Where does that slippery slope lead? I mean, what’s the argument? I’d really like to know where you fear not covering a light installation in Dubai without also pointing out the human rights abuses will lead. I can think of one slippery slope argument concerning normalizing places with a history of human rights abuses and how such normalization leads to the kind of acceptance where places like Dubai get a pass if they are pretty enough (amazing what slave labor can build you).
Is it that it’s OK to cover oppressive places in a positive light if there is a pretty video? Is it that it’s OK to positively promote a nation where slavery takes place since there have been articles about other repressive regimes? What position must you take to participate in the normalization of human rights abuses, torture, slavery, et al. and have that become excusable?
These posts about North Korea? Did they mention the brutal regime or the struggles of the residents of NK or did they just show the pretty buildings? I seem to remember the dictatorship angle being a part of those articles yet no mention of human rights abuses on this article. Why is that?
This blog speaks often about resisting the normalization of terrible ideologies and behaviors when it comes to people like Trump but gives Dubai a pass for some reason and even defends the decision to do so.
