Blunt tools shouldn’t be used for complex real-world things. Other examples would be mandatory sentencing in courts (you should let the judge assess the particular situation), or things like “I don’t go out with guys under 160cm” (you should get to know him).

Just because someone is in their 70s, doesn’t mean they can’t lead. Not with any certainty. In some cases it does, but the political process should have the flexibility to deal with each case.

Look at Deng: he was mid-70s to mid-80s when he was in power and he improved the lives of 10⁸ or 10⁹ people.

  • Everythingispenguins@lemmy.worldEnglish
    4·
    6 months ago

    From his wiki article.

    Furthermore, he is associated with some of the worst purges during Mao Zedong’s rule; for instance, he ordered an army crackdown on a Muslim village in Yunnan which resulted in the deaths of 1,600 people, including 300 children.

    It seems like killing a whole village is a pretty blunt tool.

    Edit spelling

      • Everythingispenguins@lemmy.worldEnglish
        21·
        6 months ago

        Is that all you have, judging a spelling error? Only a weak argument relies on pettiness. If you believe in him so much how about you comment on his well documented crimes? Or do you have nothing to say?

        • frightful_hobgoblinOPEnglish
          11·
          6 months ago

          oh I thought you were punning.

          Please don’t be grumpy. It’s a summertime Saturday.

          If you believe in him so much how about you comment on his well documented crimes?

          I didn’t say I “believe in Deng so much”. I wouldn’t be the sort of person who goes around hero-worshipping politicians. What I said was he improved the lives of a billion-or-so people. You have provided no evidence that is untrue.

          Is that all you have, judging a spelling error? Only a weak argument relies on pettiness… Or do you have nothing to say?

          You’re coming across like one of those people who argues on the internet.