The definition of famous is quite literally “known about by many people”

There are genuinely good use cases for them, just not what the hype machine has been driving

100%. The only thing comparing them does is make each look less bad in contrast with the other.

So by the logic that only men can preach because Jesus was a man, do you also enforce the rule that only middle Eastern Jewish carpenters can preach?

If not, then it is clearly possible for people to “stand in” for Jesus when preaching, even without matching his characteristics perfectly. The decision to specifically exclude women based on that one particular characteristic is therefore obviously sexist.

Yes it is obvious that it is flippantly dismissing others opinions, but do you seriously think that no people might want to justify it anyway, to rebuke the person acting flippantly? Or else why respond at all?

Whether meant serious or not, the topic the original comment brought up was the justifiability of the event linked in the post. I see no reason to assume that someone directly responding to that comment, was not responding to that topic.

Even if you think they weren’t justifying anything, can you at least recognise that it can certainly look like they were?

The reason I thought they were using it as justification, was because their comment was a reply to a comment that said something like “justify that tankies”

I mean that’s clearly very bad, but the bad thing in particular in that scenario is separating you from your language, which afaik isn’t happening here? At least not yet?

That’s fair, but it assumes that mandating one language means that the other language will be defunded. Is that happening here? I think ideally both languages (national language, native language) would be funded and studied

So call out the journalistic bias, or hypocritical behaviour of the BBC. But if the topic in general is brought up in conversation, just pointing to the US as some kind of justification, is definitely whataboutism. It sidesteps actual critical thinking by playing to familiarity: “well if this country does it, then it must be fine!”, which is clearly a logical fallacy.

All countries actions should be criticized equally. No countries actions should be justified by being the same as another country.

If the autonomy of these states are being infringed by this law, then that is a problem. In that case, I think the reduction of autonomy is far more concerning than the particular curriculum change.

Did you read my messages at all? As stated, I very much oppose the colonisation and forced subjugation and assimilation of native peoples, including in Australia. But I do not think that English being a mandatory subject in Australia is a bad thing.

Is the idea of someone knowing more than one language, so foreign to you?

You are making some wild jumps in logic.

Learning another language is not “destroying a culture”, this is a dog whistle of hardcore conservatives who are afraid of diversity. What would be destroying a culture, would be forcefully restricting the use of the native languages, such as forbidding the use of the native languages in schools. But I am not aware of this happening, nor was I arguing in support of that in any way.

Also, justifying a curriculum choice in schools is a far leap from justification of colonialism. I am very much against the forced subjugation of native peoples, but that is not the topic.

I’m not ML by any means, but I don’t really see the problem here? Schools are for learning useful life skills, etc. Surely learning the official language of your nation is a very useful life skill to have? Mandating that kids be taught a language does not mean forcing them to unlearn their native language.

While I don’t actually think that mandating the official national language as a class in schools is at all a problem (or a new idea), your argument is blatant whataboutism. Something cannot be justified merely by comparing it to somewhere else (especially the US, I might add).

I mean, I’m aware I can simply not murder people, but I still want murdering people to be banned. (Admittedly this is a false equivalence but the point stands)

Should we be so lucky

Best I can offer is a community, and no land

I don’t think I’ve heard of “radical left” outside of the US? In Europe I only recall “far left” and “far right”

I highly agree with the sentiment. Learning languages of different paradigms is sort of like travelling to visit other cultures to make you a more rounded, better person. Learn a functional language (lisp/Haskell). Learn a concatenative language (forth/Factor). Learn a logical language (Prolog/?). Heck even learn an assembly! (I suggest RISC-V).

Sorry for replying to an old comment, but do you have some source to support this? I am searching online but finding nothing :(