A little addendum to yesterday’s monster post.<\/p>\n
Ivan Oransky reports that<\/a><\/span>, before deleting her Twitter account, Hope Amantine had apparently also said in a tweet that the story was “not meant to offend”. \u00a0I’ve noticed that a lot recently: a person does something wrong, is publicly called out for it, and apologises for any offence caused. \u00a0Greenpeace apologised for any offence caused<\/a><\/span> when they trampled over the Nazca lines. \u00a0Gary Barlow apologised for any offence caused<\/a><\/span> by the stories about his tax-dodging. \u00a0(Not for offence caused by tax dodging, but for offence caused by the world having come to know of it, natch.)<\/p>\n I hate it when people say that.<\/p>\n It reduces moral discourse to one of whether or not Smith was sufficiently courteous. \u00a0Moral discourse is richer than that. \u00a0Hell, moral discourse has got almost nothing<\/em> to do with that.<\/p>\n More, I doubt anyone was offended in any of those cases. \u00a0That wasn’t the problem. \u00a0Lying was; trampling humanity’s patrimony was; dodging tax was. \u00a0Apologising for causing offence is a non-apology, and leaves the real moral problem utterly unremarked.<\/p>\n I just wanted to get that off my chest. \u00a0As you were.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" A little addendum to yesterday’s monster post. Ivan Oransky reports that, before deleting her Twitter account, Hope Amantine had apparently also said in a tweet that the story was “not meant to offend”. \u00a0I’ve noticed that a lot recently: a person does something wrong, is publicly called out for it, and apologises for any offence […]<\/p>\n