It actually seems like you didn’t disagree with me at all. You just misunderstood me. I specifically said there’s a moral imperative to attempt to be informed–they may not succeed. And I was separating out disagreement and ignorance as two separate things. Disagreement due to ignorance is just ignorance.
While I’m here, I’d also like to address something you said in the other thread, as we were told to take the conversation to a new thread. And my response is relevant to this thread as well.
I consider that a disagreement at the factual level. If you agree he tried to subvert the vote and is currently in the process of trying to delegitimize the vote and still remain leader when he’s been voted out, then he is by definition an authoritarian. Any time someone rejects the results of a democracy and installs themselves as leader, that is authoritarianism.
I would also, however, point out his other authoritarian aspects. He kept saying he was going to force newspapers to stop saying bad things about him. Several times he’s tried to unilaterally do things the president doesn’t have the power to do on his own. He actively tries to ruin the lives of everyone who is ever opposed to him. He even tries to declare that reality itself must obey his commands.
He’s definitely the authoritarian type. He’s shown it his entire presidency, and that is why he is trying to overthrow our democracy right now. That’s what authoritarianism does.