> I think not. And in particular, I find the the position that "hypocrisy, or rather weakly supported insinuations of hypocrisy, in regard to a certain evil is a vastly more vital and pressing topic than the actual evil happening on the ground itself" (to sum up these discussions in a nutshell) to be especially non-worthy of protracted discussion and "nuanced" debate.

I can’t keep up with your trains of interpretation.

Whatever the actual evil happening on the ground is, it can’t be about the submission since that’s just about lounging in a lecture hall and talking about philosophy. So I’m at a loss as regards the thing we’re being distracted from.

> God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, such as debates and counter-debates about whataboutism on HN.

God, grant me the strength to accept the things I cannot change, such as people responding to me on a topic that I myself started.

Doesn’t sound as reasonable in that formulation.