It always does, imo. Most of the time devil’s advocate isn’t meant to actually “defend” anything, but to find flaws/imperfections in your logic so you can adjust it and when you have to argue with an actual Xi bootlicker “devil”, they’ll have less ammo to refute your point.
The initial exaggeration was probably unintentional, due to second-hand eyewitness testimony getting relayed as fact in the middle of the chaos. But it was later used to pretend nothing happened, which clearly isn’t the case. My girlfriend is Chinese and has no idea anything ever happened in Tiananmen Square: she didn’t even know that date was censored online, so whatever they’re doing is working very well.
It always does, imo. Most of the time devil’s advocate isn’t meant to actually “defend” anything, but to find flaws/imperfections in your logic so you can adjust it and when you have to argue with an actual
Xi bootlicker“devil”, they’ll have less ammo to refute your point.The initial exaggeration was probably unintentional, due to second-hand eyewitness testimony getting relayed as fact in the middle of the chaos. But it was later used to pretend nothing happened, which clearly isn’t the case. My girlfriend is Chinese and has no idea anything ever happened in Tiananmen Square: she didn’t even know that date was censored online, so whatever they’re doing is working very well.
Not always. Sometimes it’s just amplifying the devil’s arguments by repetition. Time and place, and all that jazz.