14specks

joined 3 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (8 children)

Sure, like I said I don't think it's really important who is "worse", it's not a useful topic of discussion.

I did want to make a couple of counterpoints though

  • just cause Zelensky is popular, doesn't necessarily make him a better leader. If we were to do a comparison (which we shouldn't!) Putin is also widely popular along Russians. In both cases support for a wartime leader is going to rally, especially in Ukraine.
  • you certainly have infinitely more experience in the country than I do (dividing by zero ofc haha), but wouldn't you have run into some of the same biases coming in as a foreigner (or foreign-born)? I don't know your itinerary, and I'm not asking you to share, but the who, when and where is gonna make a difference.
  • as an example, I was interested in the interviews of the first two people in this video that I saw recently [watch starting at 3:15 till about 20 mins in]: https://youtu.be/drhgjxSJG6M located in the warzone in eastern Ukraine. Both are supportive of the Russian forces and appear to claim that such support in their local area is widespread.
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Because most Christians don’t feel so entitled to expect others to live by their rules, and threaten them with death when they don’t.

Ok come on, my friend. I know a bible burning won't get you the death penalty, but many many many people have been killed and imprisoned for not living to Christian values, especially in the United States. It's "just a few crazies" or whatever, but it really isn't since these actions happen in an environment of indirect public support.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

UNESCO doesn't bear any authority, so the answer would be "none at all" or something like that, I guess...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

always_have_been_astronaut.jpg

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Like I mentioned in my other comment, I think that both leaders can and should be criticized independently, a comparison between the two is not useful.

Neither leader is socialist, so in my opinion, neither truly has the best interest of their country's working class at heart. There could be some observation and speculation about how the possible outcomes of the conflict could promote socialist aims, but that is still independent of both guy themselves.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 years ago

I'd thought that even the most liberal people on nü-Lemmy had at least read some Chomsky (or even watched the documentaries based on his work), but I guess we aren't even there yet.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I'm not exactly with the other guy, but it's extremely important to realize that ALL sources are biased. The Washington post and the New York Times both function as propaganda. They often serve as the mouthpiece of the United States Department of State or Defense, and are happy to cultivate public support for military conflicts that are in the interest of the American ruling class.

This is well documented in the book Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky. You can also listen to the podcast Citations Needed to gain a better understanding about how this works in the modern day.

An example you may be readily familiar with is the Iraq War, in which US government officials repeatedly lied to the public and started a meaningless war, without any real journalistic pushback. This lead to an atrocity affecting millions.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

It seems like you had a point to contribute somewhere in there, but maybe try and communicate it in a way that isn't so pointed at the other user. We'd like to discourage that sort of toxicity here. Maybe if they were being a total shithead or reactionary, feel free to go off, but it seems unwarranted.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

I mean, that's not strictly necessary either. Chinal allows a good many billionaires to exist, but they are hitting their emissions targets ahead of schedule, cause they don't let the billionaires run the entire show like they do in the USA.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

You think that all of them do it out of knowledge? Remember that if they weren't born before 1980, they've really only experienced the effects of capitalism on their countries. I've heard it happen before, that some 20-25 year old who immigrated with their parents in the mid-2000s is going off about how "communism ruined my country and that's why we had to leave", or something.

In 1991 the referendum to dissolve the USSR was voted against by the population (of course it happened anyway).

I don't mean to suggest that the political or economic systems implemented under communist governments were perfect, or even that great, but in the English-speaking world there is a tendency to assume that everyone (or even a majority of people) who lived there were against their own government, when it's much more complex than that.


A modern example I noticed recently was in this video, where the people living in the warzone in Eastern Ukraine are generally supportive of Russia, and miss the USSR (I mean, if anything, the current conflict never would have happened). Of course these two people don't represent their whole community, but it's more complex than is commonly portrayed (all I'm trying to say).

Watch from around 3:15 till about 20 minutes in when the old guy in the shirt is done talking (or just watch the whole thing idc): https://youtu.be/drhgjxSJG6M?t=197

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

You're right, but there's nothing humanitarian about a military conflict.

 
view more: ‹ prev next ›