GarbageShootAlt2

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 34 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Most folks on the planet are Indian, Chinese, or in an Islamic country of some sort. Now do tell, dear blakeus12. How do all of those cultures treat LGBTQ+ people :|

China has cities bigger than New York that are pretty trans-positive. These entities aren't monolithic in their values, and in fact I would say they are more diverse in their values for better and for worse, compared to the US. What you are referring to is a cartoon perspective on these ~dozen countries spoon fed to you by western chauvinists.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

This isn't just simple assault, it's also battery on the level of severity of causing permanent disability. The sentence goes up to 10 years for more severe assault and battery: https://www.thekoreanlawblog.com/2023/01/sentence-korean-crime-korea.html . Based on what they say there, this guy probably received closer to the minimum sentence.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I kind of understand your way of reasoning in this affair, you seem to apply the principle of the lesser of two evils and i don’t deny that NATO is by far worse than their enemies, but then wouldn’t liberals also be in the right when they support the “lesser of two evils”?.

Without touching the rest of it, the idea is not to support the lesser evil, but to support what is historically progressive despite its negative elements. If two things are both a net bad but there is a lesser evil, it is generally a better answer to support neither.

All of the "CRINK" countries have negative elements -- particularly Russian chauvinism and Iranian theocracy -- but the Axis of Resistance's overall operations tend towards multilateral internationalism rather than domination by a single superpower like NATO favors.

P.S. as davel said, your English is great

[–] [email protected] 27 points 8 months ago

The whole article is almost certainly demeaning, as you would expect of a celebrity gossip rag.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago

Why the fuck would I argue with someone who minimizes genocide like that? It's not like your rotten opinion means anything, and anyone else sees the shit you tried to pull comment 1.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago (4 children)

a normal apple that happens to have bad bump on it.

It must be bait that you describe supporting an ongoing genocide as "a bad bump on a normal apple". Come on, I never doubted that that's what you really think of the people in the third world, but saying it out loud like that? If you want to be a good Harris propagandist, you're going to need to do a better job of pretending you care about humans and it's just such a shame that you can't vote against genocide. That's the way that you scoundrels vote shame properly, with crocodile tears and disavowal.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Contrary to certain self-victimizing sentiments, I think that the problem is that the platform is more and more overtaken by the topic of the election (and Israel in reference thereto) and it just results in interminable arguing in circles that accomplishes nothing but wasting time. Regardless of the outcome of the election, I think less-annoying activity will increase afterwards.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 8 months ago (10 children)

God damn, it really is "But Trump!" every time you criticize Harris

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'd hesitate to be too smol bean Japan about it considering they were brutalizing East Asia systematically at the time.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

This is wrong on almost every level. It wasn't a genocide (some people call it that, but the mainstream liberal historical consensus is that it was collectivization being botched along with some bad crop conditions), it has very little to do with anything happening in the war, and the Russian Federation was brought into existence in order to overthrow the communists. The logical end point of Putin's weird revanchist rhetoric is closer to wanting to undo the separation of nations in the former Russian Empire that began under Lenin and bring things back to the Tsarist model that preceded it. That's what he means when he says that he wants to show Ukraine what "decommunization" entails, since the Ukrainian Soviet Republic, while it was still under a central authority, had greater autonomy than the region had under the Tsar and he is making the threat that he will take that away.

God, I hate how bad education is that this even needs to be explained. Imperial Russia had been suffering from famines on a cyclical basis for centuries and, contrary to what some people say, neither Lenin nor Stalin were magicians who could just bend reality in the USSR, though many -- including some "Stalinist" Marxists -- argue that Stalin basically tried to for left-deviationist reasons when material conditions didn't actually support collectivising the way he wanted the state to, and that (along with drought and blight) caused the famine. Important to understanding this, however, is that the only time there would ever be a famine in the USSR after that was in the aftermath of the Nazi invasion as a direct result thereof. The next "famine" in Russia would be around 50 years later with the establishment of the Russian Federation, where the gutting of just about every public program and industry caused a huge excess death event over a period of a couple years.

The idea of it being a genocide -- aside from being a lie popularized by Goebbels that has no support in the Soviet archives -- is even more ridiculous for the fact that the famine ended and nothing ever happened to the Ukrainians on fractionally that scale except for the Nazis! But of course the Ukrainian Nazis love saying the Russians wanted all Ukrainians dead, because it gave them cover for perpetrating the Holocaust (see "double genocide theory").

To add one last point on "this doesn't work as a genocide," a plurality of the victims were Ukrainian nationals, but it was spread out over multiple nations and the part of Ukraine the famine impacted was overwhelmingly in the east. You know, the part that's Russian in huge disproportion. Of course, one of the other countries impacted, with I think 1.5 million dead or something like that, was Russia! It would be like trying to wipe out a population by detonating an atom bomb where a quarter of the blast is on your side of the border, then just not doing anything when most of the population you targeted survived! It only makes sense if you're assuming the Russians were such miserable morons that the dumbest Banderite bandit is incomparably more refined.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Think the little red book was a bad strategy for its time because it's essentially a collection of quotations, so it wasn't good for systematic understanding of Mao's thought. In the modern day the internet at least makes it somewhat better because the LRB has citations, so you can just look them up and see the context for the statement.

I'm kind of curious how the LRB came about, since it feels pretty condescending, but Mao was perhaps the most optimistic political leader I've ever heard of in terms of just giving the people a small bit of advice or a revised law and letting them handle the rest (this sometimes went extremely poorly, of course).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Aside, again, from the fact that Gaza is being undercounted severely due to strict criteria for marking a civilian death combined with most of the hospitals in Gaza being blown up, yes! the rate of killing matters a great deal to understanding what is going on unless you are taking the hysterical view that Putin is going to kill every Ukrainian and is just dragging his feet a little.

view more: ‹ prev next ›