And should everyone, including the women, face starvation because they're controlled by misogynists?
Oh, or should they spontaneously develop feminism without the material basis for the formation of a feminist movement?
I actually support the side which is magnitudes less violent. And there is a difference between killing fascists like the Soviets did and killing anti-colonial freedom fighters but mostly civilians like the colonial powers did.
You can only oppose everyone if your opposition doesn't actually do anything. If you're actually affecting things your opposition of one will strengthen the other. You have to be against the US empire and for multipolarity or against multipolarity and for the US empire. There isn't a third option.
"Both sides" is when you equivocate two things which are not equal, you're looking for "whataboutism" which is not an actual fallacy, claiming "you're doing whataboutism" was a PR tactic first used by British colonizers when Irish people brought up British violence in response to anti-IRA propaganda.
Online? No. Online disorganized leftists aren't actually leftists, they're leftist sympathizers. You need to be in a leftist org to actually be a leftist.
You're not a threat unless you're actually doing stuff.
Edit: did you downvote before you confirmed the image is historically accurate or after you confirmed the image is historically accurate?
A better analogy would be handing magazines to a mass shooter whenever he ran out of ammo
what they then choose to do with it is on them, not us.
Why do you believe this? Don't people have a responsibility to not give weapons to people knowing they will be used for genocide?
Also, us? Are you part of the Biden admin?
The US isn't a democracy though, it is a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, where every election we get to select which group of oppressors will wield state power against us until the next one.
Also decline is caused by anticolonial resistance and the logic of capitalism breaking down. I would suggest reading Lenin's "imperialism" and Fanon's "wretched of the earth"
Yeah didn't he call for the creation of "greater israel" in the region or something?
What do you call giving weapons with the knowledge that they will be used for genocide?
Does the recipient obviously lying "oh they'll just be used for defense" while they continue to commit genocide with previous shipments of weapons give the democrats plausible deniability in your book?
Because it is causing the issue by propping up an apartheid state and giving them the weapons they're using to commit genocide
What do you mean lash out again?