The US currentlyruns a system of slave labor camps, has been bombing Muslims and Africans for decades, and Europe has been doing the same for hundreds of years. Are these trustworthy sources of information to tell you about their enemies?
Not to lean to heavy on the whataboutree but you can’t really use that as an excuse when the criticism is coming from the left. They don’t support the other thing either, so it seems almost like deflection from valid criticism and a missed opportunity to tackle a contradiction.
Why don’t you apply dialectical materialism and tell me what you think. You’d get a lot farther than using a thought-terminating cliché.
Or put a little more directly, what makes more sense in taking down that behemoth: finding common ground with people who ultimately want the same thing as you, or dying on a hill and banishing anyone who disagrees with something that isn’t even relevant in this day and age?
It’s a deeply reactionary urge to want to win the ideal at the cost of the material. It’s why liberalism has gotten as far as it has.
Sure, diamat would say that in the age of super-imperialism that we’re now in, where the majority of surplus value comes from super-exploited global-south proletarians, demands that one or a group of countries must use violence to enforce that order, and keep the exploited countries weak and poor.
Capitalism’s current enforcer is the US, with its military might, dollar hegemony, and media monopoly. That is why the US has so many external military bases. They don’t have them because they’re fun to build.
No, he has said nothing about China or Russia. (Self?) criticism is a sign of maturity and wit. Being a western and adhere to western values doesn’t imply assuming justifying it all. In the west we do not have total freedom of speech and/or pluralism of information and, yes, there are worrying “new” forms of slavery.
You can’t say western news aren’t trustworthy and then rule out basically any other source of news implied. Unless your point is that news cannot be trusted from anyone ever, which is kinda a moot point.
If you discount the entire west you are left with Russia, China, the middle east, Africa.
None of them have a better track record in human rights violation then the west, which you discredited for exactly that.
China and Russia are absolutely relevant, since this post is about tankies. This isn’t deflecting critique of the west, it’s pointing out the hipocrasy of using these faults in the US as a defence of Russia/China.
Admittedly China hasn’t militarily invaded another country since it’s invasion of Vietnam in 79. Though the Uyghur genocide doesn’t strike me as a lot more benevolent than the ongoing wars in Africa and Middle East.
The majority of the world (notably the vast majority of Muslim countries, who would be burdened with a refugee crisis if there were an actual genocide) doesn’t think China is killing Uyghurs. Only the imperial core countries, that have been bombing Muslims for decades think that:
Here’s the people telling you that China is killing Muslims:
Internal documents from the Kunes county justice system from 2017 and 2018, provided to the BBC by Adrian Zenz, a leading expert on China’s policies in Xinjiang, detail planning and spending for “transformation through education” of “key groups” - a common euphemism in China for the indoctrination of the Uighurs. In one Kunes document, the “education” process is described as “washing brains, cleansing hearts, strengthening righteousness and eliminating evil”.
Source?
The US currently runs a system of slave labor camps, has been bombing Muslims and Africans for decades, and Europe has been doing the same for hundreds of years. Are these trustworthy sources of information to tell you about their enemies?
Not to lean to heavy on the whataboutree but you can’t really use that as an excuse when the criticism is coming from the left. They don’t support the other thing either, so it seems almost like deflection from valid criticism and a missed opportunity to tackle a contradiction.
The US has > 800 external military bases. Every other country combined has < 20. Which one is credible?
Why don’t you apply dialectical materialism and tell me what you think. You’d get a lot farther than using a thought-terminating cliché.
Or put a little more directly, what makes more sense in taking down that behemoth: finding common ground with people who ultimately want the same thing as you, or dying on a hill and banishing anyone who disagrees with something that isn’t even relevant in this day and age?
It’s a deeply reactionary urge to want to win the ideal at the cost of the material. It’s why liberalism has gotten as far as it has.
Sure, diamat would say that in the age of super-imperialism that we’re now in, where the majority of surplus value comes from super-exploited global-south proletarians, demands that one or a group of countries must use violence to enforce that order, and keep the exploited countries weak and poor.
Capitalism’s current enforcer is the US, with its military might, dollar hegemony, and media monopoly. That is why the US has so many external military bases. They don’t have them because they’re fun to build.
Then you can see how people would want to go from hyperexploitation to no exploitation, rather than daydreaming of the lesser of two evils.
Actually, most people are libs who genuinely got off twitter so they could join bluesky, so they want slightly less hyperexploitation 😒
You’re saying that like Russia and China don’t have slave labor camps and haven’t been bombing Africans and Muslims for decades.
No, he has said nothing about China or Russia. (Self?) criticism is a sign of maturity and wit. Being a western and adhere to western values doesn’t imply assuming justifying it all. In the west we do not have total freedom of speech and/or pluralism of information and, yes, there are worrying “new” forms of slavery.
You can’t say western news aren’t trustworthy and then rule out basically any other source of news implied. Unless your point is that news cannot be trusted from anyone ever, which is kinda a moot point.
If you discount the entire west you are left with Russia, China, the middle east, Africa.
None of them have a better track record in human rights violation then the west, which you discredited for exactly that.
China and Russia are absolutely relevant, since this post is about tankies. This isn’t deflecting critique of the west, it’s pointing out the hipocrasy of using these faults in the US as a defence of Russia/China.
Where on earth are you getting this?? China hasn’t been involved in an external conflict since the 60s!
Admittedly China hasn’t militarily invaded another country since it’s invasion of Vietnam in 79. Though the Uyghur genocide doesn’t strike me as a lot more benevolent than the ongoing wars in Africa and Middle East.
The majority of the world (notably the vast majority of Muslim countries, who would be burdened with a refugee crisis if there were an actual genocide) doesn’t think China is killing Uyghurs. Only the imperial core countries, that have been bombing Muslims for decades think that:
Here’s the people telling you that China is killing Muslims:
deleted by creator
Ihttps://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55794071
These have been debunked over and over again, so much so that reddit isn’t even buying it anymore. Their source(s) are Zenz, an anti-semitic, anti-abortion, far-right christian fundamentalist, who doesn’t speak mandarin, and works for the US state department.
Also, the BBC isn’t much more than a tabloid at this point:
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
BBC gets caught doctoring an image from a vlogger in China to make it look depressing, then quietly reverts their change after getting caught.
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.