Just because America does bad things/is bad doesn’t give other nations a pass to do bad things/be bad. Often people use whataboutism to justify or excuse Russia’s aggression or China’s genocide. All of these things can be bad and worthy of reproach.
Fascism doesn’t have an intellectual tradition, or higher principle outside of serving capital and upholding liberal property relations amd hierarchies. So i suppose that’s why i lump them in with the rest of the libs.
Am I i completely off base with this? Is it a gray area, or a clear break?
I also think this is wrong. Fascism is baked into the borders of liberalism. Liberalism isnt abandoned, it’s just the face of liberalism which always faces outside now needing to turn inward. There’s never been a single instance of liberalism that didn’t either 1. Have the outward facing fascism like the US to indigenous peoples or now towards the periphery or 2. Was the outside but with a government which accepted the periphery status and invited the expropriation as long as the class in power got to too.
His name is Adrian Zenz, a middle aged German man who doesn’t speak the Uighur language or Mandarin or any Chinese language and has never been to China
He’s a devout conservative evangelical Christian who has gone on record saying he believes he is on a mission from god to destroy the PRC
If you did enough research on your links to find the original sources for each of your sources you would find almost all trails lead back to him
I find it especially funny a German his age would be throwing around accusations of genocide, I wonder what his father did during the 1930’s and 40’s
It’s a running joke how all the citations about the genocide all point back to this guy who is a rabid white supremacist and the sole source of all of the worst allegations.
How the fuck do you not know who Zenz is? Have you done zero actual attempts at research? Did you think citations were just an extended bit in the forum signature line? Try clicking on those once in a while.
China’s mass imprisonment and forced labor of ethnic Uighurs in Xinjiang amounts to crimes against humanity
That isn’t exactly a glowing endorsement. Plus it makes sense there isn’t absolutely overwhelming evidence for it, China is keeping it pretty locked down.
No it’s not, and nobody expects these actors to give a glowing endorsement, but with what they get away with conceding this point shows something.
Plus it makes sense there isn’t absolutely overwhelming evidence for it, China is keeping it pretty locked down.
Already refuted your link “in response to” (not really) the site I shared on this topic, which also touches on this point, so you’ve confirmed again that you haven’t read it.
History started in 2022, Ukraine wasn’t shelling Donbass or threatening genocide of Russian speakers or overthrowing their elected president with a CIA plant no sir.
China’s genocide
Imagine believing this, I don’t even know how to engage with this because anyone that still believes this will never respond to any amount of evidence showing that Uighurs are living longer and better lives than ever before (as is the trend in all of China), or how Adrian zenz believes he’s sent by God to destroy China, or how despite having a practically undefended border with central Asian countries that there has been 0 refugees, or how foreign bloggers continue to show people in Xinjiang just living their lives and being happy, or how not a single piece of evidence has come out of concentration camps (unless you mean the Taiwanese bdsm club or the picture of prisoners in a regular prison), or how Han nationalists in China actively complain about how good Uighurs have it with the affirmative action programs, or how Chinese state media continues to show Uighur people and culture despite supposedly wanting them all dead, or how every article on this shit is sourced from American state controlled corporate media.
I‘m open to discussion. I don’t believe China is committing a genocide or that Russia’s “aggression” had nothing to do with the US. Do you have arguments/sources refuting this? Also they responded to what you had to say, it’s already a discussion. If you can explain why OP is wrong, then do it.
Defending Russian speakers and Crimeans from Ukrainian nazis is a pretty good justification, hence the reason the majority of Ukrainian russian speakers in Donbass and Luhansk back the Russians
But basic facts are inconvenient for you scumbag libs
What the fuck kind of whack ass question is this? How much paint did you huff beforehand? No one country has a moral implication to do anything you fucking moron. Capitalist countries act based on their material needs and circumstances, not some vague notion of morality.
The only moral justification I can think of would be that Russia must be a great power, so it’s morally good for it to fund forcefully expand it’s sphere of influence.
I think it’s a mistake to try to make this a moral argument, it’s not one the West can win because they manifestly do not approach foreign policy as primarily moral actors.
War is bad, workers shouldn’t die for bourgeois national rulers to protect lines on maps. But foreign policy is premised on the idea that national governments act in ways that are predictable and changeable. The war in Ukraine was avoidable, the reasons it is happening have been building for decades and deescalation was and remains an option on the table. US policy towards Russia could have prevented this, US leaders chose to play chicken with another country’s citizens for its own reasons. And that is, in my opinion, bad.
So the US should have appeased Russia? Let Ukraine be sliced up?
Governments don’t think morally, but that doesn’t mean we can’t. Public opinion is an important consideration in democracies. So if the public thinks a war is immoral, the government needs to take that into account.
Slicing up Ukraine wasn’t what Russia asked for, it’s a step they took in response to escalating pressure when non-alignment/security guarantees/ literally any negotiation at all proved to be impossible to achieve diplomatically. History didn’t start in 2022. The US could and should have kept its commitments or taken one of the multiple offers to negotiate a deescalation between 1991 and 2022. We don’t have to act as if the choice was a binary between appeasement and war, there were many many options that could have been pursued over the course of decades. The US didn’t have to continue to expand NATO, they could have let Russia join when they asked, they had options.
Alright then, start by accepting and loudly saying ‘America Bad’. Then we can move on to other bad things as well. Crying Whataboutism doesn’t let you ignore the atrocity in the first place.
Actually that’s literally how international law works. No supra national organization polices or enforces it so it’s up to nations to behave in line with laws they believe exist.
I’d the West fails to adhere to the state practice of (for example) respecting the sovereignty of all states, then Russia or anyone else can also very validly argue that it can too.
I would argue that international law just doesn’t work. A law that isn’t enforced is just a suggestion and as countries can’t have laws enforced on them international law is meaningfully not a thing
I agree with you. There are even Third Worldist theories of international law which say that international law is not ineffective, but rather an active weapon used by the Global North to enforce their interests.
The orthodox position, which I described in my post, is still very useful to cite to libs since they believe in a “rules based order”.
Just because America does bad things/is bad doesn’t give other nations a pass to do bad things/be bad. Often people use whataboutism to justify or excuse Russia’s aggression or China’s genocide. All of these things can be bad and worthy of reproach.
You mind providing sources? (Also bold of you to assume I’m even a lib, I might be capitalist swine!)
This moron doesn’t know what a liberal is, or even that he is in fact a liberal.
(those are the same fucking thing mate, Liberalism is the ideology that underpins capitalism, the ideology of free markets)
Do you mind providing sources for your assertion that it actually happened?
Libs are capitalist swine
Oh I thought libs were liberals, often leaning socialist. And the Republicans were the capitalists.
Liberalism is the ideology of capitalism. Liberals and republicans, conservatives, liberatarians, fascists you’re all libs.
Marxists, Socialists do not support capitalism. There is no such thing as liberal socialist
Fascists aren’t libs, though. Fascism is capitalism that has abandoned liberalism in order to fight communism.
I suppose that’s fair.
Fascism doesn’t have an intellectual tradition, or higher principle outside of serving capital and upholding liberal property relations amd hierarchies. So i suppose that’s why i lump them in with the rest of the libs.
Am I i completely off base with this? Is it a gray area, or a clear break?
I also think this is wrong. Fascism is baked into the borders of liberalism. Liberalism isnt abandoned, it’s just the face of liberalism which always faces outside now needing to turn inward. There’s never been a single instance of liberalism that didn’t either 1. Have the outward facing fascism like the US to indigenous peoples or now towards the periphery or 2. Was the outside but with a government which accepted the periphery status and invited the expropriation as long as the class in power got to too.
You’d better tell them that then. I’m sure they’ll be happy to know that it’s impossible to be socialist and only want to curtail businesses.
Libs and being completely politically illiterate, an iconic duo
Why do you get to define socialism to exclude liberalism?
One of the many goals of us propaganda is to deny you a an understanding of political theory.
Liberals are not socialists. It is impossible.
Sure.
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/china-xinjiang-uyghurs-muslims-repression-genocide-human-rights
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/muslims-camps-china/
https://jamestown.org/program/xinjiangs-re-education-and-securitization-campaign-evidence-from-domestic-security-budgets/
https://cdn.xjdp.aspi.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/25125443/documenting-xinjiangs-detention-system.cleaned.pdf
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/countries/2022-08-31/22-08-31-final-assesment.pdf
Zenz?
His name is Adrian Zenz, a middle aged German man who doesn’t speak the Uighur language or Mandarin or any Chinese language and has never been to China
He’s a devout conservative evangelical Christian who has gone on record saying he believes he is on a mission from god to destroy the PRC
If you did enough research on your links to find the original sources for each of your sources you would find almost all trails lead back to him
I find it especially funny a German his age would be throwing around accusations of genocide, I wonder what his father did during the 1930’s and 40’s
He fabricated the Safelite imagery?
It’s a running joke how all the citations about the genocide all point back to this guy who is a rabid white supremacist and the sole source of all of the worst allegations.
How the fuck do you not know who Zenz is? Have you done zero actual attempts at research? Did you think citations were just an extended bit in the forum signature line? Try clicking on those once in a while.
We know who Zenz is because we read sources Liberals send us. Liberals do not know who Zenz is because they do not read the sources they send us
Source on their claim specifically: https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/19/china-uighurs-genocide-us-pompeo-blinken/
That isn’t exactly a glowing endorsement. Plus it makes sense there isn’t absolutely overwhelming evidence for it, China is keeping it pretty locked down.
No it’s not, and nobody expects these actors to give a glowing endorsement, but with what they get away with conceding this point shows something.
Already refuted your link “in response to” (not really) the site I shared on this topic, which also touches on this point, so you’ve confirmed again that you haven’t read it.
What exactly do you think lib means?
Liberal
https://isreview.org/issue/84/tangled-paradox-liberalism/index.html
✨🧙✨ DEBATE CLUB BATTLES ✨🧙✨
you, waving your wand, cast a WHATABAUTISM at me.
MISS! i dodge your spell perfectly!
now see if you can doge my AD HOMINEM!
You saying I used ad hominem? I don’t see where. Or are you using ad homing back at me?
it’s a HIT! 🎯🧙
the sh.itjust.works user Hurt Itself in Its Confusion!
next, hexbear user Sasuke charges an EQUIVOCATION ATTACK! ✨
… can sh.itjust.works user JohnDClay dodge in time?
do we have any J.R emoji
We need more wrassling emotes. A steel chair as well
I am the table
Ok Lou Reed
I wish!
Comments that go hard ^
Laughing my ass off at this lol, get his ass lmao
History started in 2022, Ukraine wasn’t shelling Donbass or threatening genocide of Russian speakers or overthrowing their elected president with a CIA plant no sir.
Imagine believing this, I don’t even know how to engage with this because anyone that still believes this will never respond to any amount of evidence showing that Uighurs are living longer and better lives than ever before (as is the trend in all of China), or how Adrian zenz believes he’s sent by God to destroy China, or how despite having a practically undefended border with central Asian countries that there has been 0 refugees, or how foreign bloggers continue to show people in Xinjiang just living their lives and being happy, or how not a single piece of evidence has come out of concentration camps (unless you mean the Taiwanese bdsm club or the picture of prisoners in a regular prison), or how Han nationalists in China actively complain about how good Uighurs have it with the affirmative action programs, or how Chinese state media continues to show Uighur people and culture despite supposedly wanting them all dead, or how every article on this shit is sourced from American state controlled corporate media.
Oh so your one of them too.
Are you open to a discussion? I’d love to have one, but only if your open to it.
I‘m open to discussion. I don’t believe China is committing a genocide or that Russia’s “aggression” had nothing to do with the US. Do you have arguments/sources refuting this? Also they responded to what you had to say, it’s already a discussion. If you can explain why OP is wrong, then do it.
Sure. Let’s talk Russia first. Does Russia have a moral obligation to be a great power?
what kind of baby-brained question is this
utter lib shit
What moral justification does Russia have to invade?
:galaxy-brain:
Wow! That’s a great justification!
Defending Russian speakers and Crimeans from Ukrainian nazis is a pretty good justification, hence the reason the majority of Ukrainian russian speakers in Donbass and Luhansk back the Russians
But basic facts are inconvenient for you scumbag libs
I’m sure there are some Nazi crazies in Texas. Would Spain be right to step in and annex part of Texas to protect them?
Also, which polls are you referring to? Is that the election results from way back when? Or do you have a newer source?
Moral obligation? WTF?
Countries aren’t just one dude being moral or not lol
What the fuck kind of whack ass question is this? How much paint did you huff beforehand? No one country has a moral implication to do anything you fucking moron. Capitalist countries act based on their material needs and circumstances, not some vague notion of morality.
The only moral justification I can think of would be that Russia must be a great power, so it’s morally good for it to fund forcefully expand it’s sphere of influence.
What moral justification does Russia have for invading Ukraine?
I think it’s a mistake to try to make this a moral argument, it’s not one the West can win because they manifestly do not approach foreign policy as primarily moral actors.
War is bad, workers shouldn’t die for bourgeois national rulers to protect lines on maps. But foreign policy is premised on the idea that national governments act in ways that are predictable and changeable. The war in Ukraine was avoidable, the reasons it is happening have been building for decades and deescalation was and remains an option on the table. US policy towards Russia could have prevented this, US leaders chose to play chicken with another country’s citizens for its own reasons. And that is, in my opinion, bad.
So the US should have appeased Russia? Let Ukraine be sliced up?
Governments don’t think morally, but that doesn’t mean we can’t. Public opinion is an important consideration in democracies. So if the public thinks a war is immoral, the government needs to take that into account.
Slicing up Ukraine wasn’t what Russia asked for, it’s a step they took in response to escalating pressure when non-alignment/security guarantees/ literally any negotiation at all proved to be impossible to achieve diplomatically. History didn’t start in 2022. The US could and should have kept its commitments or taken one of the multiple offers to negotiate a deescalation between 1991 and 2022. We don’t have to act as if the choice was a binary between appeasement and war, there were many many options that could have been pursued over the course of decades. The US didn’t have to continue to expand NATO, they could have let Russia join when they asked, they had options.
Does Ukraine’s opinion matter in all this? Ukraine has wanted to move more westward. Should the US have prevented that for Russia?
Nobody said any of those things.
One of them doesn’t exist and you are doing soft-holocaust denial by misclaiming it.
Good ass bot
Alright then, start by accepting and loudly saying ‘America Bad’. Then we can move on to other bad things as well. Crying Whataboutism doesn’t let you ignore the atrocity in the first place.
Whataboutism? What about deez nuts?
phew, thank you for figuring this out for everyone. we were so confused on this point until you came along
dude you got the whole hexbear squad out here wrestling with your sheer, incomprehensible amount of shit takes
Actually that’s literally how international law works. No supra national organization polices or enforces it so it’s up to nations to behave in line with laws they believe exist.
I’d the West fails to adhere to the state practice of (for example) respecting the sovereignty of all states, then Russia or anyone else can also very validly argue that it can too.
I would argue that international law just doesn’t work. A law that isn’t enforced is just a suggestion and as countries can’t have laws enforced on them international law is meaningfully not a thing
I agree with you. There are even Third Worldist theories of international law which say that international law is not ineffective, but rather an active weapon used by the Global North to enforce their interests.
The orthodox position, which I described in my post, is still very useful to cite to libs since they believe in a “rules based order”.
deleted by creator