Serious The Politics Thread

[Chou Toshio]

Since I’m not going to source farm for a casual convo in a Pokemon forum and Ant did it themselves— I’ll just say that as an American who lived in Japan for a decade, studied abroad there, and whose family comes from Hiroshima (disclosure: my great grandparents left Hiroshima prior WWII but I have met/stayed with relatives from the region)—

My understanding of events matches Ant’s in the broad strokes, but I’ve not done research on the details. My opinion for what it’s worth.

Edit: I’ll say though that while I agree with Ant on the facts, I’m not so committed/charged to their political view on it. Of course I deplore the way the Americans prosecuted the Pacific regioin a very racist way— but reality check the Japanese Empire were also fascists that needed to be stopped. I feel most sympathetic for the American Nationals in the Philippines who were ruthlessly friendly fire bombed by their own government who cared more for the lives of white ground troops than their citizens’, and Okinawans who were caught up in a war forced on them by a government that to them would also have been an imperial invader (Japan’s).

Ultimately, there is the fact that Japan benefits greatly from being part of the American Empire and many of its citizens prefer it that way—

—and be real, my hottest take: none of this would have happened if Sakamoto Ryoma hadn’t been assassinated by the conservative loyalists in the Meiji Restoration and the Revolution to create a Constitutional Liberal Democracy instead of a Fascist Imperial State had been completed. :P

 

[ant4456]

View attachment 657315
Korea is basically an irrelevant blip lol. I don't think you're getting the point. Maybe you don't want to. The world population in 1950 was about 2.5 billion while today it's around 8 billion, so for the graph to look like it does it means not only are wars much less common, they're on average less destructive to human life.

The reason? War is no longer profitable. The Berlin blockade easily could have sparked WW3... but it didn't. The Soviets backed down. Why? Because the Americans had enough nukes to erase the USSR from history. The 60s and 70s marked the period where the Soviet's missile tech and numbers caught up and the two superpowers gradually realized direct confrontation is terrible for everyone involved. They even built a fucking Powerpuff Girls Hotline phone in the 60s so they could call each other to make sure no one accidentally got nuked. Spoiler alert, no one did.

You seriously don't think that these two opposing sides wouldn't have had a conventional war and killed another 100 million in WW3? Shit probably would have happened in the 60s... Maybe today we'd be reading about WW4 in the history books getting ready for WW5. Why not? Do you trust that political leaders will "play nice" when they sense weakness in their opponent?

This applies to smaller nations as well. Not one single time has a nuclear armed nation been successfully invaded or annexed. Probably because no one wants to risk their capital city being deleted by a spunky mushroom. A world without nukes would likely see far more conventional wars and a dramatically higher loss of human life.

obviously the korean war doesn't match the death count of the world wars, but to dismiss it as just a blip doesn't really get at the core of how these conflicts shape nations for hundreds of years, and are a major part of why the world is shaped the way it is politically

also war is extremely profitable what are you talking about, that's why we had 20 years of war in a nation where for a decade we already knew we couldn't win- we have entire industries that exist solely to make money when we are at war, that often provoke us into war, and this was true before and after nuclear bombs

i do agree that war between nuclear nations is less likely to be as catastrophic but i think it'd be way better to explore non nuclear means as excuses to not kill each other, especially when for me it's not just "will a nuke be used", but also accidents. to me, having nukes on our planet is a literal existential threat to our species; the capability to wipe us off the map from accidents- it almost happened before, and that isnt even talking about the potential of a suicidal leader who does not care if they die, only selfishly that everyone goes down with them.

 

[Cancel cult]

Sure, war is on a decline, but all it takes is one button press to start a chain of events that could wipe out everyone. One crazy leader, one rouge person in power, one misunderstanding, and everyone dies. And we have already gotten incredibly close to it. If not for someone disobeying orders, we probably would have entered a nuclear war already.

 

[soviet]

That is an absolutely nonsensical thing to say.

By that ridiculous standard most of the planet has no sovereignty.

Which patently isn’t true.

At the risk of explaining something you already know, if a country with nukes invades one without nukes, the country without nukes can't feasibly put up a resistance because the country with nukes can coerce the resistance into backing down by either using the nukes or threatening to use them (this is a modification of what happened in japan). A lot of countries today either have nukes or ally themselves with countries that have them (or could have them) to get around this.

My question to you is, if a countries authority is derived not from its inherent power, but instead relies on either the benevolence of a potential aggressor to not use nukes OR the benevolence of an ally to respond according to promises made without the threat of getting nuked themselves, does that country actually have authority (sovereignty) over its own borders? Additionally, I ask you what would happen if a country (say the US) did nuke another country in the process of an invasion. Would anyone stand up to them, and if so, how could they do it? Using nukes of their own is obviously not ideal so it reasons that they could potentially fall back on political and economic pressure, but if current Russia is anything to go off of, this might not work depending on the country (and if it were an "important" country such as the US, I doubt the rest of the world would risk ruining their own economy and would just look the other way).

 

[Bughouse]

Of course I deplore the way the Americans prosecuted the Pacific regioin a very racist way— but reality check the Japanese Empire were also fascists that needed to be stopped.
...
Ultimately, there is the fact that Japan benefits greatly from being part of the American Empire and many of its citizens prefer it that way—

The near-universal opinion I encountered in Hiroshima and across Japan, even among those who currently advocate for disarmament, was not "evil americans did something unforgiveable" but rather "we fucked around and found out" with virtually no resentment for the American's decision. It shocked me. Perhaps it's because of the second fact you noted, but I'm not gonna psychoanalyze it too hard. I don't see it as all that different from German contrition about its actions in WWII. I'm certain there are other more anti-american views too but they must be small minorities. To my knowledge the only area with significant anti-American sentiment is Okinawa, for very different reasons.

 

[Chou Toshio]

The near-universal opinion I encountered in Hiroshima and across Japan, even among those who currently advocate for disarmament, was not "evil americans did something unforgiveable" but rather "we fucked around and found out" with virtually no resentment for the American's decision. It shocked me. Perhaps it's because of the second fact you noted, but I'm not gonna psychoanalyze it too hard. I don't see it as all that different from German contrition about its actions in WWII. I'm certain there are other more anti-american views too but they must be small minorities. To my knowledge the only area with significant anti-American sentiment is Okinawa, for very different reasons.

Yeah as I said Ant is correct on the facts but I don’t hold the same political views of it.

I don’t know if I’d say Japanese thought they f’d around and found out— most modern Japanese wouldn’t defend the war but also wouldn’t say the a-bombs were justified. Certainly the Japanese have an extremely favorable view of Americans, and the war is long water under the bridge, repaired even more by Obama’s trip to Hiroshima and Emperor’s/PM’s visits to Honolulu.

Anyway…all could have been avoided #IfRyomaHadLived

 

[S.A.C. Martin]

At the risk of explaining something you already know, if a country with nukes invades one without nukes, the country without nukes can't feasibly put up a resistance because the country with nukes can coerce the resistance into backing down by either using the nukes or threatening to use them (this is a modification of what happened in japan). A lot of countries today either have nukes or ally themselves with countries that have them (or could have them) to get around this.

My question to you is, if a countries authority is derived not from its inherent power, but instead relies on either the benevolence of a potential aggressor to not use nukes OR the benevolence of an ally to respond according to promises made without the threat of getting nuked themselves, does that country actually have authority (sovereignty) over its own borders? Additionally, I ask you what would happen if a country (say the US) did nuke another country in the process of an invasion. Would anyone stand up to them, and if so, how could they do it? Using nukes of their own is obviously not ideal so it reasons that they could potentially fall back on political and economic pressure, but if current Russia is anything to go off of, this might not work depending on the country (and if it were an "important" country such as the US, I doubt the rest of the world would risk ruining their own economy and would just look the other way).

These are all good questions. There’s a few examples we can consider at the minute.

Ukraine had nukes and got rid of them, and was invaded by Russia which has nukes but hasn’t used them. We’re seeing it play out in real time that no, Ukraine’s borders are not sovereign, but it is supported by a whole host of european nations and America.

Then there’s Palestine, which is literally invaded and occupied by Israel, and backed by a nuclear power (Israel may or may not be a nuclear power in its own right).

Israel also occupies bits of Lebanon and Syria, and currently is occupying a strip of land with Gaza’s Egyptian border that is meant to be de-militarised.

Palestine is clearly an extreme case and is not a sovereign nation. But there again, unlike Ukraine, it had no army, navy, air force of missile tech of any kind either. Israel is an example of the polar opposite - what happens when an increasingly fascist country gets too much support, arguably…

I think we all would like nuclear capable countries to be grown ups in politics. But the grown ups are not currently in the room at the minute, and most western countries are hypocritical in their application of international law. But hey ho…

No, that won’t have answered your question fully, but I think you can see what I’m pointing to, carefully.

 

[ant4456]

The near-universal opinion I encountered in Hiroshima and across Japan, even among those who currently advocate for disarmament, was not "evil americans did something unforgiveable" but rather "we fucked around and found out" with virtually no resentment for the American's decision. It shocked me. Perhaps it's because of the second fact you noted, but I'm not gonna psychoanalyze it too hard. I don't see it as all that different from German contrition about its actions in WWII. I'm certain there are other more anti-american views too but they must be small minorities. To my knowledge the only area with significant anti-American sentiment is Okinawa, for very different reasons.

I don't really care about what they think about what happened. I don't believe in the execution of non-combatants, even if they are part of an enemy nation. Besides, as I will explain, they don't get to decide if everyone "fucked around and found out".

If it's really just "Fuck around and find out" for Japanese civilians, then we could literally justify killing basically anyone in WWII Japan for the same reasons. In WWII, strategic bombing considered every civilian a part of the army, and thus an adequate/military target- and by the way, most reports after the war found that said bombing of civilians (of which all sides did) was not even that effective outside of killing people who sometimes had negative sentiments against their government.

Also wonder what they think about the non-Japanese people that were living in areas effected by the bombs, by the way. We killed fucking American citizens in the bomb, for fucks sake- the idea that all of these people just "Fucked around and found out" is absurd because even if you came to the conclusion that every Japanese citizen who was in the bombing radius was not someone who disagreed with their government, and someone who was actually a military target, there were literally Americans in the fucking blast.

Did you know that due to Japan's war crimes, Korean citizens en masse were often sent to Hiroshima and Nagasaki as prisoners of war to do labor? 20,000 Korean people were estimated to have died in Hiroshima, and 2,000 in Nagasaki.

Even if every single Japanese citizen who did not actively protest their government "fucked around and found out", people who were literally fighting Japan for their freedom were killed in the blast from America. There is literally no justification possible even if we went by that ruling. As a sidenote, Korean survivors had to fight legal battles for a long time for the Japanese government to recognize them as "Hibakusha", aka people who were survivors of either bomb, and were entitled to help with medical treatment.

Nuclear bombs... didn't just kill people. It is probably the most horrific way to die that is relatively quick (depending on radius to the blast), and it gave many survivors cancer. Survivors, or people before death, watched as their friends and family essentially melted from heat exposure and people seemed demonic. For a death that was not slow, it is probably one of the scariest ways to go out.

And trust me, I am not trying to defend Imperial Japan. Because I think we as Western nations give Imperial Japan a HUGE Fucking favor in not even covering their war crimes that much, at least in my country (murica). I didn't even learn about Unit 731 until the internet, and reading about the story of what happened to people in those camps made me want to puke, and knowing that some of the masterminds of it didn't get executed made my skin crawl. The fact that my nation excused the head doctor, and that he got to go on his own volition, rather than be found guilty of some of the worst crimes of humanity.

The wars that Japan started in their imperialism, the rape, torture, everything. None of it is excusable, it is incomprehensible how much suffering Japan inflicted on others. But I don't believe in "Eye for an eye", especially when it is not: again, active combatants. When you've won the war you can indict them for war crimes, hang their leaders, end the oppression of other peoples. During battle you can do whatever it takes to win, I'm not saying "ah damn killing people that are participating in genocide is bad", but that is not what we used nuclear bombs for. We already won, and a good amount of the targets were not combatants.

We used the nuclear bombs to help us in our imperial conquest, albeit one of a smaller scale. We took Japan and reconstructed it in our image, went to fight in Korea to gain a larger influence, and fought proxy wars for decades. Nothing we did in Hiroshima or Nagasaki was in good faith, even by your logic: It wasn't punishment of Japan, it wasn't to get a peace treaty, and tens of thousands of the victims, even if you do not include Japanese civilians, died due to something they had no part of. Even if we wanted to do more bombing campaigns, we already were in Japan, and things other than nuclear bombs could be used to be more precise on targets rather than wiping out camps of prisoners!

There is essentially nothing defensible about Hiroshima or Nagasaki, in my honest opinion.

 

[Chou Toshio]

I agree Ant— there’s nothing defensible about the atomic bombs used in WWII.

I’d just say we can agree there was a LOT indefensible all around.

 

[S.A.C. Martin]

I do wonder how Vedant Patel and the rest of the state department sleep at night with everything that happens at the moment.

Personally speaking, as a historian, Vedant Patel, Anthony Blinken, Matthew Miller and Joe Biden are likely going to go down in history as the great enablers of an American funded genocide.

 

[RaikouLover]

Personally speaking, as a historian, Vedant Patel, Anthony Blinken, Matthew Miller and Joe Biden are likely going to go down in history as the great enablers of an American funded genocide.

So to be perfectly clear- you are alleging that the Biden administration is committing genocide?

 

[S.A.C. Martin]

So to be perfectly clear- you are alleging that the Biden administration is committing genocide?

It is a genocide, going by the genocide convention definitions, that Israel is undertaking. More information here:

https://www.un.org/en/genocidepreve...n and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.pdf

America under Biden is funding it and providing the weaponry that is enabling it.

So no, it’s not “alleging it” - it’s a statement of fact. The United States through Israel is undertaking a genocide of the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.

Are you challenging the facts?

 

[Chou Toshio]

So to be perfectly clear- you are alleging that the Biden administration is committing genocide?

The line between committing and facilitating here is awfully thin. And I think at the point we’re arguing the difference between the two we’re already in a very dark place.

 

[S.A.C. Martin]

The line between committing and facilitating here is awfully thin. And I think at the point we’re arguing the difference between the two we’re already in a very dark place.

I agree with you, the difference here is razor thin.

 

[ant4456]

I've been logged in for a day and just wanted to tap in to say: If you as a supposed leftist fall for ZOG propaganda you failed so hard.

Context: Some people on Twitter in leftist circles are falling for ZOG rhetoric.

I think a lot of leftists online didn't get into it through curiosity, which is required in order to understand basic principles. A political ideology should have means of which to tackle problems. When the problem is "How could the US government possibly keep supporting a genocide?" comes up, socialism has so many ways to tackle this if you think critically. Imperialism, Marxist critique of capitalism, historical analysis. Falling for the fascist ZOG propaganda means that you understand so little about the ideology that you just fell for the most basic "x minority just owns the government and that's why they can't do it" shit.

I'm not even tryna be a "read Das Kapital" leftist, because I won't claim to be an expert on it. I had lefter leaning base "vibe" politics from a teenager, but it was my senior year of high school when I did a project final for my philosophy class, and I decided to do Marxism since it seemed interesting. The book I was given was a very liberal reading of it and I kept questioning it and finding holes in its interpretation, and logic. I think at the minimum you should try to be at the point with your political ideology where you have the tools and curiosity to understand even basic problems in the world.

 

[S.A.C. Martin]

I've been logged in for a day and just wanted to tap in to say: If you as a supposed leftist fall for ZOG propaganda you failed so hard.

Context: Some people on Twitter in leftist circles are falling for ZOG rhetoric.

I think a lot of leftists online didn't get into it through curiosity, which is required in order to understand basic principles. A political ideology should have means of which to tackle problems. When the problem is "How could the US government possibly keep supporting a genocide?" comes up, socialism has so many ways to tackle this if you think critically. Imperialism, Marxist critique of capitalism, historical analysis. Falling for the fascist ZOG propaganda means that you understand so little about the ideology that you just fell for the most basic "x minority just owns the government and that's why they can't do it" shit.

I'm not even tryna be a "read Das Kapital" leftist, because I won't claim to be an expert on it. I had lefter leaning base "vibe" politics from a teenager, but it was my senior year of high school when I did a project final for my philosophy class, and I decided to do Marxism since it seemed interesting. The book I was given was a very liberal reading of it and I kept questioning it and finding holes in its interpretation, and logic. I think at the minimum you should try to be at the point with your political ideology where you have the tools and curiosity to understand even basic problems in the world.

Is this aimed at me? Because I haven’t said that.

It is factual that Israel is undertaking the genocide.

It is factual that America has funded and is arming Israel, who is undertaking it.

America is complicit under the genocide of aiding and abetting the genocide, regardless of anyone’s stance on “ZOG propaganda”.

(On a side note, with two Democratic candidates literally losing their primaries due to AIPAC funding, various revelations coming out about “AIPAC handlers” (source: https://thehill.com/video/thomas-massie-tells-tucker-carlson-that-every-republican-congressman-‘has-an-aipac-person’/9771157/) and more, I think you should probably wind your neck in calling it “propaganda” when AIPAC supporting congressmen have managed to vote for more money on weapons to Israel in ten months than has been spent on American healthcare in the last four years by the incumbents).

 

[ant4456]

Is this aimed at me? Because I haven’t said that.

No, it's general

t is factual that Israel is undertaking the genocide.

Yup

It is factual that America has funded and is arming Israel, who is undertaking it.

America is complicit under the genocide of aiding and abetting the genocide, regardless of anyone’s stance on “ZOG propaganda”.

Agreed

(On a side note, with two Democratic candidates literally losing their primaries due to AIPAC funding, various revelations coming out about “AIPAC handlers” (source: https://thehill.com/video/thomas-ma...an-congressman-‘has-an-aipac-person’/9771157/) and more, I think you should probably wind your neck in calling it “propaganda” when AIPAC supporting congressmen have managed to vote for more money on weapons to Israel in ten months than has been spent on American healthcare in the last four years).

It is propaganda. ZOG was literally a neo nazi talking point for decades.

Critique of Zionism, AIPAC and more does not need a neo nazi conspiracy theory, and I will not tolerate it at all. AIPAC is just another lobbying group like the quadrillion zillion lobbying groups of corporations that fund Presidential candidates in almost their entirety. AIPAC is not controlling the country, and a better argument is that lobbying is a pretty big problem for our country.

We do not continue the war because of some senators, though. We continue the war because it is extremely profitable; Gaza sits on a shit ton of gas and Israel is our ticket into the Middle East as a proxy state. It's just cold imperialism, not "Jewish people own the country," and I will not tolerate antisemitic conspiracies being pedaled.

 

[RaikouLover]

It is a genocide, going by the genocide convention definitions, that Israel is undertaking. More information here:

https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.1_Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.pdf

America under Biden is funding it and providing the weaponry that is enabling it.

So no, it’s not “alleging it” - it’s a statement of fact. The United States through Israel is undertaking a genocide of the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.

Are you challenging the facts?

Eh. As a black American I am uncomfortable with characterizing the Biden-Harris administration as "genocidal" when in the context of our history in the U.S. half of our presidents actually were genocidal maniacs on what is now considered American soil. I am no expert on the matter here but all things considered it seems like disingenuous political rhetoric to what is a more complicated situation. And we should be able to discuss while still being able to say Netanyahu is a piece of shit and the U.S. should do as much as it can to broker a cease fire.

 

[Celticpride]

Is Trump tweeting again a sign of panic from his campaign and internal polling?

 

[MrHands]

Is Trump tweeting again a sign of panic from his campaign and internal polling?

Every day I check election polls and literally each time I do Trump falls further and further behind. Watching him panic is genuinely hilarious.

As things are going his defeat seems likely. Harris is ahead in all the swing states she needs for 270 victory but at this rate she might get a few more

Trump is probably pissing himself right now.

 

[BigFatMantis]

Is Trump tweeting again a sign of panic from his campaign and internal polling?

Supposedly Elon Musk is trying to gain Trump supporters through some plan and it’s quite possible this is related.

 

[S.A.C. Martin]

It is propaganda. ZOG was literally a neo nazi talking point for decades.

View attachment 657748

Critique of Zionism, AIPAC and more does not need a neo nazi conspiracy theory, and I will not tolerate it at all. AIPAC is just another lobbying group like the quadrillion zillion lobbying groups of corporations that fund Presidential candidates in almost their entirety. AIPAC is not controlling the country, and a better argument is that lobbying is a pretty big problem for our country.

We do not continue the war because of some senators, though. We continue the war because it is extremely profitable; Gaza sits on a shit ton of gas and Israel is our ticket into the Middle East as a proxy state. It's just cold imperialism, not "Jewish people own the country," and I will not tolerate antisemitic conspiracies being pedaled.

Firstly - deciding to jump in with claims of antisemitism and propaganda without evidence to back up your claim is, to the say the least, a bit unintelligent at best, at worst you’re a bad faith actor.

Secondly - I made no mention of any antisemitic tropes. It is factual that AIPAC in the last ten months have hit headlines in the US and abroad for their undue influence on American politics.

Whether you want to believe the news in your own country or not is not really my problem.

Nevertheless, there is ample evidence of Israel/United States collusion and AIPAC is one of those lobbying groups which literally boasts about their influence. Read it here on their own website: https://www.aipacpac.org/

With respect, you’ve come in, agreed that Israel/USA is committing genocide, are working together, and then despite there being ample evidence of the lobbying which has led us here, decided to take the thread down a rabbit hole of supposed neo-nazism and antisemitism.

It could only be antisemitism if it wasn’t true - the evidence points all one way.

I’m no neo-nazi, and I don’t think anyone else is here. The most majority of people writing here are doing so in good faith.

Do us all a favour and take a step back, look at the news that has been reported by multiple outlets across the spectrum and across the world, and have a think about the evidence shows us, rather than throw out spurious accusations.

Eh. As a black American I am uncomfortable with characterizing the Biden-Harris administration as "genocidal" when in the context of our history in the U.S. half of our presidents actually were genocidal maniacs on what is now considered American soil.

Biden has through his administration provided the bombs, ammunition, and political cover for Israel to decimate Gaza’s civilian infrastructure and kill nearly 40,000 people, injure hundreds of thousands more and displace an entire population, 2.3 million, of a strip of land smaller than Sheffield, England, with a higher number of people.

He is complicit in genocide, whether his intentions were good, bad, or indifferent, he and his administration have enabled this and there is ample evidence for this.

am no expert on the matter here

I posted the genocide convention above, make yourself an expert. Educate yourself.

but all things considered it seems like disingenuous political rhetoric to what is a more complicated situation.

It’s not difficult and it’s not complicated. Go read the ICJ rulings on Israel this year and you will be enlightened.

And we should be able to discuss while still being able to say Netanyahu is a piece of shit

No disagreement there.

and the U.S. should do as much as it can to broker a cease fire.

Which seemingly is nothing. The easiest way to ceasefire right now is to withhold weapons from those doing the killing. The United States holds all of the cards here.

 

[BIG ASHLEY]

Eh. As a black American I am uncomfortable with characterizing the Biden-Harris administration as "genocidal" when in the context of our history in the U.S. half of our presidents actually were genocidal maniacs on what is now considered American soil. I am no expert on the matter here but all things considered it seems like disingenuous political rhetoric to what is a more complicated situation. And we should be able to discuss while still being able to say Netanyahu is a piece of shit and the U.S. should do as much as it can to broker a cease fire.

you heard it here first folx... it's only genocide if it's happening to am*ricans

 

[S.A.C. Martin]

you heard it here first folx... it's only genocide if it's happening to am*ricans

The argument was frankly nuts and is only true if you have been living on another planet without internet access for the last ten months.

 

[S.A.C. Martin]

Every day I check election polls and literally each time I do Trump falls further and further behind. Watching him panic is genuinely hilarious.

As things are going his defeat seems likely. Harris is ahead in all the swing states she needs for 270 victory but at this rate she might get a few more

Trump is probably pissing himself right now.

I will admit to enjoying the sight of Trump falling behind in the polls. I simply hope he loses so that he is too old to compete next round and hopefully the Republican Party might realise their errors and perhaps change course for a form of themselves that is less terrible…but I doubt it.