Headlines “Politics” [read the OP before posting]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Adeleine

Adeleine

after committing a dangerous crime
is a Top Social Media Contributoris a Community Contributoris a Smogon Discord Contributoris a Top Contributoris a Smogon Media Contributoris a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
That is a fair thing to take issue with, as it would be rather ridiculous, so apologies that it came across that way (and on reread I get how you could see it). All I meant to suggest is that 50% of the population thinking favorably of Stalin tells us that there is some measure of extremist authoritarianism that has taken root in the country: of course, that doesn't mean each of those individuals is a neo-nazi or comparable to that. Like with support of the modern Communist party, there are many different reasons Russians today look favorably back on Stalin.
 
Tmi489

Tmi489

Colonel M said:
Good.

Dude fucked around on Jan 6th and found out. No one wants him there now. They want him to pack and get out.

Also it sounds like a CEO of a company is under the radar too.

https://www.businessinsider.com/chicago-tech-ceo-arrested-capitol-riots-2021-1
Click to expand...
do you really think that trump along with all people were going in expecting to break in the capitol
no matter how many implications there were it was still advertised as a (peaceful) rally
this isnt good. regular people not expecting violence, who were caught up in the chaos caused by the eventual rioting now are being held accountable
do i (fully) excuse the rioters for entering? no. but they had at least some moral justification as why they did it, and i dont think its fair to outright cancel even if the decision ends up being capitalism at the end
people like you are now witchhunting what ends up representing the entirety of trump's platform (which extends beyond trump himself) by treating cancellation as good
 
Last edited:
Colonel M

Colonel M

I COULD BE BORED!
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Community Leader Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnus
Last edited:
lilyhollow

lilyhollow

Is it unfair to put neo-Stalinist elements in the same group as neo-Nazi elements?
Click to expand...
yes?

The "what about"s would likely come from all corners. I'm not sure I want to commit the time to researching American foreign policy as to be justified in analyzing it at length in this specific context.
Click to expand...
I run into this stuff alllll the time talking about China. Someone will say 'oh shit if China gets more power it'll be really bad [compared to the status quo]' and then I'll be like "how is that worse than the status quo of US hegemony" and they'll be like 'oh that's whataboutism.' It drives me up the wall, it's not whataboutism if the thing I'm bringing up is the exact thing you're trying to compare to in the first place!

I'm not saying that that's what you're doing, but at the same time it's kind of like, misleading to explain why Russia is bad, to say 'ya I prefer the status quo of US hegemony,' but then to be like 'oh but I don't know all that much about US foreign policy so I don't really want to get into that.'

I saw someone post something like "it's natural for people in the US to be more scared of China gaining power than they are of the status quo of US hegemony" and I think that was a very true statement. But it's like... the kind of statement where if you agree with it, please put some work into investigating why you feel that way lol.
 
Cometk

Cometk

lilyhollow said:
I saw someone post something like "it's natural for people in the US to be more scared of China gaining power than they are of the status quo of US hegemony" and I think that was a very true statement. But it's like... the kind of statement where if you agree with it, please put some work into investigating why you feel that way lol.
Click to expand...
To answer, a greater sense of trust in a liberal democracy than in an authoritarian state.

Still, the state of being a liberal democracy didn’t stop the atrocities of Operation Condor or misguided failures of the Iraq War.
 
lilyhollow

lilyhollow

Cometk said:
To answer, a greater sense of trust in a liberal democracy than in an authoritarian state.
Click to expand...
Also white supremacy.

I want to push back on your use of the word 'misguided' in describing the iraq war as well. You get a lot of people using that kind of language when it comes to US atrocities (referring to the weak police response to the storming of the capitol as 'incompetent' is another example). The US has the luxury of being referred to as 'foolish,' 'misguided,' and 'incompetent' when doing extremely evil things, but I notice that these characterizations are rarely afforded to other countries.

When COVID was first being reported on, first there was theorizing over whether it was intentionally created by China somehow. Then China proceeded to respond aggressively to contain the virus and they were 'repressive' and 'authoritarian' for doing that.

Now, the United States has just allowed hundreds of thousands of people die from the virus (with over 20 million cases). These people are disproportionately black, indigenous and hispanic, as pretty much anyone would have predicted. But this is all 'unintentional' of course. It's just the people in power being 'incompetent' and 'foolish.' We're so lucky that our leaders are just so darn unorganized, and really don't know what they're doing at all when they repeatedly do horrible things that kill many people.

Again this kind of narrative is something really worth examining for people who find that it resonates with them
 
lilyhollow

lilyhollow

Oh, so you agree that the US' response is unbelievably worse than China's and that our leaders acted in an incredibly evil and intentional way? Makes me wonder why you made a post then, but okay sounds good.
 
Jasper

Jasper

lilyhollow said:
Oh, so you agree that the US' response is unbelievably worse than China's and that our leaders acted in an incredibly evil and intentional way?
Click to expand...
Another early contender. Keep this up and you'll sweep the podium.

I'm not going to waste effort debating a stream of logical fallacies, so I think we should end this exchange here.
 
lilyhollow

lilyhollow

Yeah I mean we can stop there if you want, but I sincerely do not know why you posted if not to literally just go 'China bad' in response to a post I wrote that actually had nuance to it. So if you want to try to have an actual conversation again later I might be up for it, but please try to like read the post and understand the point being made if you choose to do so. only reason i'm getting snippy with you is that you very brazenly missed my point and don't seem to care
 
Jasper

Jasper

lilyhollow said:
Yeah I mean we can stop there if you want, but I sincerely do not know why you posted if not to literally just go 'China bad' in response to a post I wrote that actually had nuance to it.
Click to expand...
Then I'll explain why. I wanted to point out that criticism of the repressive aspects of the CCP's COVID response is entirely valid. I think it's an insult to the Chinese people it incarcerated to say or imply otherwise.

On the other hand, I do think there is some merit in the essence of your point. The CCP's containment effort of COVID has far surpassed the Trump administration's. I also agree that the Trump administration not caring about the lives of common people, and especially those of minorities, accounts at least in part for its neglect.

The last point I'll make is that criticizing elements of a person's argument =/= dismissing, or even disagreeing with, their argument entirely. I think you took my criticism for a dismissal when my post didn't justify you doing that.

Regardless, I hope this provides some clarity and that now we can stop trading put-downs.
 
lilyhollow

lilyhollow

My broader point is basically about the way people try to distract from the US' flaws by focusing on China's (or flaws of other 'official enemies' like Venezuela), and the language tricks they often employ when doing so. People won't hesitate to call China 'repressive' in its covid response because they arrested some people (and also because they aggressively locked down etc). We often avoid this kind of language when describing much worse actions by the United States, and ought to examine that disparity. So the point is not about whether China is/is not fairly characterized as 'repressive.'

Anyway yeah, sounds good, I think that leaves us in a pretty okay place there.
 
Cometk

Cometk

lilyhollow said:
Also white supremacy.
Click to expand...
Ok. I don't know if you're speaking directly to me, trying to add on to what I said so as to say that that is the superseding element, or just giving another reason for why you think "it's natural for people in the US to be more scared of China gaining power than they are of the status quo of US hegemony". The way you phrased your response makes me feel as though you're trying to put words in my mouth. Please let me know if that's a misinterpretation.

lilyhollow said:
I want to push back on your use of the word 'misguided' in describing the iraq war as well.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that this is in the context of comparing a Liberal Democracy to an Authoritarian state. The phrasing "misguided failures" refers to the idea that the war was waged on the basis of instilling democracy in Iraq, a cause doomed to fail in a region divided by religious ethnosectarian conflict with no common history of democracy. This goes to show that even ascribing the most charitable motivation one could as to why the Iraq War was waged from the perspective of a liberal democracy reveals the order of magnitude to which was a cataclysmic loss. And I think we're all aware that that wasn't the primary motivation for the invasion of Iraq. That's why my post assumed the "best" motivation for the Iraq War, because it was in-line with the values of a liberal democracy, not necessarily because it was what the ghouls at the head of the state intended.

re: the comparison of the Chinese and US governments' response to COVID: Yeah, that is one aspect in which it is rather advantageous to have a centralized government that doesn't have to deal with the slow-witted trappings of electoral politics. Asia's collectivist culture also helps. The fact that the pandemic response ever became a partisan issue in America is farcical.
 
Last edited:
Tmi489

Tmi489

vonFiedler said:
Didn't answer my question at all. What moral justification did anyone have to be in the capital building?
Click to expand...
i did?????
people who [did not intend to enter the capitol] who [did not go 100% under their own volition], because they [did not have a sober (clear) mind] due to [general chaos].
crime? yes, i never denied that. punished? sure. had a reason, (moral) justification to happen? yes. wasn't trying to start a riot at the capitol
tldr why do [general] protests turn into riots, and are the protesters responsible
*sober doesn't mean drunk in this case but people were in a chaotic state, less rational
Colonel M said:
I'll spare you from our friend's response:

Their justification was to be domestic terrorists.

There is no other excusable justification for it. What. So. Ever.
Click to expand...
screw off
 
Last edited:
Colonel M

Colonel M

I COULD BE BORED!
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Community Leader Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnus
Tmi489 said:
i did?????
people who [did not intend to enter the capitol]
Click to expand...
You either went in the capitol or you didn't.

If you went into the capitol, without permission to enter the capitol, you have violated the intentions of the barriers set up to prevent people from entering. It does not matter whether they were in a stupid rage or not.

We [as a group] are not condemning people who stayed outside of the capitol (behind the wall) and did not cause any chaos - with exceptions to those who helped flame the insurrection such as Donald Trump (Jr), Rudy Giuliani, and Mo Brooks, etc. What we are condemning are people, like those who climbed the wall to the capitol, those who breached through into the capitol in any way possible, and those who broke windows, infiltrated senator and house members' offices, among other unspeakable things.

I don't give a shit about their intentions, and I don't excuse any of them. It's very simple - unless you were a reporter or an officer going in there, you're guilty. People like Derrick Evans who bragged about breaching the capitol are despicable cretins, and they should be ashamed at what they did. People like Rush Limbaugh applauding those who breached the capitol are the reasons why the events happened.

This was an attempt to a riot. This was an attempt to create discourse. They were of sober mind doing this. They knew damn well what they were doing as soon as they were hitting the glass to breach the capitol.

Call them what they are - domestic terrorists. That is all you can call them. There is no moral justification to these people, and it is extremely pathetic to give them any platform to give them a moral justification. You don't throw fists at your boss just because you're mad at them. Mob mentality isn't an excuse.

I know this is Vox, but I know there were other sources for this. Read this. You tell me that this wasn't planned from the beginning of the morning and sooner, with Trump and company fanning the shit in hopes of accomplishing what he wanted:

https://www.vox.com/2021/1/8/22220840/sasse-trump-capitol-storming-impeachment
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 3)

  • ... and 1 more.
    • Top