Ukraine was the first country to break off from the USSR after the collapse. They were basically colonized into it in the first place and they're historically very independent.
"kept Ukraine... at peace with the neighboring sister region" is so telling too. Like yeah, the only way to be safe from an aggressive imperialist country is to not be independent next to it. Wow great.
In the last screenshot, you explicitly dismiss the idea of delaying the decline being a worthwhile goal, and, in fact, claim delaying is counterproductive.
If you're still advocating for voting for Dems with that assertion, then your argument is either incoherent, or accelerationist.
Combine this with the fact that you've changed your opinions over the last year from "The Uyghur Genocide is bad" to "I'm not sure if it's really a genocide, and really, whatabout other countries??? 🥺", and you'll have to forgive me for not taking you seriously.
I said it won't fix or improve anything, it simply slows down the decline, and in my opinion that's not a bad thing. During the extra time, people don't make it better.
I don't really remember whatabouting what's happening to the uyghurs. I just thought the label didn't describe what's happening to them accurately.
I said it won’t fix or improve anything, it simply slows down the decline, and in my opinion that’s not a bad thing. During the extra time, people don’t make it better.
"I would rather the decline be slower."
"The problem with that is that it pushes people to vote for the alternative"
Yes, definitely not objecting to someone explicitly arguing for slowing down the decline.
I guess all the "Ukraine is a CIA puppet!" talk in that same thread just wasn't as important to object to, huh?
And then you wonder why I don't take your claims of being totally just a neutral observer who only cares about precision, not spreading tankie talking points 🥺, seriously.
I don’t really remember whatabouting what’s happening to the uyghurs. I just think the label doesn’t describe what’s happening to them accurately.
I am explaining why a slower decline isn't the solution, but it's desirable nevertheless.
I don't think Ukraine is a CIA puppet, Russia's land grab in ukraine is unjustified. There is a nazi problem in Ukraine, but that's not a reason to side with Russia in any way.
When it comes to the Uyghurs, I did do more reading, and settled back on my previous conclusion (that it is a genocide). There is a sever lack of evidence though (and Adrian Zenz is genuinely unreliable).
I am explaining why a slower decline isn’t the solution, but it’s desirable nevertheless.
The poster you responded to explicitly pointed out that it wasn't a solution in and of itself, meaning your disputation was thus either meaningless, or you're bullshitting now.
I don’t think Ukraine is a CIA puppet,
I'm not the one you need to tell. Apparently, people saying "Decline should be slower" is a problem you need to address, but "Ukrainians in the streets protesting against a Russian-dominated government are CIA plants" is just fine. Which tracks for behavior on Dbzer0 - gotta fit in with the crowd, right?
The crowd which is comprised largely of tankies who get asspats from the 'anarchists' there.
When it comes to the Uyghurs, I did do more reading, and settled back on my previous conclusion (that it is a genocide). There is a sever lack of evidence though (and Adrian Zenz is genuinely unreliable).
You literally just said:
I don’t really remember whatabouting what’s happening to the uyghurs. I just think the label doesn’t describe what’s happening to them accurately.
I fucked up the tenses, and edited my comment since. That was my opinion at the time. Do you want me to believe that nothing is happening to them?
I'm doubting that your opinion is any more serious now than it was when you swapped the previous two times. Like a conservative confronted with evidence, I suspect you'll change for exactly as long as it takes for the norms of another social circle to kick in.
You can’t blame the democrats failures on the tiny minority of leftists who didn’t vote. Sure, if they voted it would have helped, but I don’t think they would have won the election for them.
"Tiny minority of leftists who didn't vote" here meaning "A group significantly larger than the Dem margin of defeat"?
The democrats are also said “we don’t need the left” a load of times. I don’t think that’s very appealing for leftists.
"The Democrats said"
"The big tent party isn't muzzling the people I want to be muzzled"
I'm sorry that 'leftists' apparently felt so insulted by some moderate neolib ghouls that they decided selling marginalized groups down the fucking river was an acceptable alternative. I'm so glad my life is being sacrificed for their egos.
I don’t really see why you’re surprised anarchists are anti-electorialism. An anarchist party is impossible. It is impossible to dissolve a state (into a preferable state) by voting.
Considering that harm reduction is part of anarchist thought, but banned by admin fiat on dbzer0 as 'turbolib' behavior, I'm unsurprised that you see no difference between "Letting fascism win elections makes our job harder" and "Voting can solve all our problems"
fuck no, and that’s a creepy way of phrasing that.
I'm sorry that you find it 'creepy' when I point out that tankie opinions are overwhelmingly upvoted and vocally supported on dbzer0 comms, while the moderators and admins do nothing about it. Maybe you can ask your admins to deny UN verified sexual assault a few more times to make things feel less creepy.
So if people keep learning and will change their previous held convictions in light of new evidence they've seen, you start not taking them seriously? I'd say the fail is on your side there.
If they're the person I'm pretty sure they are, the evidence they presented was a UN report that accused China of several crimes against humanity that, by the definition of genocide in the genocide treaty that China signed, would each individually have been enough to declare genocide, provided that there was also proof of genocidal intent, which the report didn't investigate. It was analogous to presenting a pathology report that said someone died of knife wounds as evidence that they weren't murdered, just because the pathologist didn't use the word murder, even though it's not the pathologist's job to decide if the knife wounds were a murder or a tragic accident with a cutlery drawer.
You can look up the UN's definition of genocide, which is defined in the Genocide Convention. https://www.un.org/en/genocide-prevention/definition has an explanation and a link to a PDF of the actual treaty. he definition is given as:
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
China has ratified the Genocide Convention, so they've agreed to obey it.
It's relatively easy to prove one or more of the acts, as they leave physical evidence and/or a paper trail. Intent is harder to prove. Some countries have found their own past administrations guilty of genocide because a government has access to its own paperwork that it might keep secret from outside observers, and in the case of Israel, there were plenty of ministers tweeting genocidal intent.
also not dissing, am legitimately curious, but do pathologists actually do that?
In the UK at least, the pathologist's job is just to report to the coroner and/or police about physical evidence gathered from a body, and it's up to the coroner and/or police to combine that with other evidence from other sources and come to a conclusion. If the police decide a death might be a murder, even they can't make the final decision, they just use that as a sign that they should collect as much evidence as possible, and hand the evidence over to the Crown Prosecution Service, who'll then decide whether or not there's a charge to prosecute, and then it's a jury that eventually decides it's a murder. If there isn't a charge to be brought (e.g. because it was an accident or a suicide) or the prosecution fails, the coroner can make the final decision about whether there was a murder without having to decide who did it.
Swapping one's opinion on genocide three times within a year without the revelation of new evidence suggests a severe lack of actual thought or conviction.
It'll be four times once they spent a few minutes back in dbzer0.
Ukraine was the first country to break off from the USSR after the collapse. They were basically colonized into it in the first place and they're historically very independent.
"kept Ukraine... at peace with the neighboring sister region" is so telling too. Like yeah, the only way to be safe from an aggressive imperialist country is to not be independent next to it. Wow great.
Anything is possible when you make shit up indeed. Funny how they also never mention what Soviets did to Crimean Tatars, either
The firehose has been at full blast lately.
In the last screenshot, you explicitly dismiss the idea of delaying the decline being a worthwhile goal, and, in fact, claim delaying is counterproductive.
If you're still advocating for voting for Dems with that assertion, then your argument is either incoherent, or accelerationist.
Combine this with the fact that you've changed your opinions over the last year from "The Uyghur Genocide is bad" to "I'm not sure if it's really a genocide, and really, whatabout other countries??? 🥺", and you'll have to forgive me for not taking you seriously.
Damn that other user must be really really mad ig.
oh that's just antiyanks, he's a nutter
antiyanks you make hundreds of accounts and you spam comments lol
i keep telling you, if you stuck to just one account I'll let ya stay
he does sometimes
there's no rules against calling me a piece of shit lol, you can do that if you want, i really don't care
I said it won't fix or improve anything, it simply slows down the decline, and in my opinion that's not a bad thing. During the extra time, people don't make it better.
I don't really remember whatabouting what's happening to the uyghurs. I just thought the label didn't describe what's happening to them accurately.
"I would rather the decline be slower."
"The problem with that is that it pushes people to vote for the alternative"
Yes, definitely not objecting to someone explicitly arguing for slowing down the decline.
I guess all the "Ukraine is a CIA puppet!" talk in that same thread just wasn't as important to object to, huh?
And then you wonder why I don't take your claims of being totally just a neutral observer who only cares about precision, not spreading tankie talking points 🥺, seriously.
"It's not really genocide because all the accusations are Adrian Zenz!"
[extensive refutation]
"I'll get to it later."
Turns out, what you meant was "I'll keep repeating the same tankie bootlicking talking points later."
I am explaining why a slower decline isn't the solution, but it's desirable nevertheless.
I don't think Ukraine is a CIA puppet, Russia's land grab in ukraine is unjustified. There is a nazi problem in Ukraine, but that's not a reason to side with Russia in any way.
When it comes to the Uyghurs, I did do more reading, and settled back on my previous conclusion (that it is a genocide). There is a sever lack of evidence though (and Adrian Zenz is genuinely unreliable).
The poster you responded to explicitly pointed out that it wasn't a solution in and of itself, meaning your disputation was thus either meaningless, or you're bullshitting now.
I'm not the one you need to tell. Apparently, people saying "Decline should be slower" is a problem you need to address, but "Ukrainians in the streets protesting against a Russian-dominated government are CIA plants" is just fine. Which tracks for behavior on Dbzer0 - gotta fit in with the crowd, right?
The crowd which is comprised largely of tankies who get asspats from the 'anarchists' there.
You literally just said:
I'm doubting that your opinion is any more serious now than it was when you swapped the previous two times. Like a conservative confronted with evidence, I suspect you'll change for exactly as long as it takes for the norms of another social circle to kick in.
"Tiny minority of leftists who didn't vote" here meaning "A group significantly larger than the Dem margin of defeat"?
"The Democrats said"
"The big tent party isn't muzzling the people I want to be muzzled"
I'm sorry that 'leftists' apparently felt so insulted by some moderate neolib ghouls that they decided selling marginalized groups down the fucking river was an acceptable alternative. I'm so glad my life is being sacrificed for their egos.
Considering that harm reduction is part of anarchist thought, but banned by admin fiat on dbzer0 as 'turbolib' behavior, I'm unsurprised that you see no difference between "Letting fascism win elections makes our job harder" and "Voting can solve all our problems"
I'm sorry that you find it 'creepy' when I point out that tankie opinions are overwhelmingly upvoted and vocally supported on dbzer0 comms, while the moderators and admins do nothing about it. Maybe you can ask your admins to deny UN verified sexual assault a few more times to make things feel less creepy.
So if people keep learning and will change their previous held convictions in light of new evidence they've seen, you start not taking them seriously? I'd say the fail is on your side there.
If they're the person I'm pretty sure they are, the evidence they presented was a UN report that accused China of several crimes against humanity that, by the definition of genocide in the genocide treaty that China signed, would each individually have been enough to declare genocide, provided that there was also proof of genocidal intent, which the report didn't investigate. It was analogous to presenting a pathology report that said someone died of knife wounds as evidence that they weren't murdered, just because the pathologist didn't use the word murder, even though it's not the pathologist's job to decide if the knife wounds were a murder or a tragic accident with a cutlery drawer.
Can you go into detail about this?
also not dissing, am legitimately curious, but do pathologists actually do that?
You can look up the UN's definition of genocide, which is defined in the Genocide Convention. https://www.un.org/en/genocide-prevention/definition has an explanation and a link to a PDF of the actual treaty. he definition is given as:
China has ratified the Genocide Convention, so they've agreed to obey it.
It's relatively easy to prove one or more of the acts, as they leave physical evidence and/or a paper trail. Intent is harder to prove. Some countries have found their own past administrations guilty of genocide because a government has access to its own paperwork that it might keep secret from outside observers, and in the case of Israel, there were plenty of ministers tweeting genocidal intent.
In the UK at least, the pathologist's job is just to report to the coroner and/or police about physical evidence gathered from a body, and it's up to the coroner and/or police to combine that with other evidence from other sources and come to a conclusion. If the police decide a death might be a murder, even they can't make the final decision, they just use that as a sign that they should collect as much evidence as possible, and hand the evidence over to the Crown Prosecution Service, who'll then decide whether or not there's a charge to prosecute, and then it's a jury that eventually decides it's a murder. If there isn't a charge to be brought (e.g. because it was an accident or a suicide) or the prosecution fails, the coroner can make the final decision about whether there was a murder without having to decide who did it.
Swapping one's opinion on genocide three times within a year without the revelation of new evidence suggests a severe lack of actual thought or conviction.
It'll be four times once they spent a few minutes back in dbzer0.