this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2023
152 points (99.4% liked)

chapotraphouse

13473 readers
1 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank

Dunk posts in general go in the_dunk_tank, not here

Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from the_dunk_tank

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Iraq dominated the headlines throughout the fall of 2002 and into the winter of 2003. Public opinion on the wisdom of war, however, stabilized relatively early and slightly in favor of war. Gallup found that from August 2002 through early March 2003 the share of Americans favoring war hovered in a relatively narrow range between a low of 52 percent and a high of 59 percent. By contrast, the share of the public opposed to war fluctuated between 35 percent and 43 percent.

Looks like Americans are even more happy with murdering people if its done by a puppet.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/rally-round-the-flag-opinion-in-the-united-states-before-and-after-the-iraq-war/

(page 2) 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Letstakealook@lemm.ee 14 points 2 years ago

Yeah, it's fucking ridiculous how much the "if you don't absolutely support anything the Israeli government does, you're a nazi" rhetoric has taken hold. The actual nazis love it because it allows them to "hide their power level," while "undesirables" are eliminated.

[–] ilyenkov@hexbear.net 14 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Death to amerikkka, unlimited genocide on the first world

[–] corgiwithalaptop@hexbear.net 12 points 2 years ago

Many people are saying!

[–] frogbellyratbone_@hexbear.net 14 points 2 years ago (1 children)

just normal bleech demon things

all joking/despair aside, this poll is stupid. even if accurate i would argue it shows how effective propaganda is rather than how mindrendingly and pointlessly violent the average american prole is.

[–] Adkml@hexbear.net 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Does it really matter if theyve been "mislead" into being mindrendingly pointlessly violent?

Especially when that violence keeps getting pointed at the same religious minority?

[–] frogbellyratbone_@hexbear.net 2 points 2 years ago

yah. i mean i'm not sure i 100% understand what you mean by matter, but yah why a political force acts the way it does and believes the things it does is important and matters

[–] GnastyGnuts@hexbear.net 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

People from settler-colonial nations recognize their own as if by instinct. The zionist jews are practically honorary anglos, for having engaged in the most anglo behavior.

[–] SeventyTwoTrillion@hexbear.net 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Precisely. This is horrific, but it is also pretty standard colonizer shit but in 2023 in contrast to a hundred years ago, There's been no actual societal development since the time of Leopold II, it's just that the Western nations were forced to stop doing it due to violent uprisings (but got the last laugh - though hopefully won't for too much longer - by trapping them in debt).

Until 1908, Leopold ran Congo as a venture for personal profit. Using a private army that included Congolese orphans, the king and his agents drained the land of resources, killing elephants for ivory and tapping trees for rubber. Congolese families were forcibly moved and their members separated and enslaved, leaving as many as 10 million dead, by some estimates. Leopold’s enforcers became infamous even among European colonial powers, so much so that in 1906, the king, denying accusations of atrocities, admitted that “most likely cruelties, even crimes” had been committed.

If for whatever reason direct colonization was seen as possible or desirable and could be re-established (which it probably cannot), then the West would collectively return to committing these atrocities and back to the good old "We are bringing Western enlightenment to these savages, even if we have to kill a few million people to do it." All the idealistic notions of sovereignty, and allowing the people of a country to rule over it instead of from a metropole, and so on and so forth (though obviously the validity of these principles in the present day is pretty much void due to neoimperialism - but the point is that the West says they support those things most of the time); those principles would quickly be removed, and the talking heads on television would be tasked with overseeing the transition and letting the audiences know that it's fine to be a bloodthirsty imperialist, if anything it's our duty.

There would be nothing - is nothing, in fact - stopping Western nations from doing direct, extreme, colonizer violence to other countries again, no philosophical or religious rule or command, no overriding sense of morality or justice. The only thing stopping them from turning every country on Earth into Gaza is the threat of overwhelming violence in return, and that the current arrangement is seen as sufficiently profitable such that the violence is undesirable. Well, and recently, the fact that their weapons stocks are running out and they're rotting from the inside due to finanacial parasitism.

[–] Romeo@hexbear.net 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Most Americans see this struggle and are fondly reminded of their own wretched past of ~~waging wars with~~ slaughtering technologically inferior natives.

[–] xj9@hexbear.net 2 points 2 years ago

even then they had to cheat. the americans wouldn't have been able to conquer the continent if they had any honor.

[–] ComradeLove@hexbear.net 3 points 2 years ago

Surprised its not even higher.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›