WhatWouldKarlDo

joined 2 years ago
[–] WhatWouldKarlDo@lemmygrad.ml 22 points 2 years ago

Glad to hear the change of heart. I thought you were a lost cause.

[–] WhatWouldKarlDo@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 2 years ago

“As far as I was concerned,” he said, “anybody who’d stand against the cops was all right with me, and that’s why I stayed in…Every time you turn around the cops were pulling some outrage or another.”

https://www.villagepreservation.org/2022/06/13/dave-van-ronk-ally-at-the-stonewall-uprising/

[–] WhatWouldKarlDo@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 2 years ago

Yeah, they're good people. I just wish they would tone down on the hieroglyphs in general on our instance.

[–] WhatWouldKarlDo@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 2 years ago

I remember making that phone call. The scariest thing I ever did in my life. No regrets. You got this!

[–] WhatWouldKarlDo@lemmygrad.ml 9 points 2 years ago

Must be nice on the holodeck.

[–] WhatWouldKarlDo@lemmygrad.ml 37 points 2 years ago (2 children)

During the New York Draft Riots, the New York Times machine gunned protestors.

[–] WhatWouldKarlDo@lemmygrad.ml 16 points 2 years ago

And the only military casualty was friendly fire.

[–] WhatWouldKarlDo@lemmygrad.ml 13 points 2 years ago

Yeah, this is definitely better than my reply. I'm tired after arguing with the liberals all damn day. I need some cigars and brandy.

[–] WhatWouldKarlDo@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 2 years ago

They only have two political parties, and it can be hard to tell the difference between them a lot of the time. They're both still going to push for more military spending, treat social programs with extreme suspicion, and probably go out and attack another country. The Wikipedia definition of neoliberal is this:

Neoliberalism is contemporarily used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as "eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers" and reducing, especially through privatization and austerity, state influence in the economy.

Which describes both parties pretty well. Americans have a bit of a twisted view of liberal Vs conservative. Both their parties are pretty right wing in comparison to most of the rest of the world, so they often come down to performative acts. For instance, I'm trans. Neither party really cares about me, but the republican base hates me. So they each put on a big show of doing something about me. But they are both primarily interested in the same overall goals in governance, which is in line with neoliberal ideology.

So we just call them all liberals (although I think the republican party is becoming fascist, which is arguably not the same thing). Regardless, an average liberal's ideology is more compatible with fascism than with us.

[–] WhatWouldKarlDo@lemmygrad.ml 21 points 2 years ago

I'm about done discussing this with you, as you already seem to have a reasonable amount of facts.

But your insistence that China fired upon peaceful protests based on "China’s authoritarian and notoriously opaque government cannot be trusted to tell the truth " is absolutely insane and not at all fact based. There's zero evidence to support that. The PLA must really be bad at massacres if they allowed that many of their vehicles and personnel to be killed by unarmed civilians.

Whataboutism or whataboutery (as in "what about…?") denotes in a pejorative sense a procedure in which a critical question or argument is not answered or discussed, but retorted with a critical counter-question which expresses a counter-accusation.

I have done nothing of the sort. I've addressed every topic. I'm inquiring further about why this one particular event is of such importance in showing how evil China is, while things like this are just one of those things. The fact that this keeps popping up every single year and actual American massacres are barely mentioned should indicate to you that the people running the propaganda machine really want you to hate China.

They've shown themselves very willing to twist the truth, but you still insist that the core claim is true, no matter what. The clear use of this as propaganda should lead you to question it.

But I doubt that any further conversation will be productive. You have the basic facts correct, which is better than most. Many people did die that night. Many of them soldiers. The fighting happened in many separate locations away from the square. Those are the facts. If you extrapolate a massacre out of that, there's no facts I can draw upon to argue with you, other than repeating that the burden of proof is on the accuser.

[–] WhatWouldKarlDo@lemmygrad.ml 24 points 2 years ago (9 children)

We are an a communist instance. American liberals (which includes both of their major political parties) are very imperialist and love to push propaganda about their enemies. It's why public opinion for China took a nose dive in the last 10 years. Why Iran is so evil, but nobody thinks about Kuwait. Why Tiananmen square gets so much attention but the white terror receives none. China's the enemy, and "Taiwan" is an innocent friend that needs protecting.

Being communist, we are anti-imperialist, and hate the war mongering propaganda that the liberals seem to lap up. They see this as being conspiracy theorists or contrarian. Hence the conflict about things like this.

view more: ‹ prev next ›