Are you somehow closer to the truth, or are you, like the rest of us, getting news from various sources and making your own mind up?
Because if so, my ad hominem kind of applies to all of us internet forum idiots and armchair politicians. Those of us without obvious declarations in our profiles could be argued to be the stealth ones, trying to swing people this way and that with who knows what agenda.
Why do we reach the conclusions we do anyway? Do we stand to gain anything?
At least in your case, it seems more obvious why you do, wearing your colours on your sleeve (metaphorically speaking) as you do.
If you would like an inkling of why I think the way I do: I’m never in favour of it when a larger power goes in, guns blazing, to override a smaller one, like there’s literally no other way. And they always, always go too far, refuse to back down, and a huge number of people die senselessly because some ideologue thinks that a lesson needs to be taught. (Curiously, the ideologues themselves tend to be a long, long way from the bullets.)
It’s happened in history so many times. My own damn country has been the aggressor. It wasn’t right then, and it’s not right when it’s done now.
Please note that you literally cannot tell which conflict I’m talking about here. There’s at least three.
You’re arguing against the most prolific tankie superposters on Lemmy. He’s one of the main voices of lemmygrad and that server and hexbears are virulent -what they call Marxist leninists- which is actually more akin to stalinist thought.
They support even modern day Russia, because it’s not really about communism, but about destroying western hegemony. And they are very fond of autocratic leadership and will defend to a point of sounding silly the benefits of communist autocracies (while often living in western democratic countries).
They are quite open about being overt propagandists and regurgitate arguments from red sails, so they have a wall of links and arguments to make it seem like they have a point. It’s very obnoxious to discuss with them as they are completely inflexible on their ideology.
Yeah, I’ve seen their name before. I notice they haven’t responded yet, so either they’re not online right now or they’re conjuring a really epic take-down of my point.
I was actually slightly afraid of coming back here to check because I didn’t know what I’d find.
The other possibility is that I’ve made a point that can’t be refuted within their ideology. After all “The West” as they see it is precisely the sort of big guy stomping the little guy that I clearly don’t like. And I’m not sure I completely disagree with that point.
Are you somehow closer to the truth, or are you, like the rest of us, getting news from various sources and making your own mind up?
Because if so, my ad hominem kind of applies to all of us internet forum idiots and armchair politicians. Those of us without obvious declarations in our profiles could be argued to be the stealth ones, trying to swing people this way and that with who knows what agenda.
Why do we reach the conclusions we do anyway? Do we stand to gain anything?
At least in your case, it seems more obvious why you do, wearing your colours on your sleeve (metaphorically speaking) as you do.
If you would like an inkling of why I think the way I do: I’m never in favour of it when a larger power goes in, guns blazing, to override a smaller one, like there’s literally no other way. And they always, always go too far, refuse to back down, and a huge number of people die senselessly because some ideologue thinks that a lesson needs to be taught. (Curiously, the ideologues themselves tend to be a long, long way from the bullets.)
It’s happened in history so many times. My own damn country has been the aggressor. It wasn’t right then, and it’s not right when it’s done now.
Please note that you literally cannot tell which conflict I’m talking about here. There’s at least three.
You’re arguing against the most prolific tankie superposters on Lemmy. He’s one of the main voices of lemmygrad and that server and hexbears are virulent -what they call Marxist leninists- which is actually more akin to stalinist thought.
They support even modern day Russia, because it’s not really about communism, but about destroying western hegemony. And they are very fond of autocratic leadership and will defend to a point of sounding silly the benefits of communist autocracies (while often living in western democratic countries).
They are quite open about being overt propagandists and regurgitate arguments from red sails, so they have a wall of links and arguments to make it seem like they have a point. It’s very obnoxious to discuss with them as they are completely inflexible on their ideology.
Yeah, I’ve seen their name before. I notice they haven’t responded yet, so either they’re not online right now or they’re conjuring a really epic take-down of my point.
I was actually slightly afraid of coming back here to check because I didn’t know what I’d find.
The other possibility is that I’ve made a point that can’t be refuted within their ideology. After all “The West” as they see it is precisely the sort of big guy stomping the little guy that I clearly don’t like. And I’m not sure I completely disagree with that point.
deleted by creator