Heads, I’m right, tails, you’re wrong
I’m curious how it changes their analysis that the liberal consensus as of like a year or two ago became that the “genocide” accusation was always bullshit.
It doesn’t. Much like “Everyone was against the invasion of Iraq”.
I would say it’s specifically like the “Ok, Saddam didn’t have WMDs, but he was still a bad guy and the US needed to take him out anyway.” viewpoint on the Iraq war.
bruh
text
Removed Comment “Do you know why Holocaust denialism is considered so bad? It’s not because it’s inherently wrong to question any claim anyone makes that a genocide is happening. It’s because the Holocaust is extremely well documented with an overwhelming amount of evidence. To place it on the same level of extremely dubious claims that primarily rely on one single person, who is a religious nut with ties to the CIA, is bordering on actual Holocaust denialism. Claims of genocide do not get some special status where they get to circumvent the normal process of skepticism and critical examination. It’s the opposite, since it is such a major claim, they should be subject to even more skepticism. The Holocaust has very clearly passed the most skeptical evaluations, to the point that we can safely say that anyone denying it is acting in bad faith. But other claims of genocide that lack that kind of evidence, such as the “Uyghur genocide” or the “White genocide” or whatever else do not get the same treatment. You don’t get to exploit the Holocaust to bypass evidence for other claims.” by OBJECTION!
reason: Genocide denialism
Banned OBJECTION! from the community World News@lemmy.world
reason: Genocide denialism
Idk how they got it into their heads that claims of genocide get to bypass any and all scrutiny but the US sure knows how to exploit that idea.
Whenever I dare look at the .world (and co) modlog, I know there’s a decent chance I’ll see one of your removed comments there. But every time that’s the case, it’s always an excellent, sensible comment, the deletion of which always a testament to the vacuous dipshittery and hypocrisy of the liberal lemmy instances. It’s like always so clearly just that they can’t argue against it without blatantly abandoning the pretense that they’re any different than the maga conservatives or outright fascists they love to claim they oppose.
So anyway, your name and pfp are very appropriate. Thank you for your service of frequently wading through those brainworm-infested waters and spraying some dewormer around. It may seem like a drop in the bucket but I’m sure some of it gets through here and there.
Something that keeps showing that Marxist analysis is actually the proper understanding of the world, at least to me, is the fact that people can’t argue against it, all they can do is attack the position by censoring them and claiming they believe things they clearly don’t.
claiming they believe things they clearly don’t.
This drives me up the wall more than it should. I know libs are acting in bad faith, so I shouldn’t be surprised when they do things like this.
“Commies will say ‘not real communism’ every time!”
“Actually, the USSR was real communism and it was based. It was in the process of transitioning to a classless, stateless, moneyless society but for a variety of reasons, ultimately failed and collapsed.”
“SEE! HE SAID ‘NOT REAL COMMUNISM!’”
“No, I didn’t. I said the opposite, while acknowledging the reality the Soviet experiment failed.”
“Wow authoritarian 1984 Voldemort!”
“Kind of a meaningless term, since all governments are authoritarian. No government in history has ever allowed ideological enemies to organize a seperate government within the same state. Except when the US does it, it gets labeled “freedom and liberty,” but when China does it, it gets the ‘authoritarian’ label.”
“WHATABOUTISM!”
…is usually how those conversations go. Often, you can type out the lib response before them. Outright reactionaries are even easier to predict.
Whataboutism? What about deez nuts?
The cognitive dissonance in these people must be intense, which genocide did that comment deny?
I mean, the gap between “Claims of genocide should be subject to the same scrutiny as other claims” and “The Uighur genocide isn’t real” is like 10 minutes of actual fact-checking.
Also worth noting that I didn’t even bring it up in that thread. It was about some completely different topic, I was playing nice, and then somebody recognized me and accused me of “supporting the Uighur genocide” and I got banned for defending myself, like I didn’t even say “it’s not happening,” I said, “I’ve yet to see evidence for it and I don’t believe claims without evidence.”
Then a mod did what libs do which is type it in google and copy-paste links they haven’t read, and I said, “before I examine those in detail, can you tell me how many times your sources cite Adrian Zenz and whether you think he should be considered a reliable source?” That’s when he banned me. I went through the sources afterward (more than he had done) and counted his name mentioned 18 times over 4 sources.
Like, you gotta know what you’re doing at that point. That one redsails article about how “brainwashing” is really just willfully accepting propaganda feels relevant.
It was a radicalizing moment for me realizing that a lot of people WANT to be ignorant to preserve their shaky worldviews. Like they’re scared of changing their minds from the safe liberal concensus and somehow this us just how most burger bros operate.
communists: right “too early”
libs: wrong for too longDuring the Second Red Scare which occurred in the United States in the years that immediately followed the end of World War II, the term “premature anti-fascist” came into currency and it was used to describe Americans who had strongly agitated or worked against fascism, such as Americans who had fought for the Republicans during the Spanish Civil War, before fascism was seen as a proximate and existential threat to the United States (which only occurred generally after the invasion of Poland by Nazi Germany and only occurred universally after the attack on Pearl Harbor). The implication was that such persons were either Communists or Communist sympathizers whose loyalty to the United States was suspect.
And in 1938, they sold down the river for a ludicrous illusion of Peace in Our Time the only strong, democratic state in Eastern Europe that might have been a deterrent to Hitler’s plans for expansion, the Czecho-Slovak Republic.
This was more or less how people framed the discussion of weapons of mass destruction in the months leading up to the invasion of Iraq.
Yep. Libs never learn.
“it’s not true until the state officially declares it true”
“And even then, it could hypothetically, maybe, possibly have potentially have happened, so we should hate the evil enemy with all our hearts anyway.”
The fact that I believed it says a lot about society
Being right doesnt make you right
Sometimes that’s right when you come to the right answer through the wrong conclusion, such as Candace Owen’s and MTG opposing Israel based mostly in antisemitism and nationalism, but that generally doesn’t describe communists.
math teacher-ass take
Math teachers want you to show your work. These guys are the opposite, the more work you show to prove your position the more wrong your being right actually is.
