https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3758961-police-discover-80-russian-torture-chambers-in-ukraine.html
Ukrainian law enforcement officers have discovered 80 Russian torture chambers and captivity places within the de-occupied areas. — Ukrinform.
Fuck elon musk for not allowing Ukraine to dismantle those war machines providing cover for this type of diabolical behavior to continue.
Elon, like any other conservative sub-human, will always side with oppressors. Always.
I would add that dehumanizing rhetoric of any kind can become a gateway drug to justifying atrocity. No matter what side you stand on. It can contribute to the radicalization of any group. Nobody is immune to becoming a monster.
Not everyone is willing to do what's necessary to cure the disease. I am willing. If that makes me a monster, then I am the monster they themselves created.
Conservatism is a plague of oppression and death. It always has been. History has proven time after time that pacifism cannot stop conservatives. We must be willing to do difficult things to survive this kind of deadly infection. Preaching peace is unfortunately not helpful. It placates those who are better served by understanding the danger we are all in and what needs to happen to stop that threat.
I am not arguing in favor of pacifism. I fully recognize the need to defend against harmful ideologies that infect people's minds with bad ideas. And if those who harbor bad ideas threaten violence then it may be necessary to react in kind. I accept that.
I'm simply saying that it matters what kind of language we use when we talk about it. Calling conservatives, or any opposing side perceived as a violent threat, subhuman creates the misconception that your own side could not ever be in the wrong. In so doing, it is possible that the we too could become infected with the bad idea that "All (insert opposing threat here) must die." I don't ever in my life time want to see anything like the Holocaust happen because people couldn't stop and think that at some point the killing needs to stop, because it's reached a point where we are no longer defending and only killing out of pure and base fear that the threat will rise up again. There is a point where self defense goes too far and gives rise to genocide. That possibility scares the hell out of me.
We should instead call all conservatives subhuman because the tenets of whatever the fuck passes for conservative these days are senselessly antagonistic and cruel to the vulnerable among us
I don't disagree with you, but at some point, most of these folks are grown ass adults with full cognitive capacity and the same access to information as the rest of us.
It's a commitment and dedication to wilfull ignorance that is a conscious decision. They make the choice to ignore new information and ignore their own values and hypocrisy. They are 100% responsible for their own actions and treating them as victims invalidates their responsibilities and denies them personal accountability.
I don't know that I'd call them subhuman, but they are hurting, killing, and oppressing people in active worship to the God of ignorance. These are bad people, and they don't deserve your defense.
There was a time when you would have been right, but at this point, they are a part of the problem, not a symptom of it.
They are actively voting in and supporting people who are disrupting attempts to mitigate the actual issues. For example, every American should be against gerrymandering, as it is expressly anti-democratic, yet here we are voting in toxic people who are running interference on any effort to combat it.
This should be a bipartisan issue. I lived in Maryland for a long time and my district looked like an electrocuted spider, in favor of the Dems. Republicans should be against this, but here we are slamming our hand into the car door every time we try to make progress.
The people pulling the strings should be held accountable, no question. Pretending that these folks aren't the problem is nice for diplomacy, but it's no longer the case.
We can hold them responsible for their actions and still recognize that they are victims of indoctrination. However, this would require the same intellectual honesty you chastise them for not having.
Straight to the personal attacks? Not really a great argument, particularly when the rest of it amounts to "NUH UH!!".
I'm gonna need more than that. @aerolemming@lemm.ee and I were having a pretty civil discussion, and I appreciate his points, though I personally disagree with them.
Read the room, man.
Are they still victims when they become violent? Or when they promote violence? At some point the threshold is crossed.
So the poor defenseless indoctrinated are ok with racism in their party and nazism? They have no autonomy at all to choose?
I considered myself a libertarian before I saw how the people on the right reacted to same-sex marriage being legalized. Their collective reaction broke the lie that they were the party of freedom/equality. I spent years deprogramming/re-educating myself. Now I'm very progressive and much more sensitive to biased info sources, but.. I'm dating a "conservative". He's questioning his political beliefs now due to the right's resurgence of anti-lgbtq and the conversations we've had surrounding that.
Thing is, all humans attach their beliefs/values/principles to the narrative they sell themselves about who they are. We settle into these narratives as we come of age, and constantly reinforce them through our perceptions of our lived experiences. For someone to be able to withstand the process of unraveling and reconstructing who they are on a fundamental level, an extreme event is necessary. Something that shocks them with enough force to break one of the core beliefs of whatever system they're beholden to.
YOUR PROBLEM is that you lack understanding in this area of human nature. That lack of understanding leads to frustration, resentment, and ultimately the same tribalism you see in the people you choose to hate. You see them as sub-human, automatically elevating yourself above them because your confirmation bias tells you that your version of truth is the only real truth, but you're too heavily steeped in your own soup to realize that you're engaging with politics the exact same way they are.
Be better. Hate the swindlers, not the swindled. Don't tolerate intolerance either. Just gently point out when they're being intolerant and let them (hopefully) stubble into their own epiphanies.
TL:DR; Confirmation bias is a helluva drug. Your willful ignorance of your own confirmation bias is blinding you and limiting your ability to understand basic human nature. I hope this stimulates a little more thought, with a little more intellectual honesty on your part. Cheers.
Those "victims" will gleefully watch you suffer and die. They will smile as your existence becomes illegal. Those "victims" will proudly facilitate your death and, in many cases, will physically participate in committing that murder.
Nearly every act of domestic terrorism in U.S. history has been committed by conservatives. Nearly every act of racism, bigotry, misogyny, xenophobia, homophobia, transphobia and antisemitism in our country is committed by conservafives. They are not the victims, they are the victimizers.
Conservatives have the entirety of the world's knowledge at their fingertips and access to the world's foremost experts. Yet, they choose to follow hateful ideologies. They choose to be opposed to education. They choose to condemn scientists and doctors as liars and traitors. Conservatives are not the victims. They are not victims of anything at all.
I was born and raised in the south in a conservative household. I recently retired from a profession completely infested with conservatives. I know conservatism very well, unfortunately.
They know they are voting for bigots. They know they are voting for misogynists. They know they are voting for white nationalists. If they are able to consume media well enough to know what days to vote and where to vote, then they know what these candidates are.
The people you are describing often refer to themselves as "centrists" so they can pretend they aren't racist, bigoted misogynists like the people they vote for. That is deception. They are deceiving you so you don't disown them for being vile garbage.
It is the internet, why did you think it would be different?
Still the same people show up.
Because it's the internet, and different communities exist in different places. I watched Reddit deteriorate into a far-left cesspool like many others, and hoped this would be a place where talking to other people and having discussions is encouraged. More so, I thought this would be a place where delegating your political opposition as 'subhumans' would be countered the way it should be.
I assume you don't use it then. I still do, but I'm trying to get away from it. What you just said is completely inaccurate, but that's understandable if you don't frequent the site. I have only seen that kind of language used on 4chan.
You're quoting my sentence, yet responding with something completely different than what I said. Why?
If you think Trump is popular on Reddit, spend about 5 minutes browsing the site on any day of the week. That's blatantly false.
Not sure what Elons reasoning is here, but i guess if it wasnt for Starlink, communication would have collapsed in the first week.
You're still relying on old information. He clarified this. Starlink was never active over crimea. He was asked to activate it and said no as that was part of the restrictions on the deployment and would have been breaking the terms that clarified it as an act of war from the west.
He didn't shut them off. Access was never active in that region.
"Raytheon never deactivated their missiles, they just don't work over the target."
That's deactivating them dummy. Where do you think Ukraine is going with their Starlinks? Disneyland?
Missiles and satellite arrays have no similarities in the way they technologically function. So this argument doesn't actually hold any water. Elon musk is the operator of the starlink. Ukraine does not operate starlink satellites. Ukraine operates the missiles we GIVE to them. Meaning the baton of ownership has been passed off from the united states to Ukraine. The Ukrainian operators then have the autonomy to do with that as they see fit. This is why we give Ukraine guns and bullets but we dont give them the human soldier to fire them. Because this implicates direct US involvement in an offensive strike against Russia. In June 2023 starlink won contract with the pentagon. Meaning elon musk and starlink are acting as agents of the united states government and as such as bound by very similar rules of engagement that the normal US military is. The difference between giving them missiles and starlink is that we can't just say "here are your very own satellites that you have the keys and drivers wheel to and they belong to you now"
Over Ukrainian territory. For defensive purposes. Where it was originally agreed for. Crimea hasn't been Ukraine for years (even though it should be). Offensives into Russia were not part of any operational original deals.
It's not deactivating if it was never live there.
The individual base station (or whatever) has its service deactivated when it goes to Crimea, which is internationally recognized as Ukrainian territory.
No one but Russian bootlickers think Crimea is part of Russia.
Right. The individual base stations always have had a service region. It's why I can't use starlink over international waters and the same thing happens from a fishing boat or anything. There's no purposeful deactivations. Just boundaries of service already established.
It's literally part of the service when you sign up.
You're right that technically he could provide coverage anywhere in the world. There's lots of reasons he doesn't. But that's always been part of the service.
18 UNcountries recognize it as Russian territory. Some of them large superpowers or economic hubs. Including one that's expected to launch starlink soon. (Though all generally shitty countries.)
But aside from that. The rules for supplying things to Ukraine were spelled out very clearly. It's why none of the Western supplies hsve been used in Russian territory attacks. Doing so Russia claimed it would retaliate.
The articles are claiming that he intentionally turned it off when it was originally on and that's not the case. It was never active there.
Look if you want to play semantics, fine. The most finite definition is that starlink satellites deactivate every time they pass over Crimea. He actively contributes to russias strike capabilities on a daily basis. It's far worse than the story, not better.
Won't matter when Ukraine creates their own capabilities, but fuck musk just the same.
Musk is beholden to various international laws when providing this coverage. Like it or not Russia considers crimea their territory and would not respond kindly to musk allowing it's use over their territory.
Like I love how everyone just expects this dude to just as a civilian piss off a nation who can shoot his satellites down or consider it an act of war on his own.
18 UNcountries recognize it as Russian territory
Russia, Belarus, China, North Korea, Cuba, Eritrea. What are rest of 12 countries?
India , and several African and middle eastern countries. (iirc Iran was on there etc). By no means a real winner list but just worth noting.
In particular India which starlink is set to go active in very soon.
Yes. However Russia has claimed it years before this conflict and threatened retaliation if westerners interfere. It's why all of the supplies we give are only used in Ukraine. The attacks on Russian soil are not with Western supplies intentionally and this would be no different.
However Russia has claimed it years before this conflict
No, it claimed when conflict started. Just before February Putin didn't go any further.
You do know those starlinks move over the planets surface, right?
The only way to not have them active over a certain area (excluding the poles) is by deactivating them when they fly over.
Either Elmo doesn't know how his own planet wide network works, or he is lying.
You do realize starlink has always had regional and location based activation for multitudes of reasons. Including laws of said countries.
Yes. It's deactivated over crimea. It always was.
Similar to how it stopped functioning if you tried to use it in international waters.
If you get starlink location of use is included in the setup. Which is why you can't just slap it onto a boat or something. (though they do now sell a starlink with that functionality)
Oh boyyyy can't wait to hear from the Tankies going NUH UH THOSE ARE FAKE AND/OR RUN BY UKRAINIANS ON RUSSIAN-SPEAKING PEOPLE THIS IS EVIDENCE OF UKRAINIANS COMMITTING GENOCIDE OR ITS THE CIA COMRADE PUTIN WOULD NEVER DO THIS
SOURCE: TRUST ME BRO
e_e
I doubt there are stupid enough people who would deny Putin's crimes.
I'm not surprised given that even drafted are tortured in army, or sledgehammer thing when Ukraine exchanged POWs.
COMRADE PUTIN WOULD NEVER DO THIS
If militant gang pensioner did it Russia with chemical weapon or in Britan, he sure will do it again.
You're describing the fascist aligned right wing parrot points. They're the ones deepthroating Putin, not "tankies"
No, the tankies are also most definitely swallowing up the same bullshit because they believe Russia and China to be freer states than the rest of the world.
I mean, there is a long documented list of crimes that make China look like a Muslim paradise compared to anything in Europe or North America, and Ukraine has every problem that Russia does. Again, why are we all trying to compare sides? Of course, with Russian suppression, it will soon be just as repressive as Ukraine, and China has a bunch of "war on terror" laws just like the US, so there's nothing to be proud of there.
I mean i don't think they actually believe them to be freer, i think they don't care about individual freedom. Whether or not Russia is more free or more repressive doesn't matter to authoritarians. (Or if anything, they prefer the repression.)
You haven't been paying too much attention then. The tankies are vomiting the same pro-putin propaganda as the right-wing fascists. The right-wing fascists want to suck Putin's dick because he hates gays and loves economic corruption. The tankies want to suck Putin's dick because they have some kind of delusion that modern Russia is a communist country and believe west=bad so anything westerners hate must be good.
I actually went and asked on Hexbear their opinions about this and tried to dig a bit to understand the logic. I don't agree with it and I think their logic is cold, brutal and lacking in empathy, but there is a logic.
Essentially, they support Russia critically. This means they agree with any normal person that Russia is a shithole, but it's a useful shithole that challenges NATO. They see this as a proxy war between NATO and Russia, and the more they can bleed each other the better, especially if it weakens NATO. The civilians who are caught in the middle are acceptable collateral damage according to them.
I've also talked to some of these folks, and my strong sense is that they are teenagers who have never been to any of these places, or really understand much about the complexity of global systems
I also get the strong sense that the vast majority are from North America, which greatly limits their perspectives. It's very easy to see this in simple calculus terms when the war isn't going on right over the border and has the potential to destroy a sibling country (Moldova, I'm Romanian).
I honestly don't think that's the case. This seems to me to be people who have an ideology (fair enough, we all do) but then see the entire world and everything around them through this black and white filter where everything either supports the cause or doesn't, and anything and everything is justified in support of that.
A lot of American communists supported Stalin. They refused to believe that the anti-Stalin news was anything but American propaganda. When Khrushchev exposed Stalin for what he did in an attempt to try rebuilding the country, many were disillusioned to the point that they left communism. Some remained pro-Soviet but rejected Stalin, some remained communist but rejected the USSR as state capitalism, and some remained pro-Stalin. I’m just pointing that out to make sure that we all remember that people can be all over the place and still justify their positions to themselves.
To me, supporting Putin because he opposes NATO is like supporting Donald Trump because he opposes Biden. There are some accelerationists who literally do that. I personally think it is idiotic, and anyone who does so is a fascist and not a communist. Putin’s homophobia, xenophobia, right wing religious fascism, and misogyny should be more than enough to dissuade any person with a conscience from supporting him. Honestly, I really think it does. I believe that the majority of the “tankies” supporting Putin are right wing accounts sockpuppeting as leftists. No one who supports LGBT rights could support Putin. I think the tankies are the same type of crowd that populated the_donald - people cosplaying a political position until it becomes internalized.
There is an absolutely massive literature in American and Western communism. Most of it predates Putin - at least, predates Putin bring anything other than a mafioso with a superpower to fund his personal wealth. You can read all about the soul searching about actually existing communism vs ideological communism and the moral dilemma that resulted.
But insofar as it’s about opposition to American imperialism or accelerationism, I think that the Trump years should have shown that to be tragically misguided. Putin’s opposition to NATO isn’t helping anyone in the West except for people like Trump and LePen. It’s not like supporting Ho Chi Minh or Mao, and it’s certainly not like supporting Allende, Castro, or Che. It’s like supporting Hitler on the basis of Hitler being anti-British.
You need to research some info on LaRouche and Dugin. They sound like complete jokes and everyone downplays their influence, but it's very real. That's where this comes from.
Also, Stalin was supported at that time in the US because of major wins in labor disputes and the fact that we were allied during WWII. The USSR was defeating Germany under Stalin, and we (the US) decided to finish off the losing team (luckily Germany). He was considered a hero, and a genuine revolutionary Communist for his work, and the fight against Nazism is how he went down in history. Ironically, wrt. your comment, it was the de-Stalinizing USSR under Khrushchev that were the "tankies", it had nothing to do with Stalin at all.
Like many other impoverished, war-torn, or underdeveloped countries, socialism failed to be fully achieved in the USSR and ended up getting stuck. We could recognize the good and move on to build something better.
Yea, they are making the same mistake as Stalin: "Haha, hitler invaded France and is bombing London, those filthy capitalists, this is great."
Why are you claiming that Putin hates gays like it's a bad thing, and then making fun of gay people? I don't suck dick, and I definitely wouldn't make the offer if I was trying to "own" a homophobe..
How am I making fun of gay people? Anyone with a mouth can suck a cock, regardless of gender or sexual orientation. The problem is sucking Putin's dick.
Why do you think only gay men can suck cock?
Oh ok, it's only okay to be homophobic if you're laughing at people who suck the wrong person's dick.
You mean to tell me that hearing that exact phrase during my entire life in a homophobic context has all of a sudden changed meanings? I don't buy your bullshit.
Have you been living under a rock? I've been hearing it used to mock, demean, or criticize people of any gender for over 10 years. So, congrats! You've discovered that the meaning of words and phrases can change. As it turns out, women can suck cock too. So can enbies! Women can have cocks, men can have vaginas, people can identify however they want, it's 2023, get with fucking times.
Oh, and I wasn't mocking them. I was using in a degrading manner. Sucking the cock of a lover or friend is one thing (and shouldn't be mocked), but being so enthusiastic about a genocidal dictator that you'd willingly gobble their cock is entirely different.
There are a lot of pro-putin (and other shitty regime) tankies, that's really my problem with them. If they were just militant communist types I wouldn't have too much of an issue with them, I may not agree with them, but I'd at least understand their position, maybe even be somewhat sympathetic in some cases.
When you dig into their reasoning, it's usually something like they support them because they're also against the US/NATO/the west, sort of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" kind of deal, but that argument doesn't really hold water for me, throwing your lot in with someone pulling the kinds of shit Putin does is totally indefensible, even if your plan is to ultimately turn on them after you've successfully toppled the west or whatever, you've still been supporting or at least turning a blind eye to some pretty horrific shit.
Exactly. I'm cool with communists, but fuck Hexbear and also kind of Lemmygrad for spreading authoritarian propaganda.
It's like how the far right tries to gaslight everyone by trying to change the meaning of the word "nazi". E.g.
Tankies are doing the same with the word "tankie". Even "militant communists" aren't tankies -- unless they cheer on brutal oppression by authoritarian regimes.
i think it's relatively clear and obvious that there needs to be a word that describes regimes which systematically inflict violence upon their own civilians via mechanized artillery and the simps who support these regimes,
and that word is 'tankie'
now, if I had my way, it'd be a different word, which would have served the purpose of freeing up 'tankie' for another purpose (a pejorative for people who brainlessly and uncritically gobble up the bullshit of think-tanks) but that's not the world we live in. In this world, tankie refers to the scenario wherein,
Civilian Population: "We don't like what's happening" *peacefully protests and/or elects local leaders The Regime doesn't like*
The Regime: *dispatches tanks and/or shells the Civilian Population with artillery fire to brutalize them into submission or slaughter them if they don't submit*
Granted, the present usage of "tankie" also carries implications about a given regime's economic system (which is to imply that the regime's economic system is Centrally Planned) but frankly that's a stupid distinction to make when even capitalist regimes will do this to their own civilians too.
Ironically, the "Russian Speaking Civilians" that Russia claimed they were invading to "protect" have suffered greater casualties directly from Russian-fired munitions than they ever had before, so even though they are actually, in fact, UKRAINIAN civilians that they're murdering, taking them at their word about these victims being Russian civilians would literally make Russia's actions a tankie move.
By my more utilitarian definition of what constitutes tankie behavior, it also includes the actions of the previous Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko, who launched artillery strikes against the very same Ukrainian civilians back in 2014 (and subsequently had his ass kicked electorally by Zelenskyy on the basis that Zelenskyy was NOT going to be attacking civilians) so... it stopped being ukrainian policy by the time russia invaded. Russia stopped nothing, and on the contrary resumed needless civilian slaughter.
And there are some witless shitstains around the lemmy fediverse who unironically defend this abject fuckery.
(AKA Tankies)
TL;DR: Yes I concur my friend. The definition and usage of Tankie is indeed quite well established, ACTUALLY.
There's no excuse for it, really. They always get involved with anti-(US)imperialism, and end up having high ranking members of their parties shake hands with reactionaries. You can support lifting sanctions on Iran, Syria, etc. without actually supporting Bashar al-Assad or Holocaust-deniers. They went to far in pursuit of geopolitcs rather than recognizing that one's domestic bourgeosie is the major threat.
Imagine if Trump won 2024 and backed out of NATO. Who cares if Trump (a hardline anti-labor conservative) gets us out of wars if he thinks Joe Biden is a Communist. Of course, anyone to the left of Nick Fuentes would be sent to jail for "anti-patriotic actions" or some shit.
The same excuse of "the enemy of my enemy..." was used when the USSR told the Chinese Communists to just fully join with the Kuomintang after defeating Japan (which were backed by Americans that got rich off the Opium Wars and massacred leftists); or when China under Mao called the USSR social-imperialist and backed the Pol Pot regime.
fascist alignment happens on the left - rarely, but it does. And when it does, they are very LOUD, and they unironically believe that ukraine was genociding russians.
It rarely happens because fascists laugh at them before ordering their execution, and they get purged by any serious Communist party. Loud as they are, we all know what happens to them in the end.
I'm not a Russia or Putin Stan but this isn't evidence of anything. A Ukrainian blog stating the Ukrainian police found 80 places the Russians used to allegedly hold and torture civilians? The article offers nothing but a statement as evidence this happened. The only photo in the blog post is a room with what looks like a mattress and clothes.
I'm sure the Russians are doing fucked up shit. I'm pretty tired of the pro-ukraine take.
What's this lefties nonsense the only people saying this are tankies because communism is good in their mind despite the fact that there's demonstrably provably wrong.
The political left are not saying this.
Conservatives are playing word games to try to confuse non-conservatives. When conservatives cannot defend an absurd postition, they often resort to re-defining words or gaslighting.
As always, every thought uttered by a conservative is either deception or manipulation. Every time. Never, ever trust a conservative. They are not capable of honesty.
Communism in itself is a great ideology, it’s just that applying it correctly requires an unreal amount of effort and cooperation between millions of people.
And since that’s extremely hard, if not impossible, to do in a realistic setting, the only countries that identify as communist are actually fascist ones who try to fool people into believing they aren’t.
It's not an "ideology" either. It's a mode of production, which includes feudalism, slave society, and capitalism. The argument has been about how we move from a capitalist society to a class-less/state-less society.
I agree with that sentiment and consider myself a leftist, also. It certainly applies more to ML/tankie types. I also believe that's what the poster in the image means too. There's still broadly some confusion and conflation of terms regarding the exact definition of solicaism/communism/leftism/ML-ism, and I believe the this is an example of that.
Tankies are not actually on the left, though. That's part of their gaslighting. Tankies are conservatives.
I view that as wishful thinking. They're leftists authoritarians. I know it's uncomfortable to think we may share a side of the political specrtum with such people, but to deny it is to ignore the problem in the same way right-wingers did with the fascists (right-wing authoritarians) who now dominate their ranks in at least the U.S and Italty. However, unlike the far right, they're usually socially progressive; at least western leftists are. Perhaps the similarities ML types have with fascists can be best explained by horseshoe theory.
However, I'm open to the idea that our common political parlance is insufficient in this matter. I'd much prefer a political spectrum defined by rationalism/humanism/critical theory vs the alternative embodied by lunatics of every stripe and philosophy, political, religious, or otherwise. Perhaps that's what you meant by disassociating from them.
Your definition of "left" is incorrect. Authoritarianism is never part of left-wing ideology. Once authoritatianism is introduced into whatever leftist construct is being discussed, the construct becomes right-wing. Full stop. When someone describes a "leftist" ideology that includes authoritarianism, you should consider that a red flag that a conservative is attempting to manipulate terminology.
Authoritarianism is definitional in determining political orientation. It's not a requirement, but when it exists as part of an ideology, that ideology becomes right-wing by definition.
When you share memes or opinions that classify any authoritatian ideas as part of a leftist ideology, you are either gaslighting or have yourself been a victim of gaslighting (and are now sharing misinformation). This is harmful to the left. If you are actually a leftist, as you claim, please stop.
Here is a Wikipedia entry further describing the characteristics of left-wing politics to help clarify how authoritarianism is definitionally counter to left-wing orientation.
Who is trying to establish communism here? Even socialism as a whole was already abandonded by both Russia and Ukraine in the 1960s, maybe even earlier. If two sides are verifiably fighting for capitalist interests, with a single country caught between choosing to pawn themselves off to one major capitalist power or another, and both sides have been confirmed to commit war crimes far beyond what could be passed off as incidental,
why do we have to support a side?
Hold on, communism is good in my mind, its just what they call communism fucking sucks and what I call communism is a pipe dream.
Facts, fam. It's ok to enjoy pipe dreams as long as we're mindful of the fact that they are pipe dreams. Everybody gets inspiration from unrealistic aspirations. It's fine. Like, unironically, it's ok to think "boy, it would be nice if the world were a little more like how I wish it were", as long as there isn't an effort made to abuse other people for not always agreeing or having the same dream.
Truth be told, it'd be cool if communism were to actually work, although I for one feel leery of the human error introduced by central planning. Parallel processing is humanity's greatest strength and leaving things up to a committee is a massive vulnerability. If instead of an insular committee of unilaterally appointed bureaucrats, it were some kind of democratic system where direct referendums could override the representatives whenever people get pissed off enough at their representatives not doing their (FUCKING) jobs, that'd be a damn sight better than any currently operating economic model. Because frankly, right now, capitalism itself also has insular committees of appointees (shareholders in boardrooms) and that sucks too.
I wouldn't want centrally planned, and I definitely don't want insular commitees of bureaucrats. Just asking for trouble. But I think what I'm asking for now would be called Market Socialism instead of Communism. If we sieze the means of production, why give up that power to someone who doesn't make the goods? And central planning sounds like it will always have the Local Knowledge problem, though today we do have tariffs at port authorities which sound to me equally insane.
"boy, it would be nice if the world were a little more like how I wish it were"
Gosh yeah :3
Hella fair!
Might that be closer to something like syndicalism?
Because, like, the people doing the work all belong to an association that represents their industry and decide collectively among their industry peers what is produced, how it's produced, and for whom.
Those industrial associations would be worker syndicates.
As far as communicating the wants of the population at large, that's what currency exists for; it's a signalling system. That's the "market" component - if a worker syndicate decides to produce things that they send to markets where nobody wants those things, nobody there buys the things and as a result they get less money for paying their own bills (including wages). Nobody likes not getting paid, after all.
I didn't say any of that. I pointed out that this particular blog source isn't providing any tangible evidence and should be treated with skepticism.
I deliberately don't follow much Ukrainian war news, I find the coverage from a western perspective distasteful so I went and googled around a bit.
This is a better evidenced and written article. Like I said I'm not a Russia fan and approaching western reporting with skepticism is generally a better approach in my opinion.
I think varying degrees of torture probably occur with all wars, by all sides. War is distasteful and terrible. (International) crimes are surely committed.
I agree that the article in question is weak. I know there's already evidence that Russia has committed war crimes. Probably Ukraine, too. War sucks.
That's generally my take, I'm not interested in breathless horse race reporting from CNN. I find it very suspicious that in my googling about torture in Ukraine, I found only one article mentioning atrocities from the Ukrainian side. I probably believe the Russians are being more brutal especially given the limited reporting I've seen about penal battalions. But given all the Nazi patches I've seen on Ukrainians, I doubt the war has been clean. From my understanding having never lived in a war zone, wars are never clean.
I don't like this war reporting portraying Russians in a dehumanizing way. I think that's dangerous narrative building. I don't trust western reporting to not toe NATO's line. So when I say I'm skeptical of articles, I try to take what information presented without the narrative attached. In this example I found not much actual information presented but a strong narrative of an invasive oppressive army brutalizing the civilian population showing no empathy and a penchant for war crimes. That might be true but the evidence presented for such a strong narrative is a picture of an ill maintained room and a police report.
We're caught in the middle of a third world war, with many similarities to the first one: namely, inter-imperialist/inter-capitalist. Saying something bad about "your team" (the one you're supposed to praise as supreme and glorious with a clear display of patriotism) is seen as traitor behavior worthy of prison. The US and UK would dehumanize Germans back during WWI, and send labor activists to jail over claims of German interference. You're right to avoid the trap of dehumanizing "the other" for the sake of trying to pick the lesser of two evils. Never pick sides in an inter-imperialist conflict. At best you get an FDR to avert revolution, at worst you get a bunch of Mussolinis walking around.
That's fair, and Iappreciate your response. However, at this point most reasonable people understand how vicious Russian occupiers are. Most people still making arguments about the veracity of their crimes are not arguing in good faith.
To be completely fair, the meme applies to me completely lol. I have to examine and reflect on my bias as well.
And that is why I am against forcing Ukraine to accept lost territory. If you let russia keep territory it has currently occupied, they will get away with all the torture, killing and abduction of civilians.
Russians have a history of doing this. And russians also have a history of having useful stooges spreading "both-sides-ism" and similar nonsense. What are you?
I've read this about five times and I still don't understand what you're getting at.
Are you accusing OP of being a Russian shill because I don't see where your getting that from.
I thought I replied to nostradiel above who was stating "I would be extremely careful about these claims from Ukrainian officials. They showed before that they are capable of anything to have attention of mainstream press and western countries. It’s propaganda on both ends - Russian and Ukrainian."
For some reason my reply ended up under Quacksalber, which is not what I intended. I thought I was careful before, but maybe I did not pay enough attention to where I replied to. I am not willing to call this a kbin bug yet, maybe I did not pay attention.
I only see that you responded to Quacksalber, no one called nostradiel is in this thread from what I can see.
Edit: I can see nostradiel at the bottom now, but your response isn't to them.
One thing I've noticed (at least in the Jerboa app) is when a comment is removed or deleted it's replies get displayed on another comment. Seemingly consistently the same wrong comment even on refreshing the page, it's weird.
Edit: it used to at least, for a really long time
It's wrong even on the (my instances) website. So I think OP just clicked on the wrong comment.
It's so sad that russians have been so brainwashed to do this to their fellow man.
Literally all they need to do is divert their military to building instead of destroying and Russia would be in a much better place now.
Given what happened in Bucha and the constant shelling and targeted attacks on civilians, this is entirely believable. Whether this story is true or not is another matter and it should be verified, but it wouldn't be surprising.
This is a really misleading title if it's just grouping places where people were imprisoned with places people were actually tortured. There's obviously a massive difference. This seems like the original article in Ukrainian: https://mvs.gov.ua/news/pid-cas-zustrici-iz-specialnoiu-dopovidackoiu-oon-z-pitan-tortur-katerina-pavlicenko-povidomila-pro-viiavlennia-v-ukrayini-80-rosiiskix-kativen
Are they actually saying people were definitely tortured in all 80 places there? (Also kind of funny, Google Translate seems to do a better job than the link in OP but it's still not clear to me exactly what they meant.)
One little question nobody here has asked himself:
How do YOU know that that's true? Can you verify this information for youself? Could the source have any incentive to lie? Have you read any response about this from the other side?
I think you have a point in that it's very possible government sources are exaggerating about this - I'm not too invested in what the invaders have to say about it though.
I would be extremely careful about these claims from Ukrainian officials. They showed before that they are capable of anything to have attention of mainstream press and western countries. It's propaganda on both ends - Russian and Ukrainian.
They need to make this moral conflation work because it's the only way their position isn't monstrous and genocide apologia.
You're the type of idiot that would be living in Africa during the 1910s holding arguments about whether Germany or the US is better, while refusing to let anyone speak up about them both being awful.
Both propagandas are bad. They obviously want to make themselves look better than the other and the other as bad as it gets. This kind of information war is a basic instrument in wars since Americans invented it.
To your question that both are bad.. Russian are killing people which is bad but to say that Ukrainian soldiers are good and that Ukrainians were saint nation before the war is a false statement as well.
From my point of view Ukraine is just a victim of global politics. To blame only Russia for this development is not fair cause Americans pushed them to this.
When USA attacked Iraq everyone was praising them and not placing sanctions against them even though that all reasons they provided to attack were intentionally falsified. And millions of civilians died and were tortured. But it's middle east so why would west care, right?!
American pushed them to this??
Russia is the one who fucking invaded Ukraine you Russian troll. Get the fuck out of here.
Russia and the US are trying to do the exact same thing to Eastern Europe right now. Just because the US claims "this is for democracy" doesn't make it better. Also, the US recognizes Taiwan as an island beloning to China, they just hold informal agreements for the sake of military and tech, like chips or manufacturing.
Propaganda is "bad" but that does not mean everything is of equal weight. Killing people is bad but that doesn't mean killing unprovoked is equal to killing in self defense. That doesn't mean they're even similar.
