But of course, if you define "genocide" as "thing that I'm willing to politically accept is a genocide", it's very easy to pretend someone isn't a genocide denialist.
Aren't you just doing the opposite [insert whatever logical fallacy]? The Holocaust is established historical fact with strong consensus among historians. Most of the other relevant alleged genocides that alleged tankies are allegedly denying have a much different degree of geopolitical contention and consensus.
What is the purpose of denying the Holocaust? Outside of the middle-east, it's almost always a white supremacist or antisemitic agenda.
What is the purpose of denying the Uyghur genocide? There's no equivalent incentive. Nobody is denying the Uyghur genocide on the basis of race ideology. The narrative of the Uyghur genocide is purely a construct of NATO Imperialist/Colonialist rhetoric to the tankies. They absolutely do not deny the genocide for the purpose of advancing a genocidal agenda.
Yeah I wanted to see something like this. Every supposed genocide committed by communists, outside of maybe Cambodia, is very contentious among historians at best. The supposed Xinjiang genocide is not regarded as a factual occurrence by half of the world, and the fiercest proponents of an existing genocide are what ...the CIA? NATO leadership? The same countries that endorsed the Iraq War? That right there should be enough to raise eyebrows. The lack of meaningful eyewitness testimony or you know, photographs or records should be something else. In 30 seconds I can watch footage of Israeli soldiers commiting war crimes and the only Chinese equivalent videos 've seen look like fairly routine prisoner transfers. Which is not great, don't get me wrong, but having prisoners or treating prisoners unfairly or with cruelty is not genocide, nor is it some unique quality for a socialist country to have, or countries in general.
The same people and organizations that talk about that genocide claim that communism and wokeness are causing a white genocide worldwide. Do you believe that too? It's fine if you do, I'm just curious if you pick and choose what you believe based on literally nothing, or if you're at least consistent with the propaganda you consume.
I'm just trying to understand your level of acceptable evidence for what genocide is. If it's "literally anytime anyone says the word genocide, it is a genocide no questions asked" then that's fine. If that's the case then lots of people call lots of things genocide all the time for nonsensical reasons, and by your measure almost everyone is a genocide denier. If it's "I listen to right wing propaganda when it makes me feel good and confirms my racial biases and ignore it when it doesn't" that's fine too and would be a good thing to know about yourself.
the only thing 'astroturfy' is how liberals will roll up acting like they're 'the most leftist' and then try to draw a line where America's state enemies are categorically evil, rather than just fucking organizing against the real evils happening where we all live.
Removed by mod
Aren't you just doing the opposite [insert whatever logical fallacy]? The Holocaust is established historical fact with strong consensus among historians. Most of the other relevant alleged genocides that alleged tankies are allegedly denying have a much different degree of geopolitical contention and consensus.
What is the purpose of denying the Holocaust? Outside of the middle-east, it's almost always a white supremacist or antisemitic agenda.
What is the purpose of denying the Uyghur genocide? There's no equivalent incentive. Nobody is denying the Uyghur genocide on the basis of race ideology. The narrative of the Uyghur genocide is purely a construct of NATO Imperialist/Colonialist rhetoric to the tankies. They absolutely do not deny the genocide for the purpose of advancing a genocidal agenda.
Horseshoe theory does not apply.
Yeah I wanted to see something like this. Every supposed genocide committed by communists, outside of maybe Cambodia, is very contentious among historians at best. The supposed Xinjiang genocide is not regarded as a factual occurrence by half of the world, and the fiercest proponents of an existing genocide are what ...the CIA? NATO leadership? The same countries that endorsed the Iraq War? That right there should be enough to raise eyebrows. The lack of meaningful eyewitness testimony or you know, photographs or records should be something else. In 30 seconds I can watch footage of Israeli soldiers commiting war crimes and the only Chinese equivalent videos 've seen look like fairly routine prisoner transfers. Which is not great, don't get me wrong, but having prisoners or treating prisoners unfairly or with cruelty is not genocide, nor is it some unique quality for a socialist country to have, or countries in general.
The same people and organizations that talk about that genocide claim that communism and wokeness are causing a white genocide worldwide. Do you believe that too? It's fine if you do, I'm just curious if you pick and choose what you believe based on literally nothing, or if you're at least consistent with the propaganda you consume.
Removed by mod
I'm just trying to understand your level of acceptable evidence for what genocide is. If it's "literally anytime anyone says the word genocide, it is a genocide no questions asked" then that's fine. If that's the case then lots of people call lots of things genocide all the time for nonsensical reasons, and by your measure almost everyone is a genocide denier. If it's "I listen to right wing propaganda when it makes me feel good and confirms my racial biases and ignore it when it doesn't" that's fine too and would be a good thing to know about yourself.
the only thing 'astroturfy' is how liberals will roll up acting like they're 'the most leftist' and then try to draw a line where America's state enemies are categorically evil, rather than just fucking organizing against the real evils happening where we all live.