https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2023/02/18/698461/US-antiwar-rally-washington

  • Tachanka [comrade/them]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    if they accidentally harm American imperial interests out of misguided bigotry

    not what is happening. For them to harm American imperial interests, they would have to actually be opposed to them in a non-symbolic way. But their opposition is purely symbolic.

    • usernamesaredifficul [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      they are opposed to the war in Ukraine. Blocking money to the Ukraine war isn't symbolic it's real

      • Tachanka [comrade/them]
        ·
        2 years ago

        ah, but that's the sleight of hand. They'd rather be in a proxy war with China over Taiwan instead! Also another reason their opposition is purely symbolic is that it's a partisan opposition rather than a political opposition. If Ron DeSantis or Dan Crenshaw got elected tomorrow and continued escalating, I don't think they wouldn't care anymore.

        • usernamesaredifficul [he/him]
          ·
          2 years ago

          Yeah but China isn't going to invade Taiwan and Taiwan is more resistant to US demands than Ukraine. For example Taiwan refused to toe the US policy line over Tibet

          • Tachanka [comrade/them]
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            China isn’t going to invade Taiwan

            Taiwan isn't an independent country. It's part of China. This is acknowledged by the UN. So the entire logic of the country invading itself is an invention of US foreign policy.

            Taiwan and Taiwan is more resistant to US demands than Ukraine. For example Taiwan refused to toe the US policy line over Tibet

            True, but that doesn't change the fact that the """anti-war""" right wing in the US are more mad about the emphasis of US foreign policy than they are about US imperialism in general. It doesn't change the fact that their opposition is mostly to spending on the wrong war rather than spending on war at all. The """anti-war""" right is absolutely fine with NATO expansion and defense budget ballooning, they just hate when liberals spend money instead of them. This is the subject of the conversation. There is no real reason to build a coalition with these people or even critically support them when they do the """right thing""" for the wrong reasons.

            • usernamesaredifficul [he/him]
              ·
              2 years ago

              Taiwan isn’t an independent country. It’s part of China. This is acknowledged by the UN. So the entire logic of the country invading itself is an invention of US foreign policy.

              Not that relevant a distinction pretty clearly whatever they are they have their own separate miltary and don't do what the Chinese government says.

              True, but that doesn’t change the fact that the “”“anti-war”“” right wing in the US are more mad about the emphasis of US foreign policy than they are about US imperialism in general

              yes but in order to be against something in general you must be against it in the specific. They are anti this war and until the next war that means they are anti war

              • Tachanka [comrade/them]
                ·
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                They are anti this war and until the next war that means they are anti war

                ask them if they want to decrease the defense budget or end NATO and see where that goes. They don't care about the root cause of it. They want to snip a branch (for the entirely wrong reasons) but they'll scream bloody murder if you try to pull the plant out by its roots.

                • usernamesaredifficul [he/him]
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  that is true. But it is also true that the branch of it needs to go

                  also their reasons don't matter they don't amount to anything more than contrarianism

                  • Tachanka [comrade/them]
                    ·
                    2 years ago

                    also their reasons don’t matter they don’t amount to anything more than contrarianism

                    this is where i disagree fundamentally. Two people can identify the same problem, but will believe the problem is a problem for very different reasons, and offer very different solutions as a result. Because of that context, their reactionary solutions to the problem they have identified are horrible, and will make things worse, and they should not be permitted to steer the conversation or be supported as they fight to gain control of the situation.