every redditor who is bloodthristy right now has simply internalized the narrative that Russia attacked Ukraine unprovoked and that the US has done nothing to cause or prolong this war.
the imperial core has always been genocidal and bloodthirsty, and reddit users are majority in the imperial core.
Moralists don't really have beliefs. Sometimes they stumble on one, like on a child's toy left on the carpet. The toy must be put away immediately. And the child reprimanded. Centrism isn't change -- not even incremental change. It is control. Over yourself and the world. Exercise it. Look up at the sky, at the dark shapes of Coalition airships hanging there. Ask yourself: is there something sinister in moralism? And then answer: no. God is in his heaven. Everything is normal on Earth.
liberals don't have values in a broader sense. in their day to day lives, sure, but about the world at large? it doesn't impact them, they'll believe whatever needs to be believed to allow liberalism to keep trucking along and extracting profit. supporting peace looks good so they'll talk prettily about it in peacetime, but as long as war doesn't come to the west and everything remains "normal" for them, they don't actually care.
The number of people who love peace in the abstract is much higher than the number of people who can resist a propaganda campaign to get them to support a war. Never trust someone who claims to love peace until you've seen them oppose a war while it was starting
Reddit libs use the same type of phrases and terminology when describing Russia and other "enemies" of the US State Department, as fascists and far right freaks in Europe do when describing Muslims and Arabs / Middle Easterners (same thing in their mind really). It's fucking terrifying how quickly they got on board with the whole "enemy of the free world" shit that also got them to support the interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
The US has its own troll farms. Probably outsourced through five different PR contracts but they exist. Spin those up and consent gets manufactured. Most real users will just go with the flow, others go rabid for various psychological reasons and become force multipliers.
Do you really think that giving in to invaders demands will bring peace? Just like it did in 2014, like it did in 2008, and like it did in 1938?
And yes, before you bring up the US, the same applies there. We should have been more firmly against Bush's wars. Because this stuff does transfers - letting one invader invade without punishment will only encourage everyone else (including the US) to do the same. Do you really want to send a message to the US, to France, to China, to Israel, that they can invade other countries without repercussions? Because if you advocate for peace with Russia, that is exactly what you're doing.
Do really think not giving in to an invader will bring peace? Hmm, I don't know. Kind of a dumb question if you're not going to examine any context. Also, do really think setting some kind of precedent matters. Capital will pursue its interests even while you gasp in horror and clutch your pearls about the violation of what you decided are the norms. Grow up.
I actually have a question for you. Do you think the richest countries in the west that already pillaged Russia in recent history, ruining over 100 million lives, stealing so much of the former Soviet Union's collective wealth that they cratered life expectancy, should be supported as they expand a military alliance in Russia's borders so they can do it again?
Do really think not giving in to an invader will bring peace? Hmm, I don’t know. Kind of a dumb question if you’re not going to examine any context. Also, do really think setting some kind of precedent matters. Capital will pursue its interests even while you gasp in horror and clutch your pearls about the violation of what you decided are the norms. Grow up.
Yes. Precedent matters, not in the legal sense, but in the sense of what a possible invader expects to happen. Capital will pursue its interests, but only by fighting back do we show that it's in their interest to not invade random countries.
Do you think the richest countries in the west that already pillaged Russia in recent history, ruining over 100 million lives, stealing so much of the former Soviet Union’s collective wealth that they cratered life expectancy, should be supported as they expand a military alliance in Russia’s borders so they can do it again?
Now that's the most loaded question I've seen in a while. It's not the "west" being supported here, it's Ukraine. You may be confused as to which way the money flows, and who requested it.
Second, you are similarly confused about how the west is expanding (by which you probably mean NATO). The US did not invade and conquer Poland, instead Poland was begging to join. Same with Turkey. Same with the Baltic countries, and now Sweden and Finland. Do you know why they all wanted to join?
Oh, and finally when did the west pillage Russia? And more importantly, how did they pillage Russia? If you believe that the US was able to control Russia so well in the 1990s, how do you know Putin is not their puppet now?
Oh, and finally when did the west pillage Russia? And more importantly, how did they pillage Russia?
Honestly, it's actually really hard to read this question and not just boggle at the ignorance. Without even trying to be rude, it's like asking us to write a tome - just for you - to explain the most basic and obvious thing.
Even though I feel confident you're locked into the worldview you've had plastered over your eyes, if you want an actual answer to your question that won't take some poor chump here on Hexbear a whole day to write, this video will do a good job explaining some of it. I genuinely hope you will at least take some of the information in.
How do you not know about the looting of the former Soviet Union? Do you know literally anything? Why do you feel qualified to talk at all on this subject when you are so insanely ignorant
deleted by creator
reddit is astroturfed and full of bots pushing US state department propaganda. Eglin air force base was identified as the most "reddit-addicted" city in 2013, but reddit removed the blog post.
every redditor who is bloodthristy right now has simply internalized the narrative that Russia attacked Ukraine unprovoked and that the US has done nothing to cause or prolong this war.
the imperial core has always been genocidal and bloodthirsty, and reddit users are majority in the imperial core.
liberals don't have values in a broader sense. in their day to day lives, sure, but about the world at large? it doesn't impact them, they'll believe whatever needs to be believed to allow liberalism to keep trucking along and extracting profit. supporting peace looks good so they'll talk prettily about it in peacetime, but as long as war doesn't come to the west and everything remains "normal" for them, they don't actually care.
The number of people who love peace in the abstract is much higher than the number of people who can resist a propaganda campaign to get them to support a war. Never trust someone who claims to love peace until you've seen them oppose a war while it was starting
You're thinking of tankies. Tankies are the people calling for an end to the war, and the anti imperialist peace loving democrats are the real Gandhis
Reddit libs use the same type of phrases and terminology when describing Russia and other "enemies" of the US State Department, as fascists and far right freaks in Europe do when describing Muslims and Arabs / Middle Easterners (same thing in their mind really). It's fucking terrifying how quickly they got on board with the whole "enemy of the free world" shit that also got them to support the interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
deleted by creator
everyone is anti war in the abstract but then most people end up thinking ok there's a good reason this time
They beat the war drum for 20 seconds and the libs started foaming at the mouth
The US has its own troll farms. Probably outsourced through five different PR contracts but they exist. Spin those up and consent gets manufactured. Most real users will just go with the flow, others go rabid for various psychological reasons and become force multipliers.
Do you really think that giving in to invaders demands will bring peace? Just like it did in 2014, like it did in 2008, and like it did in 1938?
And yes, before you bring up the US, the same applies there. We should have been more firmly against Bush's wars. Because this stuff does transfers - letting one invader invade without punishment will only encourage everyone else (including the US) to do the same. Do you really want to send a message to the US, to France, to China, to Israel, that they can invade other countries without repercussions? Because if you advocate for peace with Russia, that is exactly what you're doing.
Do really think not giving in to an invader will bring peace? Hmm, I don't know. Kind of a dumb question if you're not going to examine any context. Also, do really think setting some kind of precedent matters. Capital will pursue its interests even while you gasp in horror and clutch your pearls about the violation of what you decided are the norms. Grow up.
I actually have a question for you. Do you think the richest countries in the west that already pillaged Russia in recent history, ruining over 100 million lives, stealing so much of the former Soviet Union's collective wealth that they cratered life expectancy, should be supported as they expand a military alliance in Russia's borders so they can do it again?
Yes. Precedent matters, not in the legal sense, but in the sense of what a possible invader expects to happen. Capital will pursue its interests, but only by fighting back do we show that it's in their interest to not invade random countries.
Now that's the most loaded question I've seen in a while. It's not the "west" being supported here, it's Ukraine. You may be confused as to which way the money flows, and who requested it.
Second, you are similarly confused about how the west is expanding (by which you probably mean NATO). The US did not invade and conquer Poland, instead Poland was begging to join. Same with Turkey. Same with the Baltic countries, and now Sweden and Finland. Do you know why they all wanted to join?
Oh, and finally when did the west pillage Russia? And more importantly, how did they pillage Russia? If you believe that the US was able to control Russia so well in the 1990s, how do you know Putin is not their puppet now?
Honestly, it's actually really hard to read this question and not just boggle at the ignorance. Without even trying to be rude, it's like asking us to write a tome - just for you - to explain the most basic and obvious thing.
Even though I feel confident you're locked into the worldview you've had plastered over your eyes, if you want an actual answer to your question that won't take some poor chump here on Hexbear a whole day to write, this video will do a good job explaining some of it. I genuinely hope you will at least take some of the information in.
Great video. Thanks
Love the smug gotcha attitude combined with world class ignorance
deleted by creator
How do you not know about the looting of the former Soviet Union? Do you know literally anything? Why do you feel qualified to talk at all on this subject when you are so insanely ignorant
That and of course the multiple literal invasions during the Russian Civil War. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfmqvkwZzGQ
Liberal narcissism knows no bounds
Ok, so what precedent does fighting back have in leading to peace? Even WWII, the alleged war to end all wars, only created peace for central Europe.