Which he doesn't so it's weird that's your take away.

why do you think Algeria was in such a shitty position to begin with? Well, because it had been plundered and turned to shit by the countrymen of a certain poster here. Everything follows from that. — Streetlight

I think this idea is central to the way this topic is being discussed. Western powers have so much blood on their hands from colonialism onward that they are permanently stained by it. If they were now some third world states with an unfortunate past, we might live and let live - mistakes were made but everybody who made them is dead now. But they're not. They're the wealthiest, most powerful nations on earth - an earth containing 800 million starving people. It's not complicated morality to say that if you've benefited from the impoverishment of other countries you owe them a debt until the field is levelled again.

The unwillingness to look into the historical causes of any situation, like Ukraine, was, of course, always solely to do with this unwillingness to confront the extent to which the wealth and power of today were built on the flagrant abuse of the past. What's particularly insidious this time is the effort to literally wipe that history from the debate. I think the combination of an easy cartoon villain, an oven-ready non-American hero, and the new language of dis- and mis- information have presented an opportunity to create a dangerous new narrative which says "all that's in the past now, the reality is a new fight of good vs evil and you must pick a side" where 'picking a side' involves absolving the 'goodies' of all their past wrongs (and letting them keep all the wealth and power they thereby gained in the process).

It's insidious because the framing of good vs evil attaches atonement for the past crimes of imperialism (even up to crimes of last week, yesterday, just now...) to one of only two mutually exclusive positions, the other of which is 'evil'. We can see that framing all over the rhetoric used here.

Yet the only reasonable answer to the complaint that "Oh it's always about the US, the west, capitalism..." is "Yes". It is always about the US, the West and capitalism.

You should read his posts then, not I. I've read enough, you haven't.

A couple of the posters here have admitted they aren't interested in being truthful. — frank

That sounds honest on their part. Ironic

Most of the world don't want to live under America's boot, either. — Apollodorus

Then why are so many trying to emigrate there, or in Europe?

Then why are so many try to emigrate there, or in Europe? — Olivier5

Because America itself is the place least under America's boot, obviously.

Fuck up everywhere else on the planet, then when those populations come fleeing to the one place you haven't completely fucked you say "why would they all come here if we're so bad?"

An argument that would be laughed off the page if it wasn't for people willing to repeat it.

Quote him. I've read every post in this thread. He's militantly anti-imperialist so support for mass murderers isn't in there.

I am not interested. Have a good day.

So you can't prove he is what you say he is, you just like to make baseless accusations about people because they happen to disagree with you? Is that it?

No. How often have you accused others of "lying" in this thread? Why are you lying now and get aggressive when it gets called out?

I am telling the truth. Street has condoned terrorism against French people. It's up there, unless the mods deleted it.

That's how much the guy cares for human life, at least his web persona.

you mean this?

Where the French were the colonial oppressor and he defines the French as terrorists and believes it was just the Algerians kicked them out? That's not supporting terrorism.

Edit; in not saying it's not a crude way of putting it but reading support for mass murderers and terrorists even in this thread is simply not there. I still read your posts even if I think most of them are not well thought out.

So, just as an example when you think another poster is lying, probably there's some misinterpretation going on. Try being charitable.

Because America itself is the place least under America's boot, obviously.

Fuck up everywhere else on the planet, then when those populations come fleeing to the one place you haven't completely fucked you say "why would they all come here if we're so bad?" — Isaac

It's only a matter of time before America's boot size grows so large that it begins stepping on its tail. Immigrants will be the first casualty.

. I still read your posts even if I think most of them are not well thought out. — Benkei

You shouldn't really. They are wasted on you.

Shall I quote them for you? — Isaac

You seem to forget that I numerous times asked you and other trolls to stop involving yourself in discussions I had with others, you kept doing it, kept on writing low-quality bullshit, and since mods don't give a shit about this thread I just applied the same level of rhetoric that you people used since it seems it's the only kind of posts you people understand. And when I wrote a long correctly formulated argument against you, you just ignored it as irrelevant since you had nothing left to counter with, and instead tried to steer away from that failure to attack something else. You constantly quote me or refer to me over and over with low-quality shit and then complain about the low level you drag others down to. This is why I'm not active as much in here anymore, because I don't find it productive to discuss with people like you and since mods don't care about quality in here, I'll just counter low quality with the same quality. But you can't seem to get over anything, and you seem to forget your own rhetoric and posts. Maybe I shall do a compilation of both how wrong you've been compared to what has happened in this war, as well as all the times you upheld the low-quality posting and ad hominems you yourself whine about now.

Because America — Isaac

Sums up this discussion.

↪Benkei
I am telling the truth. Street has condoned terrorism against French people. It's up there, unless the mods deleted it.

That's how much the guy cares for human life, at least his web persona. — Olivier5

I don't give a fuck about human life. Everything for me revolves around the mine gap.

But seriously, don't be crazy, if Street actually condoned terrorism, with his conviction, he would be a terrorist. But he is only more intelligent than you, and it can be embarrassing when you get your ass handed to you, intellectually speaking.

But he is only more intelligent than you — Merkwurdichliebe

And you can tell because?

Because America — Isaac


Sums up this discussion. — SophistiCat

Damn strait. America and the the rest, beginning with agreeable white europeans

Because i've read his posts for years. And very few on this forum can compete with his intellect. Why else do you think the moderators tolerate his belligerence.

I think this idea is central to the way this topic is being discussed. Western powers have so much blood on their hands from colonialism onward that they are permanently stained by it. If they were now some third world states with an unfortunate past, we might live and let live - mistakes were made but everybody who made them is dead now. But they're not. They're the wealthiest, most powerful nations on earth - an earth containing 800 million starving people. It's not complicated morality to say that if you've benefited from the impoverishment of other countries you owe them a debt until the field is levelled again.

The unwillingness to look into the historical causes of any situation, like Ukraine, was, of course, always solely to do with this unwillingness to confront the extent to which the wealth and power of today were built on the flagrant abuse of the past. What's particularly insidious this time is the effort to literally wipe that history from the debate. I think the combination of an easy cartoon villain, an oven-ready non-American hero, and the new language of dis- and mis- information have presented an opportunity to create a dangerous new narrative which says "all that's in the past now, the reality is a new fight of good vs evil and you must pick a side" where 'picking a side' involves absolving the 'goodies' of all their past wrongs (and letting them keep all the wealth and power they thereby gained in the process).

It's insidious because the framing of good vs evil attaches atonement for the past crimes of imperialism (even up to crimes of last week, yesterday, just now...) to one of only two mutually exclusive positions, the other of which is 'evil'. We can see that framing all over the rhetoric used here.

Yet the only reasonable answer to the complaint that "Oh it's always about the US, the west, capitalism..." is "Yes". It is always about the US, the West and capitalism. — Isaac

I don't know how to put it better than this.

As for the above conversation, I don't support terrorism, but I sure as day support counter-terrorism.

The next master stroke of Putin is to revive the Russian car manufacturing industry and the much-ridiculed Moskvich sedan. Lessons in how to re-animated a corpse.

The fact that you're to egotistical to tell the difference between a judgement of yours and a fact is not itself an argument for engaging in abusive language though, is it?

the low-quality posting and ad hominems you yourself whine about now. — Christoffer

I'm not whining about anything. I've no problem with the ad-hominems, it's a passionate topic, bound to raise some robust language - completely appropriate to the emotional scale of the issue, I think. I do have a fascination with hypocrisy - you lot complaining about ad-hominems when you're engaged in them to absolutely no lesser an extent than everyone else. I can't figure out how you're maintaining that level of dissonance.

This...

I don't find it productive to discuss with people like you and since mods don't care about quality in here, I'll just counter low quality with the same quality. — Christoffer

...for example, just doesn't make any sense. I mean, it's a direct contradiction from the outset, but even if it weren't, the idea of countering low quality with low quality doesn't even follow. How is low quality a counter to low quality?

And this...

... and then complain about the low level you drag others down to. — Christoffer

...is just bizarre since I made no such complaint, and I can't even see how it would help your narrative if I had. I mean it would make me hypocritical, but you just included your own hypocrisy (fighting low quality with low quality) as part of the same storyline.

It's quite the tangled web you weave.

As for the above conversation, I don't support terrorism, but I sure as day support counter-terrorism. — Streetlight

Like drone strikes! Right?

I don't give a fuck about human life. — Merkwurdichliebe

Some people here do, and they might found your cynicism offensive. Just so you know.

What worries me is whether this tactic - so successful in the mainstream media - will be extended. How soon until we start to hear the same line being trotted out to deny, say, debt relief - "the slave trade was all in the past, water under the bridge - these African nations are so warlike, you wouldn't want to be supporting them would you...?".

Or to support orchestrated regime change every time there's a hint of socialism in South America - "we laundered their drug money and propped up criminal rackets ages ago, all irrelevant now, water under the bridge - you wouldn't want to side with the same people who abstained from voting against Putin would you...?".

Any move to end systemic racism - "yes we horrendously mistreated African Americans, but that's got nothing to do with the current problem, all water under the bridge - you wouldn't want to side with those viscous street gangs now would you...?"

And so on. Once a narrative's been established it can just be picked of the shelf for use next time and it sounds so comfortingly familiar that it's got its own appeal beyond the convenience even of the excuse it offers.

You mean, the way the Brits forgot all their crimes in Ireland?

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/abroad/english-ignorance-about-ireland-just-isn-t-funny-anymore-1.3677267

You mean, the way the Brits forgot all their crimes in Ireland? — Olivier5

Yes. I mean exactly that. Are you suggesting that was a good thing done there?

It's done every single day. The contempt, the ignorance, the crass stupidity with which the UK treats a neighbouring country as if it was their doormat. Decolonize Ireland already.

So you see? You don't need to go all the way to Somalia or South America to find some example of imperialism. You can just look right under your nose, at the fabric of your own country. How it bears the mark of the empire. How eager the English are to forget what the Irish want to remember. And how it's now unraveling.

My attempts at low-quality generally lead me to longer better-formulated posts. I generally fail at being consistently low-quality.

And harsh language, swears etc. are not ad hominems. I'm guilty of many swears, and that doesn't mean anything more than focusing the text to make the point stronger and more clear on where I stand. Low-quality, however, means making little to no argument, short, sarcastic, down-talking remarks of little value to the discussion but more focused on the ego of the poster. Going back in this thread there's a clear pattern of long arguments being broken apart into strawmanned arrogant hit pieces by people generally not interested in actual discussions but more focused on bragging about their own supposed intellect and pushing their ideas, ideology, and convictions with no regard for actual understanding of other's arguments before replying.

Like, your first post in this thread is a sarcastic mock out of everyone seriously contemplating the risk of Russia invading Ukraine.

What! Governments exaggerating a threat so that powerful industries can benefit. Sounds like some kind of crazy conspiracy theory to me.

Best just trust what the official experts have to say on the matter...

https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/russia-ukraine-news-latest-today-nato-us-reject-putin-claims-withdrawl/

...so that's settled then. The experts say Russia is preparing for war and I'm sure the billions that the pharmaceuticalarms industry will make is just a coincidence.

Of course, you might find some experts disagreeing, but with none of you being military strategists, you wouldn't want to be 'doing your own research', would you?

Besides, have you not read the news? Those nasty truckers are funded by the Russians, best be on the safe side, lest they fund any more peaceful protestsdomestic terrorists. — Isaac

The tone you set here is perhaps what sparks the quality to go down in a thread like this. I didn't start it, and neither did SSU or many others. Just like the invasion of Ukraine should be blamed on Russia for starting it, maybe soul-searching your own rhetoric would be good practice for you. Did you enter the discussion with respect or just arrogance? Do you think that a strong response to such arrogance is others' fault or your own? If you think it's others' fault, then you just seem to be along for the ride in order to trigger people and that's basically what a troll does.

I'm not innocent of getting down and dirty, but it usually comes as a response to something, while many others in here seem to have a tendency to just initiate a discussion with bad behavior, low-quality arrogant bully mentalities, or whatever. This, for me at least, puts these people, regardless of their knowledge of a subject, in a place where they become irrelevant interlocutors as they degrade the quality of the discussion. This is why I tried to call out to moderators to clean this shit up, but they don't care, possibly since this behavior is also conducted by moderators like Benkei as well.

So this thread is a cesspool that lost its smell of quality when these people went hard into such posts, and like trolls, triggering others until getting a response that they can point at and claim they're innocent of bad behavior. It's tiresome that this thread ended up in mostly only those kinds of back and forths, imagine if the moderators actually moderated this thread from the beginning instead of claiming "it's politics so the bar is higher". :shade: