it’s like you believe you can tariff them expecting they won’t do the same. Why do you believe the rest of the world is not going to retaliate and why do you believe America can prosper without the rest of the world?
What’s the point of having a military alliance with countries you puts tariffs on? That’s unfriendly to say the least.
I don’t remember you citing anything that falls into the criteria, which isn’t arbitrary btw, it should be obvious that it’s fucking stupid to rely on examples from decades ago if you’re comparing it to another nations current actions.
Are you actually comparing a recruitment ad to Russia’s media manipulation, crackdowns, and foreign interference? kill me
Good thing I didn’t say any of that shit. If you could stop building strawmen out of my arguments because you can’t actually tackle any of them, that would be great.
Then stop saying stupid shit if you’re not making any substantive points? What’s the point of saying they don’t do shit to you because they’re not in a position to do so? wow, thanks for the enlightening insight.
Bro, this isn’t about YOU. If you want to objectively compare how each government treats their own population, then the fact that the foreign government doesn’t affect YOU isn’t fucking relevant you moron (even though they do affect you via election interference/propaganda, but sure).
COVID misinformation in the Philippines? The rampant lies leading up to the Iraq War? Those things fit your criteria.
Also, don’t try to pretend that you’re only excluding historical examples, you’re also excluding recent examples, because “Trump isn’t representative of America.” Who knows what you’ll exclude next, maybe Bush isn’t representative either because he lied and that contradicts your worldview.
Also very funny to me that you’ll exclude history from like 40 years ago but cite history from 80 years ago (WWII) as still relevant.
If you were able to shut down the hyper-partisan moralistic urge to constantly opine on who the “good guys” and “bad guys” are long enough to actually listen to anything I’m saying and look at reality as it is, then you’d understand my point. As it is, you’ve missed it completely.
I’m not interested in discussing, like, who’s more likely to get into fucking heaven. Christ. It’s completely and totally irrelevant to the conversation.
If one person has a gun pressed against my head, and another person doesn’t, then I’m more concerned about the guy with the gun against my head than the other guy. Maybe the other guy is a worse person, maybe the guy with a gun to my head volunteers at the soup kitchen every day and the other guy kicks puppies, but my concern is removing the gun from my head.
What I’m saying is that American billionaires have a gun to the head of the American people in a way that Russian billionaires don’t. And your response is to talk about how the Russian billionaires are bad people and have guns to other people’s heads. Irrelevant to the conversation.
Yeah, it’s not about me specifically. It’s about my class, which has the same material interests as me. If you want to write off my class because it’s “not about us” then, you know, good luck in the next election.
I don’t, thanks. Why would I? I’m interested in pursuing political objectives that help me and my class. I’m not interested in evaluating each country moralistically and then picking a team to stan like it’s football or something.
It’s funny to you because you’re too stupid to know the difference between comparing similar tactics used between Hitler and Putin VERSUS using ancient-ass cold war events to justify a contemporary opinion.
Well it seemed like you were very much willing to carrying water for the actions of the Russian state by saying that the US does the same things, if not even worse. Suddenly you have no interest in comparing them? Try having the ability to follow a conversation before engaging in one.
If the cold war is “ancient ass” what does that make Hitler? “Prehistoric ass?”
Completely arbitrary, of the example serves your position is fine, if it serves my position it doesn’t count. You’re just throwing out anything and everything that doesn’t confirm your preconceived beliefs.
You telling me to “try having the ability to follow a conversation” is pretty rich considering how you’re constantly losing the plot and getting distracted by moralizing, like you’re doing here. You assumed that my goal was to “carry water for” the Russian state by talking about the bad things the US does. No, not really. I don’t particularly care which is worse between the two, at no point have I ever attempted to make that case. You assumed that was my angle, because that’s how you see the world, but that’s not how I see the world and I’ve told you that over and over again.
I’ll try to explain again since once doesn’t seem to be enough. It’s not about how old the examples are. You were using OLD examples to justify an opinion on the US NOWADAYS, while I was merely pointing out the similarities between Putin and Hitlers tactics. The difference between these two should be obvious.
keep shooting out this tired slogan. I’ve just been stating facts. I don’t give a fuck if your goal is to carry water for them or not, you made comparisons regardless so don’t suddenly pretend as if comparing them came out of nowhere or isn’t relevant to the topic.
The reason you assumed I was trying to carry water for Russia is that you assume I think in the same nonsense terms that you do, viewing geopolitics through this inane lens of “good guys” and “bad guys” like it’s a Saturday morning cartoon. In reality, they’re all ruthlessly self-interested and neither Russia nor the US has any interest in improving the lives of ordinary people (as I already told you, when I said Russian billionaires don’t exploit me only because they lack the power to do so). The correct way to view such conflicts is through the lens of realpolitik.
To give a historical example, in the American Revolution, the revolutionaries were supported by the French monarchy. France’s absolute monarchy was less democratic than Britain’s, and obviously the French king did not support the revolution because he supported it’s ideals. The French only wanted the revolution to succeed in order to weaken Britain. The British colonists lobbied for and happily accepted the French support, realizing that, even if the French king was just as bad as the British king, the British government was the one exploiting them, while they had a common enemy with the French government.
In the same way, I have no illusions about Russian capitalists or the Russian government being in some way “morally superior” or “the good guys,” but I also recognize that the American billionaires and government are the ones exploiting me, and are therefore my most direct and primary enemy.
If you want to persuade me from that position, then you need to be able to make the case that supporting the American capitalists/government against the Russians is somehow in line with my material class interests. Preferably without relying on a single historical example from 80 years ago which has been cited over and over again to justify disasterous wars that made things worse for everyone.
And if you can’t make that case to me, then you won’t be able to make it to a broad audience. And if you can’t make it to a broad audience, eventually, you will be unable to get elected on a platform that includes support for it, and Ukraine will be abandoned. And if Ukraine is going to be abandoned anyway, then it’s better to avoid prolonging the war for no reason, because it just means more people will die.
Not sure why you think this hyper-cynical teenage view is any less of an inane and immature lens than “saturday morning cartoons”
That’s just your opinion.
I never positioned the conversation as being about who is exploiting YOU more though. You keep inserting your own personal interests as if it should be the compass when comparing the US and Russia, idk why.
No time for tankie bs, sorry. If you can’t already see how the US gov is incomparably better to what Russia has to over the world then you’re too far gone.
I’m not a celebrity or a pundit, I’m not here to sell my case to a “broad audience”, I just talk to individuals.
“We should abandon it because it’s going to be abandoned anyway” is circular logic nonsense. The point should be people realizing that it’s best, even just for their own self-interest, for Ukraine to win.
You have no idea if supporting or surrendering would result in more or less deaths. Don’t pretend to know.
“People persue their own interests” is not a “hyper-cynical teenage view” lmao.
Again, it’s not about me, it’s about my class.
And it’s not a “compass for comparing the US and Russia.” Compare them all you like, it doesn’t concern me. What does concern me are, you know, my class interests. If you want to ask me to set aside my own interests in favor of your opinions about morality, then you have to make the case for why I should.
No, it’s seeing the writing on the wall. I don’t control public opinion, I can’t change the fact that people are losing and will continue to lose interest in Ukraine, that’s just a fact of life. And given that that’s going to happen, the best thing to do is to cut losses as soon as possible.
Then make the case, because you haven’t. All you’ve done is talk about how they’re the bad guys and pulled out an unrelated example from 80 years ago that’s resulted in disaster every time it’s been used as an example.
Of course I do. I mean, to the extent that it’s possible to predict any events. It’s the deaths from surrendering versus the deaths from surrendering plus the deaths from however long the war keeps going.
pretending that everyone does this to the same extent is what makes it a hyper-cynical teenage view.
spare me the tankie cringe
If I’m just comparing how shit the Russian gov is vs the US gov, your interests aren’t relevant in the first place.
Do you live under a fucking rock? Do you need it explained to you why failing to stand up to this invasion might encourage others (like China->Taiwan)? Why stability/security in the West/World is vital for prosperity and won’t be possible unless Russia is defeated, given that they’ve spent most of the time under this regime by being raping & pillaging shits?
Hubris? Yet you think it was super difficult to predict Trumps relationship to Project 2025 lmao. Tell me, how do you know that supporting Ukraine properly doesn’t result in Russia’s defeat in, say another year or that surrendering them doesn’t result in death camps all over Ukraine for years? Fuck off with your “off course I do”. Now go back to reading whatever tankie trash that’s been rotting your brain as you’re clearly only interested in bad faith debate and juggling semantics.