• BlackCoffee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    70
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    “The dismissal of tankies really bothers me”

    I am gonna make it easy.

    If you are a holocaust denier, Stalin/Mao/Hitler/lenin fetishist or “defend” how they ruled their people then you are purposely keeping your eyes shut.

    There is so so much literature to read and material to watch about these people that you actually have to actively dodge it to not know what they have done and some of the regimes that came from them are still doing.

    Just because you are right about 1 thing doesn’t mean that it validates every single believe that you have.

    There are also enough people who are not the above who were against the invasion of Iraq and already foresaw why the US went there.

    But this is the thing; It is your choice to believe the above. It literally is a choice, the truth is different. It is literally a choice to close your eyes towards history and the crimes authoritarian rulers and regimes are still commiting towards their citizens.

    The western world is not perfect but there is a reason people are fleeing towards western nations and not the other way around.

    • iie@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      2 years ago

      The reason people are fleeing towards western nations is that the west extracts 25% of its GDP from the impoverished colony states these people are fleeing from.

      https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095937802200005X

      Unequal exchange theory posits that economic growth in the “advanced economies” of the global North relies on a large net appropriation of resources and labour from the global South, extracted through price differentials in international trade. Past attempts to estimate the scale and value of this drain have faced a number of conceptual and empirical limitations, and have been unable to capture the upstream resources and labour embodied in traded goods. Here we use environmental input-output data and footprint analysis to quantify the physical scale of net appropriation from the South in terms of embodied resources and labour over the period 1990 to 2015. We then represent the value of appropriated resources in terms of prevailing market prices. Our results show that in 2015 the North net appropriated from the South 12 billion tons of embodied raw material equivalents, 822 million hectares of embodied land, 21 exajoules of embodied energy, and 188 million person-years of embodied labour, worth $10.8 trillion in Northern prices – enough to end extreme poverty 70 times over. Over the whole period, drain from the South totalled $242 trillion (constant 2010 USD). This drain represents a significant windfall for the global North, equivalent to a quarter of Northern GDP. For comparison, we also report drain in global average prices. Using this method, we find that the South’s losses due to unequal exchange outstrip their total aid receipts over the period by a factor of 30. Our analysis confirms that unequal exchange is a significant driver of global inequality, uneven development, and ecological breakdown.

      As for the rest of what you said, see my other comment

      • BlackCoffee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        36
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 years ago

        I love the fact that you all have a notepad somewhere with written statements for these subject. Don’t make it to obvious.

        What is the point you are trying to make with that article? That western nations are not perfect? That because western nations are taking advantage of others that it is okay for countries to commit mass murder? That authoritarian regimes are born from western actions? That inequality all around the world is born from the actions of western nations?Tell me what is your angle and what do you want me to do with the info you provide which is information that I already knew.

        In regards to your other posts;

        Criticizing journalism is okay. Not taking everything at face value is a good practice to have.

        But willfully ignoring history and everything that has been said and written about it is just still and again people purposely closing their eyes.

        I still do not understand why someone would not take the time to actually read the literature and watch the footage of how hurtful these regimes have been through the years.

    • Iceman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      2 years ago

      Defending the genocidal western world in some contrarian bs over tankies is nothing but discussing. But please rationalize a million dead Iraqis, with this snobbish tone, you’re probably correct.

      • BlackCoffee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 years ago

        You accuse me of defending the “genocidal” western world?

        Which country started WW2 and the holocaust? I am gonna give you a hint it is 1 of the people I named in my post.

        If you actually think I am defending anyone than you are not reading my post.

          • BlackCoffee@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 years ago

            Seriously what point are you trying to make?

            You are saying that Europe “rolled” over and effectively died when the Nazis were strolling in and most of the western nations were just apathically watching?

            I agree with you. Good point to make. If the western nations were to make a stand earlier in Hitlers crusade than alot of hurt could be spared.

            Even in my country there used to be enough people who were collaborating with the Nazis. We actually had a party who were actively promoting it.

            My country also had the most jewish victims that were murdered by the Nazis. Three quarters of the total that lived in my country were brutally slaughtered.

            It is the highest of all western nations.

            I have read the literature and seen the documentaries.

            So again what is the point that you are trying to make that I don’t know about?

            • nephs@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              My point is that, by the single metric of crushing nazis, no warring nation topped the soviets.

              Can’t deny that the strongest opposition to nazis, by count of absolute death of nazis, was the socialists, not the democrats.

              You agree western nations were lenient in the beginning, just like the soviets did what was diplomatically available to delay being attacked, until some industrial setup was available.

              But by the end of ww2, counting the bodies, soviets get less credit than they deserve by western historiography.

              Source: Wikipedia.

              • BlackCoffee@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                “But by the end of ww2, counting the bodies, soviets get less credit than they deserve by western historiography.”

                Sounds more like a thing that you should pick up with your history teacher then.

                WW2 in my country is a part of history that get’s the most attention during history classes. Never has it underestimated the role of the Soviets in the WW2 in defeat of the Nazi’s.

                That doesn’t mean that it validates the regime that it had during those years. Don’t you have the ability to see the incidents in isolation or is your whole reasoning about this fact that because they killed the most Nazi’s that the regime and whatever they did in Eastern Europe and their own borders are OK?

                It is the same reasoning people make that Hitler is also quite a good guy because he designed the Autobahn (which is Nazi propaganda) that “improved” the lives of the people of Germany.

                Just because a governing body of a country did good things for their country or had tendencies to make a right choice doesn’t change the fact that they are and still can be pieces of shit.

                • nephs@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  I’m originally from a colonised country. I have reasons to be skeptical of dominant western speech and historiography.

                  I’m not validating every action of socialists, the same way I have to suppose you don’t validate every action of the western nations. All governments are probably doing stupid shit, I support none.

                  I’m impressed by your statement that a governing body that had tendencies to make the right choice is/was a piece of shit, in contrast of generally defending governing bodies that apparently doesn’t have tendencies of making the right choices in the economy realm, for most people. Evident by recent banks bailouts.

                  Adding to my point, we only know about stuff that happens outside western countries through the lenses of western media. Which is generally alright, where there’s no state interest in the topics. And this specific topic, of socialism, alternative means of organising production and making politics is very sensitive to western countries, so they have to filter news, just like you’d expect China to do.

                  Also, thank you for a generally civilised conversation in a very heated sublemmit, I appreciate it. :)

              • weirdwallace75@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                2 years ago

                Doesn’t change the fact the USSR allied with the Nazis and divided up Poland with them, and then came crying to the West for Lend-Lease aid when trusting Hitler backfired on them.

              • tumble_weeds@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                2 years ago

                My point is that, by the single metric of getting crushed by nazis, no warring nation topped the soviets.

                Fixed that for you. That’s what happens when you cozy up with Hitler trying to be his ally like a moron before realizing you fucked up. A long and proud history of shit decision making and then whining about it after.

          • weirdwallace75@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            2 years ago

            Doesn’t change the fact the USSR allied with the Nazis and divided up Poland with them, and then came crying to the West for Lend-Lease aid when trusting Hitler backfired on them.

              • utopianfiat@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 years ago

                The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was negotiated while Thalmann was rotting in a concentration camp. Stalin was actively censoring Soviet solidarity with Thalmann for a half decade because he believed the Nazis could be compromised with and didn’t want to send the message that they supported a German political prisoner, even a Communist one. After years in the camp Thalmann was eventually shot in the back of the head on Hitler’s personal order.