The answer to all of these is: The western empire declares something/someone an enemy when it wants an excuse to attack it/them. If you take it at face value in a vacuum, it sounds reasonable enough, but historically, it’s almost never about what they say it is about. You can even see this sort of thing in the hundreds of years old colonial civil/savage narrative that lingers some today and the narrative playbook hasn’t changed that much, fundamentally. They’re still doing it to Palestine, for example.
The Liberals and Pax Americana always have the practice to redefine words like dictatorship, socialism, communism, capitalism, and even liberalism to create illusion of correlation. Using inaccurate or derogatory labels to confuse people is their usual trick. Their tactic to avoid awareness of the trick is to distract the people with what-if debate on “whether to support the abstract ideological thing that we said are bad” from the realistic debate on “whether we are giving the correct label or definition”.
Their tactic to avoid awareness of the trick is to distract the people with what-if debate on “whether to support the abstract ideological thing that we said are bad” from the realistic debate on “whether we are giving the correct label or definition”.
What’s wrong with opposing terrorists?
What’s wrong with opposing dictators?
The answer to all of these is: The western empire declares something/someone an enemy when it wants an excuse to attack it/them. If you take it at face value in a vacuum, it sounds reasonable enough, but historically, it’s almost never about what they say it is about. You can even see this sort of thing in the hundreds of years old colonial civil/savage narrative that lingers some today and the narrative playbook hasn’t changed that much, fundamentally. They’re still doing it to Palestine, for example.
The Liberals and Pax Americana always have the practice to redefine words like dictatorship, socialism, communism, capitalism, and even liberalism to create illusion of correlation. Using inaccurate or derogatory labels to confuse people is their usual trick. Their tactic to avoid awareness of the trick is to distract the people with what-if debate on “whether to support the abstract ideological thing that we said are bad” from the realistic debate on “whether we are giving the correct label or definition”.
Well said!