this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2024
312 points (68.8% liked)
Memes
45868 readers
1345 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Instead, you make up ideas like Xi bankrolling vloggers when we have very open record of the US approving 1.6 billion to bankroll anti-PRC propaganda. Do you have any sources to back up your claims, at all, or do you invent them for your arguments?
My source
Now go ahead and try to discredit them that they're a bourgeois run agency so their journalism is biased
I had to make my point. The mods can proceed to ban this account too
So predictable. The source for that is the australian strategic policy institute, a right wing australian defense department war-hawk think tank, with close ties to the US DoD.
Vice is also just western supremacist media targeted to hipsters. They mostly do shorts / videos against all the US empires primary enemies, and get most of their funding from fox news and other right-wing outlets.
Of course it's gonna be that, they've been squeezing all the juice out of that and the Zenz study the BBC commissioned from him with the specific goal of manufacturing a genocide
And you provide leftist sources to buttress your claims, so i guess we're both speaking from the echo chamber then.
If you don't speak up for the war hawks and murderers of innocent civilians, who will?
More debunked "Black Book of Communism" nonsense? From your prior comments espousing support for Double Genocide Theory and Holocaust Trivialization, it seems that you have an awfully comfortable view of Nazism. Explains the Anticommunism, I suppose.
Cool, so now we have the idea that states pay influencers money. This still hasn't translated to execution of billionaires being done out of opposition instead of mass corruption and breaking the law. You need to provide sources for your arguments, not justifications that they could be true.
You are directly decieving yourself because you license yourself to. If you actually looked at real sources and didn't reject them reflexively, instead of accepting bourgeois media at face value, you'd sit much closer to where I do. You should read False Witnesses and Masses, Elites, and Rebels: The Theory of "Brainwashing." Both are excellent examples of why people don't change their minds when seeing indisputable evidence, they willingly go along with narratives that they find more comfortable. It explains the outright anger liberals express when anticommunism is debunked. That doesn't mean Communists don't do the same thing, but as we live in a liberal dominated west (most likely, assuming demographics) this happens to a much lesser extent because liberalism is that which supplies these "licenses" to go along, while Communism requires hard work to begin to accept. This explains the mountains of sources Communists keep on hand, and the lack thereof from liberals who argue from happenstance and vibes.
Libs are probably not gonna read them but thanks for linking them because I will
The more people the better, leftists are included in that!
You're no leftist 🤡
I disagree, I'm a dedicated Marxist and advocate for Socialism, as well as national liberation and LGBT rights, as well as antiracism. Why do you say I'm not a Leftist?
Because you're not advocating for the FBI approved way of doing leftism probably
More homophobia, guess you went mask-off.
We both know the corruption claims were cover ups for the corporate witch-hunt. Also, you're very aware of my readiness to change my views in the presence of convincing evidence. This evidence is however not so convincing.
What do you mean "corporate witch hunt?" I believe the evidence of corruption is valid, do you have evidence to the opposite? Why do you say it isn't convincing?
Furthermore, I believe you have displayed the exact opposite of being willing to change your views in the face of evidence, and have proven the articles I provided here quite accurate given your refusal to read any of the evidence I provided in our last conversation where you not only refused historical books, but even an 8 minute article.
You shattered any impression of openness back then, so you'll forgive my lack of faith in you.
Racism and homophobia in one, color me surprised. You don't actually have any point, so you insult me directly with racism and homophobia. Coming from you, I can't say I am surprised, but it's still disappointing, and considering I'm pansexual the homophobia still hurts.
Either way, your refusal to read more than 2 seconds of an 8 minute article purely because it could change your mind is exactly what I am talking about. If you trusted what I said so far enough to read a whole book and yet can't read more than 2 seconds of an article that disagrees with your narrative, that further cements my point that you seek license to be racist and homophobic, which you unmasked here. You want to only further your own narrative and outright reject anything that doesn't agree with you, Politzer's book never risked that but real historical evidence can, so you hide your eyes. All "Tankies" does is elaborate on the real successes of Socialism and why Marxists support AES, and directly states that Marxists do not believe Stalin and Mao did nothing wrong, yet you avert your eyes before you dare see real Socialist victories, like doubling life expectancy, defeating the Nazis, reaching near full literacy rates (far more than modern US), and ending famines.
If nothing else, reconsider your racism and homophobia before you continue to hurt others.