TheOubliette

Yeah internet culture can get pretty gross.

How dare I notice an inconsistency!

Hmm how often do you inappropriately tell people to not be victims? That's definitely a far-right turn of phrase.

You're only saying that because you got owned recently.

(this is a joke)

"Hold your nose and vote genocide".

Rather than rewarding genociders, might I suggest opposing them? I was told this was the worst crime, but apparently it isn't as bad as not voting for it.

If you'd like to do electoral math, being an automatic lever pull means you have no leverage. And if your conception of electoralism is to cheerlead and support top-down dictates, you're actively disempowering yourself.

But personally, I don't think it should require game theory to not vote for any pro-genocide candidate. Demand better or be complicit. I certainly won't forget this depravity.

Don't complain about me doing bad things or my buddy over here will do even worse.

Thought-terminating cliche

"Don't like far-right policies? You've already lost the argument, for I have depicted you as the soyjack"

I am always available if you would like to engage in good faith

The starvation is due to their country being invaded and bombed for 20 years, their foreign reserves being stolen, and massive sanctions. We are seeing collective punishment visited in the normal civilians of Afghanistan.

The Taliban itself only came to power due to destabilization of the former (incompetent) government by the US. They were described as God-fearing freedom fighters that should be (and were) materially supported. It was only the militant Islamophobia of the post-9/11 US that led to any pretense of caring about the people of Afghanistan - and to use this as an excuse for invading and bombing them. For the record, civilians don't benefit from getting bombed.

Now we see this filter down into this discourse, where so long as a person can maintain sufficient hate for the Taliban, it isn't so bad to starve 10-15 million people in Afghanistan. Taliban bad, so widespread deprivation is okay.

The logic in this thread is, and I am not exaggerating, that used by Nazis on their occupied populations and it is why it is a war crime.

I'm not talking about collective punishment

When I point out that it's bad for Afghanistan to "go broke" because it means the starvation of the population, you respond by vilifying the Taliban. Obviously, this is not a direct response to what I actually said, so we have to put on our thinking caps. This attempt to justify the starvation of a population either by deflection or a more concrete but implicit logic is the logic of collective punishment.

you brought that up bc you support groups that collectively punish women for existing

I have nerve said anything like this.

I just hate the taliban, and I'm not such a cartoonish misogynist or dumbass tankie that I think they're cool and OK just bc they oppose the US.

It sounds like you are having a rich disagreement with the person in your head. And you are even winning! But it has no relation to me.

I really hope you come to that conclusion too, but if you don't we should meet up so I can knock all your teeth out :3

We have now reached the "threats of violence" portion if the Lemmy.world experience. And all because I don't think the country of Afghanistan deserves to starve just because the Taliban is its government.

Lmao now this person is harassing me in DMs.

Seems to be a cultural thing at Lemmy.world