Lol, you think I’m the one with something to hide? Let’s do this in front of the class then - tell us the answer to the following question:
If a guard at a concentration camp during the Holocaust said that he was tired of people complaining about it, and justified himself saying, “the world doesn’t revolve around genocide,” that people needed to “move the fuck on,” and then accused anyone who criticized him of being a pedophile, would these be valid arguments?
Should be pretty easy for someone who’s not a Nazi to answer, right? I’m sure anyone reading it would have no trouble saying “no.” But for some reason, you can’t.
If a protester in australia stopped people from feeding their families at a food bank or kept sick kids from getting cancer medicine by blocking the door because of the Holocaust, would that be a valid position to hold? 🤔
Depends, if for example they’re destroying a rail line used to conduct the Holocaust and it coincidentally caused that, then yes. If it’s entirely unrelated, then no.
Not sure what that question has to do with anything.
Have you ever seen “The Rock” with Sean Connery and Nick Cage? To make it really succinct, I support your position and I would be on alcatraz with you (metaphorically speaking), but when it comes time to launch the rockets, I’m with General Hummel and it sure seems to me like .ML would really like to just pull the trigger.
I guess it depends a lot with how “related” you find things.
Its pretty clear in the US that genocides in other parts of the world (or even at home in the not so distant past) are not given appropriate weighting by political parties in power. However, there are still hungry families, people who need medicine, and various other forms of suffering right in the town where you live if you’re a US citizen.
I don’t even disagree with the position you have that minimizing genocide is abhorrent. However, by talking about “what is related or not” I personally feel like society is spraying blood from the femoral artery and there’s the “tourniquet party” and the “shoot people in the femoral artery” party and you’re like “FUCK THE TOURNIQUET PARTY, they abetted genocide! I’m out!”. Or “Because of their apparent support for genocide, I will vote for the cautery and surgical foam party, even if they HAPPEN to be a 9 hour drive away.”
On the one hand, this issue is really fucking important. On the other hand, riding the morality of the issue to the point that you do nothing to fix or address ANY problem (which makes a person who only posts about it basically indistinguishable from a neck bearding grouper) is also important to realize.
Kids were and are dying in Palestine. I have a hard time seeing how the moral thing to do is to make sure some kids grow up without parents in the because they got disappeared by ICE (or any of the issues above). I’m telling you these issues are not related to me: fight genocide AND fight police state / hunger / healthcare etc. The other guy is making the same argument but I guess he wants to open a Waffle House or some shit.
From where I sit, you have made “minimizing genocide” a weapon that even hurts more people , and simultaneously allows you to feel good about doing nothing by doing nothing.
The democrats are not “the tourniquet party.” Tourniquets stop bleeding, the democrats want to cause more bleeding. They are the “stab your femoral artery again” party. They don’t fix shit.
If you stick a knife in my back nine inches and pull it out six inches, there’s no progress.
If you pull it all the way out that’s not progress. The progress is healing the wound that’s below, that the blow made. And they haven’t even begun to pull the knife out, much less pull, heal the wound…
They won’t even admit the knife is there.
Throughout history, there have been plenty of times when people supported genocide on the premise that it prevented some greater threat. I’m not aware of a single time in history where that position was the correct one.
Compared to whatever the party of trump is, idk how any sane person can equivocate and just say “yeah it’s all the same either way”. The kind of person I guess with no trans or foreign friends maybe, but even still.
By way of understanding each other, I agree on point 2 and disagree with point 1.
They may go to the same place and maybe it all started in 1970 or something. But I wasn’t here then and neither were lots of people who I believe are similar to me. I want change in a radical way, but I would settle for slowing the house from burning enough for us to have room to do something meaningful. D is a counter burn and R is gasoline.
Then, after I pointed out how abhorrent these things were, and they did nothing to deny that the exact same arguments could be used to justify the Holocaust, while also hurling a bunch of insults at me, I called them a Nazi. They responded by accusing me of being a pedophile.
Damn, and you still have to provide only a partial context? Only the bits that benefit you and make you seem like the victim, huh.
How about you share the parts where you relentlessly accuse me of being a Nazi? The part where you misconstrue what I’m saying and purposely fail to grasp my point? The part where I actually fight back by falsely accusing you to prove my point, by using the same tactics you used to accuse me baselessly?
Damn, and you still have to provide only a partial context?
They literally said, “I’m employed,” so I gave a condensed version. If someone wants to read through all your drivel, they can read through the thread I linked. If they want your side of the story, they can ask you. This person asked me.
How about you share the parts where you relentlessly accuse me of being a Nazi?
I literally referenced that.
The part where you misconstrue what I’m saying and purposely fail to grasp my point?
I can’t link that part because it doesn’t exist and never happened.
The part where I actually fight back by falsely accusing you to prove my point, by using the same tactics you used to accuse me baselessly?
I wasn’t accusing you baselessly. I gave you my basis. You didn’t “prove your point” you just lobbed baseless nonsense to deflect from my valid criticisms.
… that benefited only you. Why don’t you include any of your own sins in there? Do you really think you’re a saint?
I literally referenced that.
Quote it like you did everything else. It doesn’t cost you a damn thing.
I can’t link that part because it doesn’t exist and never happened.
Oh, right, we’re still doing that bit, pretending we don’t understand basic analogies while trying to shove entire hypotheticals in people’s faces. Jfc, listen to yourself.
You didn’t “prove your point”
What point? Proving I’m not a Nazi? How about you prove that you’re not a pedo? The burden of proof falls on you to prove that I am. All you have are your stupid and loaded hypotheticals.
Oh, right, we’re still doing that bit, pretending we don’t understand basic analogies
Are you talking about the analogy where you compared a moral stance about genocide to a mere preference between liking pancakes or waffles? I understood that analogy perfectly, as well as how utterly monstrous it was to make.
The burden of proof falls on you to prove that I am.
I did.
All you have are your stupid and loaded hypotheticals.
It’s not my fault you don’t understand hypotheticals.
I understood that analogy perfectly, as well as how utterly monstrous it was to make.
I wish you had understood the one where I abstracted away the word “genocide” that you had fixated on so you could understand what my meta-comment was about. Or how you should’ve understood that you’re the type of person to interject with “but how can you hate waffles!” when someone says they like pancakes. Sounds to me like you didn’t understand anything at all.
I did.
Oh, and what’s this? Now you’re questioning whether I sound like a good person? Where’s the evil Nazi you were accusing me of being just a second ago, huh?
It’s not my fault you don’t understand hypotheticals.
It’s not my fault you make shitty and overloaded hypotheticals. Also, let me remind you that refusing to answer does not mean failing to understand. I simply side-stepped it, bucko.
I have nothing to hide. You’re putting words in people’s mouths and crying wolf. How about you share the entire context with the class instead? It’s easier if you don’t start spewing bullshit.
You think it’s acceptable to supplant what I actually said in its original context with how you arranged it instead? See how both the post and the picture fit exactly with your behavior?
“False narrative” do you not understand how hypotheticals work? Are all hypotheticals “deceptive?” Christ Jesus.
I’m not sure whether to pity you for having been failed by your educational system or whether to pity the educational system for having to deal with you.
And you can’t give any reason why my hypothetical isn’t valid beyond “it’s dumb” or it’s “a false narrative,” with no further explanation.
It’s not complicated, it’s incredibly straightforward. We don’t even need the hypothetical, since you seem to struggle with the concept of them. Let’s frame it this way instead: is it valid to say the exact things you say about one genocide about other genocides? Yes or no.
Lol, you think I’m the one with something to hide? Let’s do this in front of the class then - tell us the answer to the following question:
Should be pretty easy for someone who’s not a Nazi to answer, right? I’m sure anyone reading it would have no trouble saying “no.” But for some reason, you can’t.
A guard at a concentration camp? No.
If a protester in australia stopped people from feeding their families at a food bank or kept sick kids from getting cancer medicine by blocking the door because of the Holocaust, would that be a valid position to hold? 🤔
Depends, if for example they’re destroying a rail line used to conduct the Holocaust and it coincidentally caused that, then yes. If it’s entirely unrelated, then no.
Not sure what that question has to do with anything.
Have you ever seen “The Rock” with Sean Connery and Nick Cage? To make it really succinct, I support your position and I would be on alcatraz with you (metaphorically speaking), but when it comes time to launch the rockets, I’m with General Hummel and it sure seems to me like .ML would really like to just pull the trigger.
I have not seen that movie.
The acting is a little bad in some places but it’s a very decent action movie IMO. You can’t have a Cage movie without some bad acting I think.
I guess it depends a lot with how “related” you find things.
Its pretty clear in the US that genocides in other parts of the world (or even at home in the not so distant past) are not given appropriate weighting by political parties in power. However, there are still hungry families, people who need medicine, and various other forms of suffering right in the town where you live if you’re a US citizen.
I don’t even disagree with the position you have that minimizing genocide is abhorrent. However, by talking about “what is related or not” I personally feel like society is spraying blood from the femoral artery and there’s the “tourniquet party” and the “shoot people in the femoral artery” party and you’re like “FUCK THE TOURNIQUET PARTY, they abetted genocide! I’m out!”. Or “Because of their apparent support for genocide, I will vote for the cautery and surgical foam party, even if they HAPPEN to be a 9 hour drive away.”
On the one hand, this issue is really fucking important. On the other hand, riding the morality of the issue to the point that you do nothing to fix or address ANY problem (which makes a person who only posts about it basically indistinguishable from a neck bearding grouper) is also important to realize.
Kids were and are dying in Palestine. I have a hard time seeing how the moral thing to do is to make sure some kids grow up without parents in the because they got disappeared by ICE (or any of the issues above). I’m telling you these issues are not related to me: fight genocide AND fight police state / hunger / healthcare etc. The other guy is making the same argument but I guess he wants to open a Waffle House or some shit.
From where I sit, you have made “minimizing genocide” a weapon that even hurts more people , and simultaneously allows you to feel good about doing nothing by doing nothing.
The democrats are not “the tourniquet party.” Tourniquets stop bleeding, the democrats want to cause more bleeding. They are the “stab your femoral artery again” party. They don’t fix shit.
Throughout history, there have been plenty of times when people supported genocide on the premise that it prevented some greater threat. I’m not aware of a single time in history where that position was the correct one.
Compared to whatever the party of trump is, idk how any sane person can equivocate and just say “yeah it’s all the same either way”. The kind of person I guess with no trans or foreign friends maybe, but even still.
I don’t say that the two parties are exactly the same, but 1) they will both lead to the same result and 2) they are both fundamentally unacceptable.
By way of understanding each other, I agree on point 2 and disagree with point 1.
They may go to the same place and maybe it all started in 1970 or something. But I wasn’t here then and neither were lots of people who I believe are similar to me. I want change in a radical way, but I would settle for slowing the house from burning enough for us to have room to do something meaningful. D is a counter burn and R is gasoline.
If the status quo was enough to address Trumpism, then why is Trump president?
Never pretended I wasn’t anti-Nazi.
Hey, I’m employed and don’t have the time to dig into the lore. What did Lemminary say? Can you permalink it?
First they minimized genocide with:
Then they doubled down, comparing being pro- or anti-genocide with “liking waffles or pancakes” and said to “move the fuck on.”
Then, after I pointed out how abhorrent these things were, and they did nothing to deny that the exact same arguments could be used to justify the Holocaust, while also hurling a bunch of insults at me, I called them a Nazi. They responded by accusing me of being a pedophile.
Damn, and you still have to provide only a partial context? Only the bits that benefit you and make you seem like the victim, huh.
How about you share the parts where you relentlessly accuse me of being a Nazi? The part where you misconstrue what I’m saying and purposely fail to grasp my point? The part where I actually fight back by falsely accusing you to prove my point, by using the same tactics you used to accuse me baselessly?
You’re nothing but a mean girl, Katie.
They literally said, “I’m employed,” so I gave a condensed version. If someone wants to read through all your drivel, they can read through the thread I linked. If they want your side of the story, they can ask you. This person asked me.
I literally referenced that.
I can’t link that part because it doesn’t exist and never happened.
I wasn’t accusing you baselessly. I gave you my basis. You didn’t “prove your point” you just lobbed baseless nonsense to deflect from my valid criticisms.
… that benefited only you. Why don’t you include any of your own sins in there? Do you really think you’re a saint?
Quote it like you did everything else. It doesn’t cost you a damn thing.
Oh, right, we’re still doing that bit, pretending we don’t understand basic analogies while trying to shove entire hypotheticals in people’s faces. Jfc, listen to yourself.
What point? Proving I’m not a Nazi? How about you prove that you’re not a pedo? The burden of proof falls on you to prove that I am. All you have are your stupid and loaded hypotheticals.
Are you talking about the analogy where you compared a moral stance about genocide to a mere preference between liking pancakes or waffles? I understood that analogy perfectly, as well as how utterly monstrous it was to make.
I did.
It’s not my fault you don’t understand hypotheticals.
I wish you had understood the one where I abstracted away the word “genocide” that you had fixated on so you could understand what my meta-comment was about. Or how you should’ve understood that you’re the type of person to interject with “but how can you hate waffles!” when someone says they like pancakes. Sounds to me like you didn’t understand anything at all.
Oh, and what’s this? Now you’re questioning whether I sound like a good person? Where’s the evil Nazi you were accusing me of being just a second ago, huh?
It’s not my fault you make shitty and overloaded hypotheticals. Also, let me remind you that refusing to answer does not mean failing to understand. I simply side-stepped it, bucko.
There is no context in which you don’t come off as a total shitbag in this
I have nothing to hide. You’re putting words in people’s mouths and crying wolf. How about you share the entire context with the class instead? It’s easier if you don’t start spewing bullshit.
What context? That you said all those exact things about a different genocide? You really think that’ll make you look better?
You think it’s acceptable to supplant what I actually said in its original context with how you arranged it instead? See how both the post and the picture fit exactly with your behavior?
I literally just asked whether your exact words apply to other genocides. That’s it. You’re acting like that’s somehow deceptive.
Still can’t answer the question btw 🤔
Brother, you’re setting up a false narrative and asking me to debunk it. How is that not deceptive? 😂
“False narrative” do you not understand how hypotheticals work? Are all hypotheticals “deceptive?” Christ Jesus.
I’m not sure whether to pity you for having been failed by your educational system or whether to pity the educational system for having to deal with you.
No, I’m literally saying yours is, actually. But talk about the failed education system some more, why don’t cha. Embody this post for us all, please.
And you can’t give any reason why my hypothetical isn’t valid beyond “it’s dumb” or it’s “a false narrative,” with no further explanation.
It’s not complicated, it’s incredibly straightforward. We don’t even need the hypothetical, since you seem to struggle with the concept of them. Let’s frame it this way instead: is it valid to say the exact things you say about one genocide about other genocides? Yes or no.