Positive peace is always desirable unless you’re a person with violent tendencies. Obviously “peace” on its own bases its value on the conditions of the peace. You haven’t dropped anything but smug proclamations about the most basic philosophy 101 material.
I will say though , interesting way to waste your time on the internet, snarking people for wasting time on the internet.
Oh and here’s a little truth for you, you don’t use oxygen to type. You use it to speak.
So you also don’t blame Hamas for what they did by that logic. Or is 100 years too short for your sensibilities, would another century of abuse help? Gaza is already worse than the Warsaw ghetto in the 30s-40s, when do they get their war crime pass?
Also, quick reminder that the current Israeli government has sent cash and resources to Hamas because people like you will see hamas’ behavior and think they aren’t the ones being provoked intentionally to generate a good causus belli for sociopaths to glass the region. The Likud party has in their mission statement that Israel will own the land from the sea to the Jordan river so Hamas isn’t the only party with “river to the sea” rhetoric.
To say he hasn’t been better than trump is naive. Everything Biden has done that you hate will be done to a greater extent under trump. Remember this is the guy that moved the embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.
Just look at project 2025 to see the truly fascist intentions of trump and republicans at large. Neither are good but they aren’t close to being equally bad.
That’s the spoiler effect created by a first past the post system. You won’t get to the first result unless you change how voting works. A good way to get there is to start local instead of what most people do which is nothing until federal elections, then whine how the system isn’t giving them good candidates.
They get bailed out because corporations have the funds to capture government, which isn’t at odds with capitalism. Not sure why you think that’s betraying capitalism, the system is about controlling means of production and siphoning funds off the top, buying government is the natural result to maximize profits.
Communism as an ideology rejects unjust hierarchies so when an authoritarian takes over its directly at odds with the ideology. Capitalism embraces any hierarchy that emerges as long as it’s profitable so when capitalists corrupt governments to make it easier to make more money it’s not a betrayal of the ideology, it’s working as designed.
And since you’re too stupid to understand what I’m saying:
If you’re born in Thailand, never set foot in Scotland and never even start any process to gain citizenship then you aren’t fucking Scottish no matter how much you claim you are. I made this very clear the first time when I said the person in this example was born somewhere that’s NOT Scotland and also said they spent their entire life NOT in Scotland. So clearly they weren’t born there, have no ancestry, and aren’t trying to move there, still think they’re right when they claim to be a Scotsman?
For all your condescending snark you clearly can’t read.
Do I need to pick a side? Can I not think both have flaws that should be addressed? The criticisms aimed at capitalism by Marx are incredibly valid, his solution clearly not so much based on real world attempts.
I think if anyone is viewing this through a tinted lens it’s you. Your position is very black and white with no actual care for honestly comparing the two ideologies. You’ve made statements that show a fundamental lack of understanding of both systems and the faults you lay at these governments aren’t inherent to them being communist as I explained earlier.
Capitalism hasn’t been corrupted because the underlying values and tenants of the ideology are functioning exactly as intended. Communism is a utopian pitch with a glaring flaw in implementation that allows strongmen to form authoritarian control. Capitalism by design rewards those that can operate profitably regardless of ethics, which ensures an inherently dystopian outcome. If it’s better for business that a mass murderer like Pinochet takes power then that’s the optimal decision from a capitalist model. US involvement the Middle East and Central/South America has almost always been to benefit a US based corporation that was exploiting and extracting the natural resources of those places. A system that allows and encourages the concentration of economic power is inherently corrupt and self serving towards the elite at the top.
That last part was me describing an instance where “no true Scotsman” literally isn’t a fallacy. Words have meanings, if I call you a duck you’re still a person. If something doesn’t fit the established definition then you can’t honestly say it does.
Do you think ignoring obvious sarcasm makes you look smarter?
Every system of governance has millions of deaths attributable to them. Capitalists destabilize third world countries so they can take advantage of the corruption. If you look at every authoritarian government propped up by western capitalist governments you’ll see the body count hit the billions. I’d say a system that props up a guy who threw thousands of political dissidents out of helicopters is far more “inherently shitty” than one whose core ideology was undermined by strongmen.
Every starving person that exists in a place where excess food is destroyed is another body waiting to be added to the count.
Attack the actual tenants of an ideology, not the bastardized version spoon fed to you by people with an incentive to present it dishonestly.
Or give me a good pitch as to why North Korea is definitely a democratic republic. When the person claiming to be a Scotsman was born in Thailand and lived their whole life in Iraq it’s not a fallacy to say that they’re wrong.
I didn’t realize communism was when you’re an authoritarian state capitalist system. It’s so interesting that international corporations can exist within a communist system. You’d think there’d be local control of resources and production and minimal social hierarchies, given that those are the core defining traits of the ideology.
So cool to see how you understand the concepts you’re talking about, plenty of people just go by whatever strawman they get raised with.
Exactly, gotta protect US business while they siphon off resources from the third world. Only we’re allowed to exploit the natural resources of another country.
Like I said, too stupid to hold a conversation with. I’ve been an atheist my whole life.
Yeah we know you’re too stupid and arrogant to have a conversation, you don’t need to remind me.
If you think I wasn’t clear that’s on you. I stated my premise and gave examples as to why I think my premise is valid.
If you still don’t understand me I don’t think it’s worth it to keep trying.
Compelling argument. I really liked the part where you explained anything. Exactly what I expected from someone that needs things to be simple to make sense.
I’d rather not latch onto mental shortcuts to understand the world. It’s naive, reductive, and doesn’t help you reach an actual solution. All it does is validate your previously conceived biases.
The civil war happened because rich landowners built their economy around slavery and didn’t want to get rid of it. Many bought into racist justifications as to why the system should continue. Slavery still exists in this country and the civil war has been over for over a century, read the 13th amendment carefully.
People support MAGA because there’s been a decades long movement to create a media sphere that insulates viewers from inconvenient information and to reinforce party created narratives. Thus primed to be taken advantage of by conmen like Trump. Any behavior from this group spawned from the preceding movements such as the Tea Party.
The nightclub was attacked because of anti LGBTQ ideology that isn’t specific to one religion making him feel like they are a threat to society. It’s like saying the person that assassinated the planned parenthood doctor or the one who bombed a clinic did it because they thought god would reward them in heaven.
Stop trying to dumb shit down to make yourself feel smarter. Contextualizing is never a bad thing unless you want to avoid unhelpful facts. As I’ve already stated and you haven’t refuted, barbaric violence has been committed in the name of all ideologies, and every time they cite portions of their dogma to justify their barbarism.
What’s simpler? Newtons theory of gravity or Einstein theory of relativity? The four humors or germ theory? Which one is more accurate? The simple answer is not always the correct one.
Do think there’s something inherent to this abrahamic religion absent from any other? Or could there be an alternative explanation? Maybe that fundamentalism and extremism thrive in unstable societies and can turn any ideology into a fanatical and violent version of itself?
After all, ever since the fall of the Ottoman Empire these countries have been set up for failure and are consistently destabilized by foreign backed coups.
It’s like using South America as an example of a political ideology in action, it ignores the multitude of interventions done by outside groups designed to undercut local power and destabilize the region for better looting.
It’s not an argument for religion. It’s an argument to not unfairly single out a religion for something they’re all universally susceptible towards.
It’s very popular to use your talking points just for Islam. It doesn’t sounds like you’re talking about religion generally as a result.
There are Buddhist sects that commit terrorism. It’s not specific to religion. Stick humans in there and even a religion that talks of pacifism will gain violent extremists.
When the Scotsman was born in Austria and lived their whole life in Russia I don’t care how much they insist they’re a Scotsman. Definitions matter.
I doubt you’ll insist that NK is a democratic republic.
When your objective is obstruction then that’s all you need.
Yeah that bit about adderal came out of nowhere, very odd fantasy you got there.