You’re misinterpreting what I said. I said that those who dogmatically support or oppose NATO are not much different, in that their reasons are similar. That’s why I referred to campism - the belief that the world is divided into large, competing political groups of countries (“camps”) and that people should support the camp that promotes their ideology. It’s a sort of lesser-evilism that people with all sorts of different ideologies fall into, and it can end up being used as a thought-terminating cliche. When you dismiss everyone with leftist ideologies by pointing to some campists who oppose NATO as the representatives of the entire “radical left,” you are doing this yourself. It robs the discussion of nuance and turns it into a contest between sports teams.
Yes I heard you, and I disagreed with you because you equate people who want hundreds of millions if not billions of people to die so that the strongest and most brutal nations can expand, with people who directly oppose exactly that outcome. These things are not questionable or simply hypotheticals, we’ve tested it. NATO prevents war, lack of NATO brings war.
The absence of conflict is not the same as the presence of justice. Maintaining peace and order is not always the most important thing, the very same logic is used by oppressive regimes to justify crushing dissent. I am not one of those people who supports Russian imperialism, which is why I take such issue with your characterization of the entire “radical left” as such. NATO maintains peace, yes, but it also maintains a status quo that is unjust. I do not want imperialism to continue, regardless of whether it is carried out by Russia or Western countries.
You’re misinterpreting what I said. I said that those who dogmatically support or oppose NATO are not much different, in that their reasons are similar. That’s why I referred to campism - the belief that the world is divided into large, competing political groups of countries (“camps”) and that people should support the camp that promotes their ideology. It’s a sort of lesser-evilism that people with all sorts of different ideologies fall into, and it can end up being used as a thought-terminating cliche. When you dismiss everyone with leftist ideologies by pointing to some campists who oppose NATO as the representatives of the entire “radical left,” you are doing this yourself. It robs the discussion of nuance and turns it into a contest between sports teams.
Yes I heard you, and I disagreed with you because you equate people who want hundreds of millions if not billions of people to die so that the strongest and most brutal nations can expand, with people who directly oppose exactly that outcome. These things are not questionable or simply hypotheticals, we’ve tested it. NATO prevents war, lack of NATO brings war.
The absence of conflict is not the same as the presence of justice. Maintaining peace and order is not always the most important thing, the very same logic is used by oppressive regimes to justify crushing dissent. I am not one of those people who supports Russian imperialism, which is why I take such issue with your characterization of the entire “radical left” as such. NATO maintains peace, yes, but it also maintains a status quo that is unjust. I do not want imperialism to continue, regardless of whether it is carried out by Russia or Western countries.
Idgaf about your Tankie justice, theres a special place in hell for warmongers like you.
Sigh…