It is not an exclusive or. I was not calling America not-genocidal, but the fact that you automatically assumed I said that just because I said something anti-China is very telling.
My point is China isn’t accused of doing anything close to what Israel is doing, yet the West condemns China and gives weapons to Israel. This cheapens and weakens the accusation of genocide and discredits the concept itself.
Genocide is the crime of crimes. It shouldn’t be used as a technicality to score political points.
In case you haven’t noticed yet, many if not most people around here aren’t exactly rabid supporters of the mainstream politicians doing the whole supporting of Genocidal ethno-Fascists doing their very own Holocaust, and that’s especially so for people who have Ecological concerns - and who would be atracted to this specific post - since said politicians also tend to be neoliberals who at best given lip service to Environmentalism.
You seem to having a knee-jerk reaction on the whole China subject and letting your prejudices cloud your judgement in a big way.
Clearly if it was “all” (and that’s just if that “all” is only for Americans) the Democrats’ poll numbers would not have gone up when Joe Biden was replaced by Kamala Harris.
If you go more broadly than just America, in most of Europe for example people do have more voting options than Fascists and ethno-Fascist supporters, so that “all” would be even more distant from reality than just counting Lemmy users from the US.
Further, this is Lemmy, which is much more to the Left than pretty much all general (i.e. not specific to a certain political ideology) social media.
Also and more as a general coment, when people use “all”, “always”, “never”, “everybody”, “nobody” and other statements about 100% or 0% of people doing something, it’s almost always a prejudiced false statement. I’m pretty sure we can find plenty of people even in countries with fake-Democracies with no real choices that would rather refrain from participating altogether rather than vote for somebody who supports Genocidal ethno-Fascists.
Don’t get me wrong: I did plenty of arguing against people here defending that Americans should vote for the ethno-Fascism lover to defeat the wannabe-Fascist, but presuming they’re “all” like those American defending that most Max Grouchian take on Principles (“These are my principles. If you don’t like them, I have others”) is a very prejudiced take, IMHO.
The venn diagram of “people who think China is committing genocide” and “people who refuse to vote for genocide” has almost zero overlap. I would be surprised if even one such person existed, but I suppose it’s technically possible.
So, congratulations, you’re a special exception to a general rule. I’d be shocked to hell and back if there were more of you.
Including you? I assumed you were opposed to voting for genocide, but still believed it made sense to accuse China of genocide. Could you please explain where I was wrong?
Except in this case there’s no murder. China is accused of reducing birth rates, not mass killing. Regardless of whether the accusation is true, any serious person can see there’s a very clear difference.
Also, you can definitely be charged with murder if you were critical in providing the murder weapon and facilitating the murder.
Every other genocide in history has been accompanied by mass killing and mass detention and mass displacement. That’s what makes genocide the crime of crimes. It’s a horror with no parallel.
I think there’s a serious problem if you can have a bloodless genocide by technicality.
The fact that China is called genocidal while the US and Europe give unlimited military support to Israel is really something.
It is not an exclusive or. I was not calling America not-genocidal, but the fact that you automatically assumed I said that just because I said something anti-China is very telling.
My point is China isn’t accused of doing anything close to what Israel is doing, yet the West condemns China and gives weapons to Israel. This cheapens and weakens the accusation of genocide and discredits the concept itself.
Genocide is the crime of crimes. It shouldn’t be used as a technicality to score political points.
In case you haven’t noticed yet, many if not most people around here aren’t exactly rabid supporters of the mainstream politicians doing the whole supporting of Genocidal ethno-Fascists doing their very own Holocaust, and that’s especially so for people who have Ecological concerns - and who would be atracted to this specific post - since said politicians also tend to be neoliberals who at best given lip service to Environmentalism.
You seem to having a knee-jerk reaction on the whole China subject and letting your prejudices cloud your judgement in a big way.
They’ll all fucking vote for genocidal ethno-Fascists doing their very own Holocaust. They don’t actually care.
Clearly if it was “all” (and that’s just if that “all” is only for Americans) the Democrats’ poll numbers would not have gone up when Joe Biden was replaced by Kamala Harris.
If you go more broadly than just America, in most of Europe for example people do have more voting options than Fascists and ethno-Fascist supporters, so that “all” would be even more distant from reality than just counting Lemmy users from the US.
Further, this is Lemmy, which is much more to the Left than pretty much all general (i.e. not specific to a certain political ideology) social media.
Also and more as a general coment, when people use “all”, “always”, “never”, “everybody”, “nobody” and other statements about 100% or 0% of people doing something, it’s almost always a prejudiced false statement. I’m pretty sure we can find plenty of people even in countries with fake-Democracies with no real choices that would rather refrain from participating altogether rather than vote for somebody who supports Genocidal ethno-Fascists.
Don’t get me wrong: I did plenty of arguing against people here defending that Americans should vote for the ethno-Fascism lover to defeat the wannabe-Fascist, but presuming they’re “all” like those American defending that most Max Grouchian take on Principles (“These are my principles. If you don’t like them, I have others”) is a very prejudiced take, IMHO.
The venn diagram of “people who think China is committing genocide” and “people who refuse to vote for genocide” has almost zero overlap. I would be surprised if even one such person existed, but I suppose it’s technically possible.
So, congratulations, you’re a special exception to a general rule. I’d be shocked to hell and back if there were more of you.
You’re assuming way too much about everybody, including me.
Including you? I assumed you were opposed to voting for genocide, but still believed it made sense to accuse China of genocide. Could you please explain where I was wrong?
One commits it, one supplies arms to a third being investigated for it (we at confirmed yet?). Its murder vs manslaughter or association to murder.
Except in this case there’s no murder. China is accused of reducing birth rates, not mass killing. Regardless of whether the accusation is true, any serious person can see there’s a very clear difference.
Also, you can definitely be charged with murder if you were critical in providing the murder weapon and facilitating the murder.
Genocide includes deliberately manipulating birth rates - killing isn’t actually required.
Every other genocide in history has been accompanied by mass killing and mass detention and mass displacement. That’s what makes genocide the crime of crimes. It’s a horror with no parallel.
I think there’s a serious problem if you can have a bloodless genocide by technicality.