I think you are also treating every western action as if europe personally designed it
Nope, I’m just referring to the actions that Europe enthusiasticly supported and engaged in.
when in reality europe’s record is more mixed
No more mixed than Russia; but for some reason (chauvanism), you only engage in this kind of equivocation for Europe.
It has responsibility for serious failures
And that’s the true hypocrisy of Europeans on display: other countries do bad things, but Europe just is “responsible” for “failures”. It’s not that Europe deliberately went out and did something bad, they’re the good guys, after all! They were just trying to do the right thing and unfortunately failed!
It’s disgustingly self serving. And solidly demonstrates my point.
but in most recent cases it was not the main driver.
And in many cases it was. Not that it matters that it “wasn’t the main driver” when it still enthusiasticly participated and supported these actions. “Sure I helped operate the gas chambers, but they weren’t my idea, I’m just a smol bean!”
In lots of others, like iraq or afghanistan (or the US’s overall middle east approach), european states mostly followed the US out of strategic dependence rather than some unified desire to dominate the world.
You would never in a million years attempt to make these kinds of disgusting excuses for anyone except Europe, and you know it. This is the break is hypocrisy and you know it. Russia also has it’s strategic reasons for invading Ukraine, famously, but I’m betting you don’t find that compelling. You only find my compelling when it’s Europe going “we had to help commit genocide, it was in our interests!”
but it does mean europe isn’t operating on the same logic as russia,
Actually it means they operating on the exact same logic.
which treats territorial expansion as a central political project.
And Europe treats global domination by Western capitalist hegemony as a central political project, which is much worse.
That’a why I separate western crimes from the structure of the political systems behind them.
Yes, I’ve already noted that you hold a complete double standard. Now you’re just coming out and saying it.
Europe has elections that can actually change governments
Bullshit: your elections are tightly run on rails to make sure that noone other than some flavor of liberal capitalist can win. Any time a serious leftist party becomes viable, it gets banned, or worse, all of the information people need to make informed decisions is filtered through media owned by oligarchs, and, must importantly of all; the people Europe fucks over the most don’t get to participate in your bullshit elections. If Russians voted to invade Ukraine, would that be ok? They basically did; Putin is extremely popular, and all of the most popular opposition politicians also support the war in Ukraine. This is not at all different to Europes genocidal brutalization of the middle east.
courts that can and sometimes do push back,
Europe has not prosecuted a single one of its genocidal war criminals. Not one; most of them still walk around as prominent national figures. They’re putting Tony Fucking Blaire in charge of Gaza.
and protests that occasionally work
In the sense that Europeans will express the against something they were after it has happened, just not in a way where they will compensate the victims or not do it again.
which is exactly why those policies deserve criticism, but
Stop. Stop this gross double standard. You would never in a million years do this for anyone other than Europe
but it still gives european citizens real levers to pressure their own governments.
Oh ok. That’s much worse. That means that European citizens in general are responsible for the modern Holocaust they support. That makes Europe much worse than Russia.
Oh, but it makes you personally feel empowered, and you only give a shit any your personal interests, as I pointed out earlier.
Russia superglues those levers in place.
As opposed to Europe, where those levers are consistently fixed in the same place as Russia, but allegedly the citizens could move them if they chose to, but they don’t. Which, again, is much worse.
Opposition is criminalised
Like every viable leftist party in European history.
media is destroyed
As opposed to simply giving oligarchs direct control of it, like Europe does.
and elections are for show.
Yeah, real elections are when you can choose between two ghoulish capitalists with the same genocidal foreign policy. And the people you exterminate aren’t allowed to participate at all.
That is not a small difference
Correct, it’s not a small difference: it’s no difference at all.
but it still gives european citizens real levers to pressure their own governments.
I’m sure that means so much to the people of Iraq and Palestine. The people of the imperial core choose to exterminate them. This is just straight up white supremacy: genocidal violence isn’t as bad if white people get to vote to commit it.
So for me it is not about excusing the west or pretending europe is ‘moral’.
Yes it is: you’ve demonstrated a whole sale double standard in the standard you apply so that you can excuse the West. A double standard of, essentially, “it benefits me personally, so it’s brutalization of foreigners is not as bad”
It is simply that western hypocrisy does not magically turn russia’s invasion into something justified or admirable.
Literally no one ever said it did, as I already fucking told you
I can condemn Iraq, Libya, Gaza and still condemn a war aimed at erasing a neighbour.
Would you advocate for Russia retaliating against Europe for it’s genocidal actions in Ha a, just as you advocate for Europe retaliating against Russia for its invasion of Ukraine? No, of course you wouldn’t: you reserve that status of moral world police for Europe, because you have a double standard and do not actually condemn Iraq, Libya, and Gaza in the same way you condemn Russia. Even though what Europe is supporting in Palestine is even worse than the invasion of Ukraine, you treat it differently. It’s just an “oopsie”, a failure to live up the superior platonic European mortality you treat as axiomatic.
That is not loyalty to Europe, it is just refusing the idea that one set of atrocities cancels out another.
No, the loyalty to Europe is the gross double standard and the implication that Russian atrocities cancel out Europes worse atrocities.
You are treating any distinction I make as if it is an attempt to portray europe as moral. It is not. europe has taken part in serious crimes and carries responsibility for them.
My point is that political systems are not identical. Europe’s structures are too often captured by interests and often fail, but they still allow for leadership changes, court rulings, investigations and public pressure. Even in eastern europe elections have been re-run and parties banned after proven foreign interference. These mechanisms are limited, but they exist. Russia removes them entirely.
Acknowledging this difference is not excusing western actions. It’s also not claiming russia’s motives are justified. It’s just recognising that foreign policy, internal structure and accountability aren’t the same thing.
If your view is that any distinction is a double standard, then we are not working with the same categories, and there is no productive way to continue the comparison.
And back to the original theme - we don’t want nor need war in europe, but russia (a fully captured state) seems hell bent on bringing it. I suppose that when it eventually falls, it will fall hard.
You are treating any distinction I make as if it is an attempt to portray europe as moral.
Because you are. You’re trying to portray Europe as having the moral right to police Russia’s behavior.
europe has taken part in serious crimes and carries responsibility for them.
Though not, apparently, in any way that you think should prevent Europe from acting as world police or open them up to retaliation.
My point is that political systems are not identical.
No, your point was that your political system is better, and thus Europe should not be judged as harshly. But it isn’t and it should.
Europe’s structures are too often captured by interests and often fail
Yes, which is why they are not different to Russia.
but they still allow for leadership changes, court rulings, investigations and public pressure
I already went into detail about why that’s bullshit. You completely ignoring that to just restate your bullshit assertion is the height of cowardice.
Even in eastern europe elections have been re-run and parties banned after proven foreign interference
If you’re seriously going to try to argue that Europe has only banned leftist parties after “proven foreign interference” then you’re straight up just a McCarthyist fascist and you might as well start ranting about Judeo-Bolshevick conspiracies, because that’s where you’re at politically.
These mechanisms are limited, but they exist. Russia removes them entirely.
As I stated before (and you ignored), that is worse for Europe then: having these mechanisms and choosing never to use them to prevent genocidal atrocity is worse than not having them at all.
Acknowledging this difference is not excusing western actions.
Lol. That’s nonsense: your whole argument has been in service of excusing western actions. Literally your whole point was that Europe’s atrocities arnt as bad because European chose to commit them.
If your view is that any distinction is a double standard
My view is coming up with a bunch of rationalisation to defend European atrocities, which are vacuous at best and outright false at worst, is a double standard. Because, as I said before (and you ignored), you would never in a million years try to come up with these kind of rationalisations for any country other than European ones.
we don’t want nor need war in europe
A great many Europeans are absolutely frothing at the mouth for war with Russia. And it’s true that the rest of you don’t want it in Europe: but in the middle east instead.
but russia (a fully captured state) seems hell bent on bringing it.
Yeah; once again, Europeans are in no position to accuse other countries of being “hell bent on bringing war” (or of being fully captured).
I suppose that when it eventually falls, it will fall hard.
Uhuh. Once again. You might as well start ranting about Judeo-Bolshevick conspiracies and white, European destiny.
You are reading motives into my argument that aren’t there. I am not claiming europe is moral, has a mandate to police anyone, or deserves immunity from judgement. I am not trying to justify Iraq, Libya or Gaza, and I am not asking anyone to view those actions as lesser.
My only point is that political structures differ, and that this matters for understanding how states act and how their citizens can influence them. That’s not a moral hierarchy and not an excuse - just a factual distinction. If you reject the idea that internal political structure makes any difference at all, then we are working with entirely different premises.
At that stage there is no meaningful basis for comparison or discussion. I have stated my view and you disagree. OK.
Nope, I’m just referring to the actions that Europe enthusiasticly supported and engaged in.
No more mixed than Russia; but for some reason (chauvanism), you only engage in this kind of equivocation for Europe.
And that’s the true hypocrisy of Europeans on display: other countries do bad things, but Europe just is “responsible” for “failures”. It’s not that Europe deliberately went out and did something bad, they’re the good guys, after all! They were just trying to do the right thing and unfortunately failed!
It’s disgustingly self serving. And solidly demonstrates my point.
And in many cases it was. Not that it matters that it “wasn’t the main driver” when it still enthusiasticly participated and supported these actions. “Sure I helped operate the gas chambers, but they weren’t my idea, I’m just a smol bean!”
You would never in a million years attempt to make these kinds of disgusting excuses for anyone except Europe, and you know it. This is the break is hypocrisy and you know it. Russia also has it’s strategic reasons for invading Ukraine, famously, but I’m betting you don’t find that compelling. You only find my compelling when it’s Europe going “we had to help commit genocide, it was in our interests!”
Actually it means they operating on the exact same logic.
And Europe treats global domination by Western capitalist hegemony as a central political project, which is much worse.
Yes, I’ve already noted that you hold a complete double standard. Now you’re just coming out and saying it.
Bullshit: your elections are tightly run on rails to make sure that noone other than some flavor of liberal capitalist can win. Any time a serious leftist party becomes viable, it gets banned, or worse, all of the information people need to make informed decisions is filtered through media owned by oligarchs, and, must importantly of all; the people Europe fucks over the most don’t get to participate in your bullshit elections. If Russians voted to invade Ukraine, would that be ok? They basically did; Putin is extremely popular, and all of the most popular opposition politicians also support the war in Ukraine. This is not at all different to Europes genocidal brutalization of the middle east.
Europe has not prosecuted a single one of its genocidal war criminals. Not one; most of them still walk around as prominent national figures. They’re putting Tony Fucking Blaire in charge of Gaza.
In the sense that Europeans will express the against something they were after it has happened, just not in a way where they will compensate the victims or not do it again.
Stop. Stop this gross double standard. You would never in a million years do this for anyone other than Europe
Oh ok. That’s much worse. That means that European citizens in general are responsible for the modern Holocaust they support. That makes Europe much worse than Russia.
Oh, but it makes you personally feel empowered, and you only give a shit any your personal interests, as I pointed out earlier.
As opposed to Europe, where those levers are consistently fixed in the same place as Russia, but allegedly the citizens could move them if they chose to, but they don’t. Which, again, is much worse.
Like every viable leftist party in European history.
As opposed to simply giving oligarchs direct control of it, like Europe does.
Yeah, real elections are when you can choose between two ghoulish capitalists with the same genocidal foreign policy. And the people you exterminate aren’t allowed to participate at all.
Correct, it’s not a small difference: it’s no difference at all.
I’m sure that means so much to the people of Iraq and Palestine. The people of the imperial core choose to exterminate them. This is just straight up white supremacy: genocidal violence isn’t as bad if white people get to vote to commit it.
Yes it is: you’ve demonstrated a whole sale double standard in the standard you apply so that you can excuse the West. A double standard of, essentially, “it benefits me personally, so it’s brutalization of foreigners is not as bad”
Literally no one ever said it did, as I already fucking told you
Would you advocate for Russia retaliating against Europe for it’s genocidal actions in Ha a, just as you advocate for Europe retaliating against Russia for its invasion of Ukraine? No, of course you wouldn’t: you reserve that status of moral world police for Europe, because you have a double standard and do not actually condemn Iraq, Libya, and Gaza in the same way you condemn Russia. Even though what Europe is supporting in Palestine is even worse than the invasion of Ukraine, you treat it differently. It’s just an “oopsie”, a failure to live up the superior platonic European mortality you treat as axiomatic.
No, the loyalty to Europe is the gross double standard and the implication that Russian atrocities cancel out Europes worse atrocities.
Keep cooking, the clarity of thought is refreshing
You are treating any distinction I make as if it is an attempt to portray europe as moral. It is not. europe has taken part in serious crimes and carries responsibility for them.
My point is that political systems are not identical. Europe’s structures are too often captured by interests and often fail, but they still allow for leadership changes, court rulings, investigations and public pressure. Even in eastern europe elections have been re-run and parties banned after proven foreign interference. These mechanisms are limited, but they exist. Russia removes them entirely.
Acknowledging this difference is not excusing western actions. It’s also not claiming russia’s motives are justified. It’s just recognising that foreign policy, internal structure and accountability aren’t the same thing.
If your view is that any distinction is a double standard, then we are not working with the same categories, and there is no productive way to continue the comparison.
And back to the original theme - we don’t want nor need war in europe, but russia (a fully captured state) seems hell bent on bringing it. I suppose that when it eventually falls, it will fall hard.
Because you are. You’re trying to portray Europe as having the moral right to police Russia’s behavior.
Though not, apparently, in any way that you think should prevent Europe from acting as world police or open them up to retaliation.
No, your point was that your political system is better, and thus Europe should not be judged as harshly. But it isn’t and it should.
Yes, which is why they are not different to Russia.
I already went into detail about why that’s bullshit. You completely ignoring that to just restate your bullshit assertion is the height of cowardice.
If you’re seriously going to try to argue that Europe has only banned leftist parties after “proven foreign interference” then you’re straight up just a McCarthyist fascist and you might as well start ranting about Judeo-Bolshevick conspiracies, because that’s where you’re at politically.
As I stated before (and you ignored), that is worse for Europe then: having these mechanisms and choosing never to use them to prevent genocidal atrocity is worse than not having them at all.
Lol. That’s nonsense: your whole argument has been in service of excusing western actions. Literally your whole point was that Europe’s atrocities arnt as bad because European chose to commit them.
My view is coming up with a bunch of rationalisation to defend European atrocities, which are vacuous at best and outright false at worst, is a double standard. Because, as I said before (and you ignored), you would never in a million years try to come up with these kind of rationalisations for any country other than European ones.
A great many Europeans are absolutely frothing at the mouth for war with Russia. And it’s true that the rest of you don’t want it in Europe: but in the middle east instead.
Yeah; once again, Europeans are in no position to accuse other countries of being “hell bent on bringing war” (or of being fully captured).
Uhuh. Once again. You might as well start ranting about Judeo-Bolshevick conspiracies and white, European destiny.
You are reading motives into my argument that aren’t there. I am not claiming europe is moral, has a mandate to police anyone, or deserves immunity from judgement. I am not trying to justify Iraq, Libya or Gaza, and I am not asking anyone to view those actions as lesser.
My only point is that political structures differ, and that this matters for understanding how states act and how their citizens can influence them. That’s not a moral hierarchy and not an excuse - just a factual distinction. If you reject the idea that internal political structure makes any difference at all, then we are working with entirely different premises.
At that stage there is no meaningful basis for comparison or discussion. I have stated my view and you disagree. OK.
You really think I’m going to keep taking you seriously after bullshit like this?
Fuck off, you lying white supremacist troll. Take your fascist “agenda” elsewhere.
You got epistemolgoically toasted
Nah, the guy clearly has an agenda and can’t control himself. I’m just trying to stay consistent.
Classic white supremacist: their beliefs are just normal, everyone who disagrees with them “has an agenda”.
Fuck off, at this point you’re just admitting that you consider any disagreement with you to be inherently invalid: an agenda
Removed by mod
And this is what all your attempts at high minded apologism are reduced to when actually faced with any push back.
You took to abuse and a silly claim on a side thread… and you got a fitting response.
Lol. You lying scumbag; you were the one who started with the abuse and silly claims.
Jesus christ lmao
Oh you are staying consistently cooked & euro-supremacist