I think you’re asserting something with no basis again, making you objectively wrong about that too lmao.

If you just say “I disagree” while having absolutely no grounds for that disagreement then you’re objectively wrong.

Well, there’s nothing you can point to in what I wrote that implies anything about intent so I’d say your disagreement is pretty objectively wrong.

No, I implied nothing. The other person went out of their way to assuage people that just because they were calling out misinformation didn’t mean they’re not on their side - I just stated facts without making any indication about what I thought of OP’s intent. Loyalty and tribalism come before truth. People posting false information have to be reassured that you think they’re great before you correct them. It’s ridiculous.

I said literally nothing about their intent in my comment whatsoever.

If it’s fake news (and it is) then I have every right to say, “Get this fucking bullshit off my feed” (my actual response was quite a bit more measured than that). I shouldn’t have to be like, “Haha! Oh that’s so funny, you’re really smart and clever! Oh, but, fyi, that’s kinda misinformation, just so you know!”

Would you rather listen to the blunt truth or to a friendly lie? If it’s the latter, then that ought to be called out as well as the original point - falling for a fake news story is entirely excusable, but being unwilling to listen to criticism unless it’s phrased nicely and defanged is not.

Shit like this is part of why I use term “Blue MAGA,” because you’ll find the exact same mentality over there. The facts don’t matter, if you don’t demonstrate you’re one of us, we’ll write you off anything you say. Critical thought means listening to criticism, even if it’s, “antagonistic.”

Tfw you say something and everyone hates it and then someone else comes by and says the same thing in a slightly different way and everyone likes it 😑

The term “concentration camps” usually doesn’t refer to places people volunteer to go to. The headline’s clickbait enough as it is.

I did post it there as well.

This is misinformation and a fake quote. What he actually said on that day was:

About the capitalist states, it doesn’t depend on you whether or not we exist. If you don’t like us, don’t accept our invitations, and don’t invite us to come to see you. Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you!

“We will bury you,” was a poor translation. What he meant (which is pretty clear from context) was more like, “We will outlast you,” or “We will be there at your funeral.” He never said anything about “We will take down America without firing a shot” or “We will bury America from within” (how do you “bury someone from within,” anyway?).

Khuschev’s strategy towards the West was called, “peaceful coexistence,” the concept being that it wasn’t necessary to take active steps towards overthrowing Western governments, instead seeking to establish an ammenable working relationship, the belief being that the Soviet system would win out in time while the capitalist system would eventually decay and the proletariat of Western nations would eventually radicalize and rise up on their own. You can say that this wasn’t their real belief or whatever, but it was a major contributing factor towards the Sino-Soviet split, and they were willing to stand by that line to the point of alienating other communist countries.

But regardless of whether you agree with that interpretation or not, this quote isn’t just misinterpreting the quote, it’s outright lying about what was said.

This is misinformation and a fake quote. What he actually said on that day was:

About the capitalist states, it doesn’t depend on you whether or not we exist. If you don’t like us, don’t accept our invitations, and don’t invite us to come to see you. Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you!

“We will bury you,” was a poor translation. What he meant (which is pretty clear from context) was more like, “We will outlast you,” or “We will be there at your funeral.” He never said anything about “We will take down America without firing a shot” or “We will bury America from within” (how do you “bury someone from within,” anyway?).

Khuschev’s strategy towards the West was called, “peaceful coexistence,” the concept being that it wasn’t necessary to take active steps towards overthrowing Western governments, instead seeking to establish an ammenable working relationship, the belief being that the Soviet system would win out in time while the capitalist system would eventually decay and the proletariat of Western nations would eventually radicalize and rise up on their own. You can say that this wasn’t their real belief or whatever, but it was a major contributing factor towards the Sino-Soviet split, and they were willing to stand by that line to the point of alienating other communist countries.

But regardless of whether you agree with that interpretation or not, this quote isn’t just misinterpreting the quote, it’s outright lying about what was said.

It’s always funny to me how the go-to examples of like, “See, they just blindly support anything the regime does!” tend to be relatively minor events after the state in question has considerably chilled out. Like, Stalin and Mao did much worse things compared to Khrushchev/Hungary and Deng/Tienanmen. The problem being, communists are generally willing to criticize things like the Great Leap Forward, because, surprise surprise, we don’t just blindly support anything they do. The reason for this is that the word tankie isn’t meant to describe someone who blindly supports everything a communist country does, as it’s claimed to, but rather, someone who supports anything any communist country does.

The fear Western leftists had that led to the term being coined was that people who had previously been critical of Stalin and Mao would respond positively to the countries moving away from their approach, and so they had to create a label to discredit such people and associate them with the previous leaders. It’s one of the reasons Khrushchev’s approach was questionable, because no matter how much you try to distance yourself from someone like Stalin and paint yourself as “one of the good ones,” you’re still never going to appease the Western left that demands absolute perfection, let alone the West in general.

Realistically you’re right, but also tourists disrespecting the cultural sites they’re visiting is especially grating, particularly when it’s a white guy and in a nonwhite country, and Americans specifically have a reputation for this sort of thing which some of us are embarrassed by and want to distance ourselves from.

Like, if this was a Japanese person who was doing it to spite the imperial family, I’d be totally fine with it, but this guy just seems disrespectful of the culture in general, like, if there was some kind of cultural site dedicated to spiting the emperor, he’d likely deface that just as readily. Practically speaking, whatever punishment is applied to shitty tourists will also be applied to political protestors, so legally it’s better if it’s a slap on the wrist, but we can still say the guy sucks.

What “racist dogwhistles” did I use, exactly?

I’m also a realist, and know that biden bragging about hindering bibi wouldn’t have helped anything.

Yeah? How about not unconditionally sending Bibi a bunch of weapons and money that he used to commit genocide, you think that might have helped anything?

both sides want to fight for their invisible friends more

Ah, of course, the height of liberal analysis of the situation. I’m sure Israel being a settler-colonizer apartheid ethnostate making shit tons of money through exploitation and keeping the Palestinians in a permanent state of helplessness, poverty, and oppression has nothing whatsoever with why the Palestinians are fighting them, no, it’s all because those backwards savages aren’t as smart and rational as you are.

This is what happens when you perform absolutely zero material analysis of anything. You’re completely oblivious and ignorant of both what’s happening and why.

Nothing clownish about me acknowledging the objective reality of an active genocide which you deny being conducted by the “people” you support.

60% of the buildings in Gaza have already been destroyed, with Biden’s unconditional support. Stop doing genocide denial and pretending that your preferred psychopaths aren’t bathing themselves in the blood of Palestinian children every night.

Because Gaza’s been doing so well right now.

What restrictions?

Democrats were never holding them back from expanding, they literally expanded the war into Lebanon under Biden. The only check they ever had are the people on the ground fighting.