522

God help them. The slaughter to come is probably beyond our imagining

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] a_blanqui_slate@hexbear.net 11 points 1 year ago

Man the Romanov children struggle session was wild.

[-] MemesAreTheory@hexbear.net 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Lmao I unfortunately have to draw a distinction between civilians in a war zone and inheritors of a monarchical state. But you did catch me out in a semantic contradiction. Such is the price of conciseness sometimes.

[-] SixSidedUrsine@hexbear.net 16 points 1 year ago

Contradiction indeed. "Legitimizing violence against children and juveniles is not a good look. Oh wait, no, those ones are ok to kill because of the specific power their parents had."

[-] MemesAreTheory@hexbear.net 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Hey comrade, there's material differences between the God-ordained ruler of an institution that takes that sort of thing seriously and children who don't have the power of an entire state (and the implied entitlement over the lives and labors of the literal serfs it contains) as part of their inheritance. Sorry you're missing the forest for the trees here, but that's not on me. Are the children of monarchs more culpable than kids of civilians? No, probably not. Are they a greater material risk/threat by an exponential factor? Yes absolutely.

[-] SixSidedUrsine@hexbear.net 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

There are material differences pointed out by ComradeCmdrPiggy that you conveniently ignored to make a blanket statement like "making apologisms for violence against teenagers you've lost the plot." Turns out, you just draw the line at the killing of children in different material circumstances than both I and ComradeCmdrPiggy do. And your lines have more to do with some vague future potential than the actual immediate threat to those fighting for the liberation of their people. You can say I'm missing the forest for the trees, but by your own admission, you're the one contradicting yourself.

edit: fixed a word (blanket, not blatant).

[-] MemesAreTheory@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago

Keyword, semantic contradiction. If you're going to take my good grace acknowledgement of unspecificity as inherently contradictory in my intent then you're not engaging in good faith and I invite you to fuck off. I'm not interested in re-litigating the entire Romanov struggle session. Accept my 'mea culpa' and move on to matters affecting actual children today instead of literally events from over 100 years ago please. Put your guns away comrade, we're on the same side today.

Consider this a response to both your comments under mine and @a_blanqui_slate@hexbear.net's contributions so far. I endorse their good humor and recognition of the futility of resorting to debate-broism in this moment/place.

[-] SixSidedUrsine@hexbear.net 9 points 1 year ago

I invite you to fuck off.

Likewise. But while you're at it, I'd also invite you to do some self crit and examine the contradiction and the "mea culpa" you correctly admitted to.

move on to matters affecting actual children today instead of literally events from over 100 years ago please.

This is more than just an academic question for some of us, even though it may be just that for you. And please don't pretend like I'm the one focusing on what happened 100 years ago when everything I've said is about what's going on right now.

But fine, I am taking the above comment as a "disengage" so I'm doing the same.

Uncritical support to the Palestinian resistance freedom fighters against the genocidal occupation. palestine-strong

[-] MemesAreTheory@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I acknowledge the implication of your objection and implied contradiction on my part, I simply recognize what I actually intended with my original statement and don't care to trudge through the entire matter of the Romanovs again because I failed to put a, what I take to be, unnecessary carve out to my concise line above. This isn't an oversight on my part, it's a product of not typing a thesis. Our primary struggle today is not with kings/queens/their successors. My day job also literally pertains to evaluating these matters of culpability in, not exactly the same, but similar, circumstances. Self-defense law, just-war theory, and other matters of similar philosophical/legal significance are not something I have a coarse understanding of. You and I have a difference of opinion on an empirical matter (practical importance of executing a monarchy's line), and one which neither of us are in a real position to provide the evidence to back up. Such is the way of history sometimes shrug-outta-hecks

And I did not say disengage because I did not intend it. I meant it as a shot across the bow about reading into statements too literally, debate-bro technicalities, and picking fights where they don't need to be. I'd rather not walk away with the verbal equivalent of PPB on the table.

[-] a_blanqui_slate@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Nope nope nope I can't do this again shut it down. I was making a joke.

[-] SixSidedUrsine@hexbear.net 12 points 1 year ago

Just because you started (and were on the correct side) of that struggle session doesn't make you the arbiter of what gets discussed, weirdo. This IS the wrong place to bring up the Romanov kids struggle session, as you did. But pointing out the contradiction (which tbf he did himself point out as well) in someone's arguments about what's happening right now is not doing that.

ComradeCmdrPiggy isn't wrong - if a 15 year-old Israeli kid is, for example, pointing a gun at a Palestinian freedom fighter, no one should expect the Palestinian not to protect themselves and the necessary struggle for their liberation in whatever way possible. If that same kid is huddled down and simply trying not to die, but is present because their parents are colonizers, killing that kid would be fucking heinous. Someone enters this conversation with the understandable and justifiable take of "I'm in favor of Palestine engaging in violent resistance, but if you're going to start making apologisms for violence against teenagers you've lost the plot." That's great, but then that person proceeds to say "well if that huddled, non-threatening, prisoner kid might inherit a dangerous position, they're fair game. Scratch what I said earlier about apologisms for violence against teenagers being bad." Pointing out the fact they've completely undermined themselves with respect to what they're saying about this conflict right now isn't just fair game, it's completely relevant and on topic.

[-] a_blanqui_slate@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago

Pointing out the fact they've completely undermined themselves with respect to what they're saying about this conflict conflict right now isn't just fair game, it's completely relevant and on topic.

It doesn't though, cause it's easily fixed with an ad hoc carve out, and in order to explore whether or not that ad hoc carve out stands up to scrutiny will, in substantial effect, involve reopening the Romanov struggle session and the justifications within it. Something both of us agreed shouldn't happen.

[-] SixSidedUrsine@hexbear.net 10 points 1 year ago

If you think this conversation shouldn't be had here, then stop commenting on it and perpetuating it. sans-shrug

[-] a_blanqui_slate@hexbear.net 5 points 1 year ago

I can't believe you've done this.

this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2023
522 points (100.0% liked)

news

23564 readers
667 users here now

Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.

Rules:

-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --

-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --

-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --

-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --

-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--

-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--

-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --

-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS