When we do it, it's only a "pseudo-occupation"

When Nazi Germany occupied France, was it only a "pseudo-occupation" because the Panzers then "protected" the occupied territory from the British? What a ridiculous line of logic.

Right wing people tend to be subservient and just fall in line and vote Republican. People on the left tend to be less pragmatic

People are always saying this, but is there actually evidence that it's true? The Libertarian Party regularly gets more votes than the Greens, so if anything it seems like the opposite is true. Ross Perot got the most votes of any third party candidate in history, and in both the elections he ran in, Bill Clinton won. In 2016, Trump refused to rule out the possibility of a third party run if he didn't get the nomination, and it appeared to be a serious possibility.

So is this claim just based on vibes or what?

Yes, it would be bad to start another war somewhere else.

Name one time when that's happened.

It's much more likely that they're ordinary people acting according to well known psychological patterns of tribalism. People can hold different beliefs or values without being paid actors.

I am not a soulist. In fact, I consider it to be an extremely dangerous ideology. If you're successful in undermining consensus reality, we're going to have dragons and vampires running around terrorizing people. The moment reality becomes mutable enough for someone to turn themselves into something with mind control powers, like a mind flayer, we're all fucked.

I am trans and neurodivergent, and I take offense at this statement:

Obviously, soulism is more attractive to any trans person than realism, because it offers faster and more complete transition than any realist ideology.

Trans identities are not a rejection of reality. I don't find your ideology appealing in the slightest. I believe in objective science, and the science is 100% on the side of trans people.

I don’t keep links for things I don’t need.

This website has a search function. Searching "Khmer Rouge Justified" returns precisely 5 comments, none of which were claiming it was justified or responding to someone claiming it was justified. "Khmer Rouge Wall" likewise turned up nothing of note. Liar.

Almost everybody has seen MLs call it justified, it takes only one case.

Great! Anyone is welcome to chime in and provide evidence. Where is it? Liar.

accusing others of lying in the same comment you are asking for proof in,

That... that's not at all contradictory lmao. Liar.

I think everybody reading this has a measure of you.

Given your comments about how drowning puppies is justified, which everyone's definitely seen but which I have precisely zero evidence of, I think you're the one everyone has a measure of.

How could you say that?

Puppies? Really? Wow.

Ofc, I won't provide evidence, because as you're a puppy murderer, I don't respect you and won't play by your terms. Liar.

There's nothing remotely ridiculous about saying that an apartheid ethnostate does not have a right to exist.

I don't doubt that there were some cases of the government overstepping, or that you can find a couple people out of the hundreds of millions who are dissatisfied. But the figure of hundred of millions refers to people who were living in extreme poverty, which is defined as less than $2 per day, some of the poorest people on the planet. That's not a lifestyle that's worth preserving.

Coming back from that tangent though, am I correct that the general economic system and the existence of billionaires are not the problems that you have with China?

It's like when Republicans call everything to the left of them "woke," but the Democrat version.

Ranked Choice only matters when you’ve got a third position that successfully triangulates between the other two positions.

Hold it!

Uhh...

What on earth are you talking about?

they will take it as an insult if you call them socialist.

Do you have any evidence to support this testimony?