Always the same map.
Having a metropolis is not exempt from being under oppression.
Would you show pictures of skyscrapers in the middle east to compare its human rights?
Most Marxist-Leninists are skeptical of the Uyghur genocide narrative because the scant evidence we’re given comes from spurious sources like Adrian Zenz and an Australian weapons makers think tank called the ASPI. We’re also well-versed in the American empire’s history of hurling manufactured atrocity propaganda at its geopolitical rivals.
Ignore the photographs of Xinjiang and Gaza. Just look at the maps to the left. They show that the only countries against China on the Uyghur issue are the exact same colonizing countries which are trying to subjugate the Global South on every other issue. We think this isn’t a coincidence.
Under oppression of what? Of CIA-backed terrorist attacks being suppressed? Oh the huge manatee.
The accusation wasn’t human rights abuses, the accusation was genocide.
The propaganda trick here is to throw out a henious story, completely fail to back it up with evidence, then gradually retreat to a far less damning accusation that’s essentially impossible to disprove. The smear sticks with most people and you then see how much of the lie you can get away with depending on the crowd.
Because the people living in the many apartment towers in the top image aren’t being targeted in a literal Final Solution supported by the exact same powers that cry crocodile tears over made-up claims of “genocide in Xinjiang”.
Also the Uyghurs living in Xinjiang are Chinese citizens, meaning the accusation of colonisation falls flat on its face.
Death to ameriKKKa, Death to piSSrael
UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_the_Rights_of_the_Child
Which Country is the Greatest Threat to Peace? (Gallup, 2018)
UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
Fun fact: The US votes against that one because it prohibits giving the death penalty to minors.
Yeah.
I mean it’s not surprising in the least, well maybe that they do go into such technicalities while killing millions of children around the world.
Ukrainians viewing the US only to be used by them to fight a proxy war is sad to see.
Is that an Egyptian flag on France ?
Whoops, thanks, that makes more sense
It’s funny because it’s the same map as all the “Free world vs unfree world” maps
Love these colonizer index maps
Equal shame for all the countries that abstained. There is not a damn chance any country is genuinely unsure how they want to vote so an abstain vote in this case is just “I want to vote against but am too embarrassed to.”
Which happens to be the entire West, not a single country commonly considered “Western” voted in favour. Surprise surprise
We had a shitstorm in Poland over this, it’s extremely shameful that a country that suffered so much from nazism did voted like that, but government just responded “EU decided this”
9·7 months agoAbsolutely, the only country that might have suffered more at the hands of the Nazis is the Soviet Union. In raw numbers Poland has the 3rd largest number of deaths in WW2, in % of 1939 population it is first.
When your support for a country is so blind and unconditional that you can support genocide.
Statement of the Spanish public TV RTVE in Eurovision
Abstaining knowing the US will vote no is also voting no.
Germany has truly lost its way not siding with its broskis USA and Turkey
That resolution probably broke Deutschland’s brain, because although it was a resolution against glorifying nazism, it was also against other forms of discrimination, which they’re cool with.
Fuck I got double vision
So…. Anyone want to sponsor me for a work visa outside the USA? This ship is sinking and I’m surrounded by racist assholes apparently, and I want out!! Seriously….
Ok, why did Ukraine vote against?
Because when the vote was cast, Western Ukrainian Banderites were in power. Previously in this post.
Because the US installed nazi-sympathizing government in 2014: https://forward.com/news/462916/nazi-collaborator-monuments-in-ukraine/
I’m guessing, based purely on the countries highlighted, that this is a Russian sponsored resolution.
There are plenty of more genuine resolutions you could’ve picked, but they wouldn’t have fit your narrative as well. Please don’t launder Russia’s lies just to embellish your point.
“If Russia says Nazis are bad, than Nazis must be good!”
Liberal politics is just reaction.
I love it, it leads to epic blunders like having an homage to a nazi in Canada.
There’s at least one Nazi who fought in the SS buried in the Arlington Cemetery in DC.
Yeah, but they just expunge that from their collective memory.
I said the resolution is bad, not the principle. You’re again misrepresenting something to further your own narrative.
So the content is the resolution is good, but its nonetheless contacted some kind of metaphysical badness unrelated to it’s content due to it being proposed by a bad guy and not a good guy.
Maybe we can get it proposed by Israel instead, then it would be a good guy presenting it because they only invade non-white countries
Russia wrote it for a reason. Think for a few seconds on why that might be.
And please stop lumping me in with the imperialist crowd. I’m anti-imperialism, but unlike some of y’all I (rhetorically) oppose all imperialism not just western imperialism.
So the content is the resolution is good, but its nonetheless contacted some kind of metaphysical badness unrelated to it’s content due to it being proposed by a bad guy and not a good guy.
I’m anti-imperialism, but unlike some of y’all I (rhetorically) oppose all imperialism not just western imperialism.
“Unlike you, I believe that all lives matter, not just black ones”
I never said the content of the resolution is good. I haven’t read it. I’m just assuming it isn’t since Russia sponsored it. And even if it is actually good, the hypocrisy of the Russians sponsoring a condemnation of Nazism is notable.
Just because a country is anti-American doesn’t mean it’s anti-evil. I shouldn’t need to explain this. I don’t know why I even tried. This isn’t worth it. You’re not acting in good faith. Drawing a false equivalency between “all lives matter” and “all colonialism is bad”. Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine is bad. Israel’s genocide of Palestinians is bad. America is bad. All three things can be true at once, the world isn’t black and white. Seriously what level of Reddit-brain must you have to try to say stuff like this.
I should really just mute this whole conversation. I’m gonna look for the button.
And even if it is actually good, the hypocrisy of the Russians sponsoring a condemnation of Nazism is notable.
Elaborate?
I’m just assuming it isn’t since Russia sponsored it.
Ok, I’m just going to not read your comments and assume they’re bad because your a westerner.
the hypocrisy of the Russians sponsoring a condemnation of Nazism is notable.
What a disgusting thing to say.
You’re not acting in good faith.
Can I ask a serious question? Who is it that told you idiots that any disagreement is “bad faith”? Because you all deploy this exact phrase, word for word, any time anyone disagrees with you. It’s your favourite thought terminating cliche.
Drawing a false equivalency between “all lives matter” and “all colonialism is bad”.
It’s a completely apt equivalence, you just don’t want it to be.
Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine is bad. Israel’s genocide of Palestinians is bad. America is bad. All three things can be true at once, the world isn’t black and white. Seriously what level of Reddit-brain must you have to try to say stuff like this.
What the fuck is this complete non-sequitor? Not to mention it runs counter to your position up to know (“if Russia says Nazis bad, then Nazis good”)
the world isn’t black and white.
Your whole argument is that Russia is bad, so anything they do is bad! That’s the most black and white argument imaginable!
I should really just mute this whole conversation. I’m gonna look for the button.
Google Satre’s quote about anti-Semites
Russia is at war with nazis currently. Of course they have the most to gain from condemning nazism.
Russia wrote it for a reason. Think for a few seconds on why that might be.
Because NATO put a bunch of Nazis in its command structure and the U.S. has backed various fascists countless times in the last 80 years, so it would put the western alliance in an embarrassing spot.
That’s like half of politics: trying to embarass your opponents into backing off various positions.
I’m guessing, based purely on the countries highlighted, that this is a Russian sponsored resolution.
Pretty funny how you saw that all of Latin America, Africa, and Asia voted against genocide, and your first reaction is to call them russian bots.
More that Ukraine voted against it and every single Western country abstained. Was I wrong though?
We can’t condemn the Nazis because if we condemn the Nazis people will think we’re Nazis. When people see that we won’t condemn the Nazis, that’s how they’ll know we aren’t Nazis.
This is a weak ass excuse collaborator. You get the pit too.
The resolution was explicitly designed to justify Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, an act condemned by 141 countries (ES-11/1) including many that voted for the above resolution. Voting for a resolution condemning Nazi’s, written by a Nazi regime and designed to frame their opponents as Nazi’s themself … I’ll leave it up to you on how you would view that.
If you want to frame the West as evil, you can without being misleading, ES-10/21 is a resolution drafted by Jordan calling for the condemnation of Israel’s genocide in Gaza. That was abstained on by most Western countries and voted against by the USA and Hungary. Many countries cited wanting an “explicit condemnation of Hamas” as their reason, and that is what I’d call a weak ass excuse.
The first instance of this resolution is A/C.3/68/L.65 from November 2013.
I did not know that and don’t know enough to respond. I’ll leave this conversation to the other guy who actually knows what he’s talking about.
Owned
I would like to encourage more people on this platform to humbly bow out and respond with integrity when they don’t know versus the “20 replies of arguments” that drown out the conversation. You might be correct but I think your response is in poor form (unless we’re just celebrating being the lowest parts of social media).
And all it took was someone responding with actual information, instead of 20 people responding with a straw man attack.
You admitted you never even read the resolution in the first place, and just assumed it based on “Russia bad”. No one strawmanned you, you just shout the name of random fallacies as a thought terminating cliche
Not knowing enough to respond never stopped you before, given you were making claims about the content of a resolution you admitted you didn’t know the content of
Lol stay stupid patriot
