3 ms·

Western "democracies" at work. Constantly criticizing foreign dictatorships only to hypocritically play their same game, just a bit slower.

miroljub 4y ago
Why is this downvoted? Isn't the UK government one of the prone to look at everyone else from the high horse and criticize the shit out of any "authoritarian regime" while doing the same thing in some of the areas? Heck, the country where I grow up is classified as a "hybrid regime" by the UK government, and yet, they don't even think about implementing encryption backdoors or censoring and blocking any media.
- pastacacioepepe 4y ago
  > Heck, the country where I grow up is classified as a "hybrid regime" by the UK government, and yet, they don't even think about implementing encryption backdoors or censoring and blocking any media. It's because the patent of democracy was never granted by the west based on a country actual values, but rather on their subservience to the imperialist system that keeps the west in power. We happily partner with dictators if they play our game and disrupt democracies if they don't.
- isaacremuant 4y ago
  It's downvoted because the propaganda suggests that "it's different when we do it". It works for everything, for atrocities, wars, privacy invasions, freedom curtailment, human rights abuses, police violence, etc.
  - miroljub 4y ago
    > It's downvoted because the propaganda suggests that "it's different when we do it". Isn't it how it always works? When we[1] do it, it's a "humanitarian intervention" or "special military intervention" or "to protect human rights" or "spread democracy" or "prevent genocide" or "protect the women and children", but when they[2] do it, it's an "aggression", "genocide", "atrocities", "crime against humanity". [1][2] feel free to pick any side here, dosen't matter. We == good, they == evil, for any we and they.
- danaris 4y ago
  It's downvoted because it implies that this is generally true of Western democracies—that they're not actually any better than foreign dictatorships, as a category.

miroljub 4y ago

Why is this downvoted? Isn't the UK government one of the prone to look at everyone else from the high horse and criticize the shit out of any "authoritarian regime" while doing the same thing in some of the areas? Heck, the country where I grow up is classified as a "hybrid regime" by the UK government, and yet, they don't even think about implementing encryption backdoors or censoring and blocking any media.

pastacacioepepe 4y ago
> Heck, the country where I grow up is classified as a "hybrid regime" by the UK government, and yet, they don't even think about implementing encryption backdoors or censoring and blocking any media. It's because the patent of democracy was never granted by the west based on a country actual values, but rather on their subservience to the imperialist system that keeps the west in power. We happily partner with dictators if they play our game and disrupt democracies if they don't.
isaacremuant 4y ago
It's downvoted because the propaganda suggests that "it's different when we do it". It works for everything, for atrocities, wars, privacy invasions, freedom curtailment, human rights abuses, police violence, etc.
- miroljub 4y ago
  > It's downvoted because the propaganda suggests that "it's different when we do it". Isn't it how it always works? When we[1] do it, it's a "humanitarian intervention" or "special military intervention" or "to protect human rights" or "spread democracy" or "prevent genocide" or "protect the women and children", but when they[2] do it, it's an "aggression", "genocide", "atrocities", "crime against humanity". [1][2] feel free to pick any side here, dosen't matter. We == good, they == evil, for any we and they.
danaris 4y ago
It's downvoted because it implies that this is generally true of Western democracies—that they're not actually any better than foreign dictatorships, as a category.