4 ms·

Criticising America is nothing new or subversive. Hunter s Thompson was doing it all these years ago and much more interestingly and on point than anyone on her

by juleiie 6mo ago

Criticising America is nothing new or subversive. Hunter s Thompson was doing it all these years ago and much more interestingly and on point than anyone on here could. Day every day the same unoriginal whining because it is hard to call it something as sophisticated as critique, can be heard all over the reddit. While at the same time no one bothers to critique CCP to the same extent because we simply are not paid for doing this. No one is interested in non profit repeating the same facts about china every single day. We are just content knowing that china is not some sort of “saviour” or alternative. It is an enemy of the free world. I try to not use things produced by my adversary to not fund my own doom.

andersonpico 6mo ago
> Criticising America is nothing new or subversive. Hunter s Thompson was doing it all these years ago and much more interestingly and on point than anyone on here could. The existence better critique out there is irrelevant if you don't take the argumentt in front of you on its strenghts. > Day every day the same unoriginal whining because it is hard to call it something as sophisticated as critique, can be heard all over the reddit. Criticism of a country with military bases across the whole world doesn't have to be hip to be correct. No one cares what you think about reddit or how hipster you like your political takes to be and this doesn't exempt you from having to argue about the concrete facts in a discussion forum. > While at the same time no one bothers to critique CCP to the same extent because we simply are not paid for doing this. No one is interested in non profit repeating the same facts about china every single day. You are so wrong about no one criticizing the CCP that's it's difficult to believe that this statement is sincere. Maybe I could attribute it to selection bias as you're on an american forum? There's also a cottage industry around anti-Chinese propaganda besides the western funded government propaganda machine that is in place for the last decades. > We are just content knowing that china is not some sort of “saviour” or alternative. Oh but they are! China is a concrete alternative for an economic partner for most parts of the world, but only if the US doesn't sponsor a military coup or invade your country in response. If they you can get away from Americans threats, China is also a more reliable partner with much more stable policies and much less likely to sabotage your elections, secretly pay your politics and judges and manipulate your markets. > It is an enemy of the free world. I try to not use things produced by my adversary to not fund my own doom. This has no basis in reality. The US is the actual enemy of the free world and has been since ww2: occupying countries, sabotaging their domestic politic disputes, staging military coups, bombings, etc. Whatever justifications for those actions after the fact do not make any other country more free.
- 0xDEAFBEAD 6mo ago
  >military bases across the whole world Another reason I'm eager to leave NATO is leaving will help cut down on our military base count. I expect some Europeans will protest, the same way Kurds protested when Trump pulled us out of Syria: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz-WKu881Yc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz-WKu881Yc We'll have to stay strong and ignore their protests. It's the only way to reduce our military footprint and warmongering tendencies.
  - jicko 6mo ago
    Yeah because obviously the US-Europe relationship is one way, isn't it? NATO exists because the US won't allow any other global hegemon to exist. US backing of Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan are for that same reason. I meant that as a neutral statement; large regional powers also do not like each other when situated too close, that's why India and Russia are friendly, and why Russia and China have a complicated relationship despite both being opposed to the US. Has quite a lot of good also come out of that? To the Europeans, yes. But it's not like the US is doing it from the bottom of their hearts. And it's not like the US ever intervened in the Middle East for anything other than oil, historically. You go there and piss off the hardcore islamists / dictators, and make use of the Kurds as local fighting forces, and then you abandon them to the revenge of said islamists? Ofc they're pissed.
    - 0xDEAFBEAD 6mo ago
      >NATO exists because the US won't allow any other global hegemon to exist. The obvious non-US potential hegemon was China, yet we normalized trade with them, which greatly helped their economy grow. The new one is India. We've been buddying up to them a fair amount as well. The US also played a role in the creation of the EU, arguably a more potent rival hegemon than any individual European state: https://archive.is/VC2zV https://archive.is/VC2zV >Has quite a lot of good also come out of that? To the Europeans, yes. But it's not like the US is doing it from the bottom of their hearts. I don't believe that is true. As I stated elsewhere in this thread, even during the Biden administration, right after Biden sent billions to Ukraine, the US was barely net-positive in approval rating for many European countries: https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2024/06/11/views-of-the-u-s/ https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2024/06/11/views-of-the-u... If a lot of good came out of the relationship from Europe's perspective, you would expect them to approve of the US. And yet they don't. So we can conclude that US presence is a negative for Europe, and it would be best for Europe if US troops and security guarantees were withdrawn. Unsurprisingly, many Europeans have requested this course of action. >And it's not like the US ever intervened in the Middle East for anything other than oil, historically. The Gulf War was rather similar to the Ukraine invasion in the sense of a powerful country (Iraq) invading a weaker neighbor (Kuwait). But you probably think we only aided Ukraine for minerals-related reasons anyways, eh? That's why Europe is aiding Ukraine right now, correct? >make use of the Kurds as local fighting forces So the Kurds and Islamic State are fighting. The US steps in to help the Kurds. At that point we become "warmongers" who are "making use of" the Kurds. It would've been better to stay complicit. After all, the only reason anyone would ever oppose IS is due to oil, right? So that must've been our motivation. Time to stop the warmongering.
alfiedotwtf 6mo ago
Ask people in Iraq, Afghanistan, Venezuela, Cuba, and Greenland if they think America is their saviour and in general do-gooder of the free world.
- 0xDEAFBEAD 6mo ago
  Which people, exactly, are you asking? "That same ice cream shop owner thanked me repeatedly for my help in invading and ultimately overthrowing Saddam Hussein’s regime in 2003. I told him that Canada didn’t take part in the invasion, but he didn’t care. Kurdish people were brutally persecuted by Saddam for over 30 years, and look back on the Saddam years with pure terror. The shop owner refused to take payment for the ice cream and offered that I stay with his family in their apartment upstairs." https://goodperson.substack.com/p/notes-on-my-travels-in-iraq https://goodperson.substack.com/p/notes-on-my-travels-in-ira... In Afghanistan, you saw their desperate attempts to flee the country as the US withdrew. Nonetheless, it was necessary to reduce our warmongering and military footprint. Afghani women being forced into burqas is ultimately not our business. In Venezuela, apparently, the main complaint is that Trump didn't go even further: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/venezuela/article314905965.html https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas... In Cuba, on the subreddit, there is a discussion of Trump saying that "Cuba is next" (after Iran). A mod of the subreddit writes (translated): "I am in Cuba, and I would say that 95% of the people here—those I know or have spoken with—are reacting to this with hope. That is something that many people on the outside do not see." See link below: https://www.reddit.com/r/cuba/comments/1s5s1ip/trump_cuba_is_nextcomment_made_during_iran_war/ https://www.reddit.com/r/cuba/comments/1s5s1ip/trump_cuba_is... And I'm sure you could find a few Greenlandic Inuit who are tired of Danish colonialism as well. My point is that simply "asking people" is not a particularly reliable or effective method. It's much better to stay complicit, reduce military spending, and avoid being a warmonger.
jicko 6mo ago
I don't think people pointing out American hypocrisy are under a delusion that China is a saint. They're just pointing out the hypocrisy. It's also a delusion to think that the world is free under US hegemony. It's mostly better for those who cooperate, and the incentives are good. But it's not "free". The only entity free to do whatever it wants under US hegemony, is the US. The unoriginal whining is mostly about China or any country that isn't the US, really. Asia is unimaginative and can only copy. Europe is lazy, blah blah blah. Because Americans who can't take being told that their country isn't #1 in the morality olympics seem to also not know much about other countries at all. Like look at all the whining about China being communist. It's fcking hilarious. They've been an authoritarian, state-run capitalist country for decades by now. Just google their social spending vs other countries, will you.
Matl 6mo ago
> is not some sort of “saviour” or alternative. It is an enemy of the free world. I try to not use things produced by my adversary to not fund my own doom. Are you aware that this is how America is increasingly perceived around the world? It's not a 'free world' when America dictates and the others are supposed to just take orders. May be you're fine with that, feeling on top of the food chain, but everyone needs friends at some point. What does the 'free' in 'free world' even mean any more? You're not allowed to express your opinion on college campuses anymore, (lack of domestic freedom), and if you're a country, you're increasingly facing trade barriers from the US, (lack of freedom in commerce). I'm not saying that as a sovereign country you don't have a right to impose these restrictions. I simply wish the US would treat other countries as sovereign.
- juleiie 6mo ago
  America is still a democracy. Its leaders may be vile today but they are bound to change. Unlike China. I cannot condemn whole nation on the basis of two elections. That’s the beauty of it all. In a democracy there are no irredeemable nations. There are just phases better or worse. China was always evil and cracked down on anyone who questioned power of highest leader. If you think you are going to convince people that somehow an authoritarian state is preferable to a western liberal democracy in any way then you are foolish. Or paid by the state. I love democracy and I love freedom. I will tirelessly work to oppose people like you until my last breath. That I swear. All the disinformation, all the propaganda will be dispersed at the iron flank of NATO. You will never have this land. Europe is my home and it is free and free will remain till I breathe. So I dare you commies, come here to Poland and try anything. We will crush you and you will see what red really looks like.
  - Matl 6mo ago
    > America is still a democracy. Its leaders may be vile today but they are bound to change. I disagree that it is a democracy. It's a corporatocracy and it's been for decades. But the elections are a nice PR. The Trump thing of not having a PR filter over policies that were there long before him is just making people question whether system a.) is indeed better than system b.); a.) Pseudo democracy where the will of corporations, but not people is implemented and that the people up for elections are so compromised by special interests by the time we get a choice that it doesn't matter anymore i.e. the US and most of the West. b.) A system that does away with the spectacle of national elections, with the social contract being that the leadership better be competent and peruse national interests and development, but is not directly elected i.e. China. That competency is supposed to be ensured by only allowing people who have proven competence at lower levels, (some of which they are directly elected to). There's a question about how sustainable either is. I would prefer a third option c.) where you can elect relatively competent leaders, but that doesn't seem to be an option these days. What Trump is unquestionably doing however, is making a lot of fans of the idealized system of democracy c.) think that perhaps option b.) > a.) even if less than ideal. Just because you call yourself a democracy doesn't mean you're one. Just ask citizens of the DRC.

by juleiie 6mo ago

andersonpico 6mo ago

> Criticising America is nothing new or subversive. Hunter s Thompson was doing it all these years ago and much more interestingly and on point than anyone on here could. The existence better critique out there is irrelevant if you don't take the argumentt in front of you on its strenghts. > Day every day the same unoriginal whining because it is hard to call it something as sophisticated as critique, can be heard all over the reddit. Criticism of a country with military bases across the whole world doesn't have to be hip to be correct. No one cares what you think about reddit or how hipster you like your political takes to be and this doesn't exempt you from having to argue about the concrete facts in a discussion forum. > While at the same time no one bothers to critique CCP to the same extent because we simply are not paid for doing this. No one is interested in non profit repeating the same facts about china every single day. You are so wrong about no one criticizing the CCP that's it's difficult to believe that this statement is sincere. Maybe I could attribute it to selection bias as you're on an american forum? There's also a cottage industry around anti-Chinese propaganda besides the western funded government propaganda machine that is in place for the last decades. > We are just content knowing that china is not some sort of “saviour” or alternative. Oh but they are! China is a concrete alternative for an economic partner for most parts of the world, but only if the US doesn't sponsor a military coup or invade your country in response. If they you can get away from Americans threats, China is also a more reliable partner with much more stable policies and much less likely to sabotage your elections, secretly pay your politics and judges and manipulate your markets. > It is an enemy of the free world. I try to not use things produced by my adversary to not fund my own doom. This has no basis in reality. The US is the actual enemy of the free world and has been since ww2: occupying countries, sabotaging their domestic politic disputes, staging military coups, bombings, etc. Whatever justifications for those actions after the fact do not make any other country more free.

0xDEAFBEAD 6mo ago
>military bases across the whole world Another reason I'm eager to leave NATO is leaving will help cut down on our military base count. I expect some Europeans will protest, the same way Kurds protested when Trump pulled us out of Syria: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz-WKu881Yc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz-WKu881Yc We'll have to stay strong and ignore their protests. It's the only way to reduce our military footprint and warmongering tendencies.
- jicko 6mo ago
  Yeah because obviously the US-Europe relationship is one way, isn't it? NATO exists because the US won't allow any other global hegemon to exist. US backing of Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan are for that same reason. I meant that as a neutral statement; large regional powers also do not like each other when situated too close, that's why India and Russia are friendly, and why Russia and China have a complicated relationship despite both being opposed to the US. Has quite a lot of good also come out of that? To the Europeans, yes. But it's not like the US is doing it from the bottom of their hearts. And it's not like the US ever intervened in the Middle East for anything other than oil, historically. You go there and piss off the hardcore islamists / dictators, and make use of the Kurds as local fighting forces, and then you abandon them to the revenge of said islamists? Ofc they're pissed.
  - 0xDEAFBEAD 6mo ago
    >NATO exists because the US won't allow any other global hegemon to exist. The obvious non-US potential hegemon was China, yet we normalized trade with them, which greatly helped their economy grow. The new one is India. We've been buddying up to them a fair amount as well. The US also played a role in the creation of the EU, arguably a more potent rival hegemon than any individual European state: https://archive.is/VC2zV https://archive.is/VC2zV >Has quite a lot of good also come out of that? To the Europeans, yes. But it's not like the US is doing it from the bottom of their hearts. I don't believe that is true. As I stated elsewhere in this thread, even during the Biden administration, right after Biden sent billions to Ukraine, the US was barely net-positive in approval rating for many European countries: https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2024/06/11/views-of-the-u-s/ https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2024/06/11/views-of-the-u... If a lot of good came out of the relationship from Europe's perspective, you would expect them to approve of the US. And yet they don't. So we can conclude that US presence is a negative for Europe, and it would be best for Europe if US troops and security guarantees were withdrawn. Unsurprisingly, many Europeans have requested this course of action. >And it's not like the US ever intervened in the Middle East for anything other than oil, historically. The Gulf War was rather similar to the Ukraine invasion in the sense of a powerful country (Iraq) invading a weaker neighbor (Kuwait). But you probably think we only aided Ukraine for minerals-related reasons anyways, eh? That's why Europe is aiding Ukraine right now, correct? >make use of the Kurds as local fighting forces So the Kurds and Islamic State are fighting. The US steps in to help the Kurds. At that point we become "warmongers" who are "making use of" the Kurds. It would've been better to stay complicit. After all, the only reason anyone would ever oppose IS is due to oil, right? So that must've been our motivation. Time to stop the warmongering.

alfiedotwtf 6mo ago

Ask people in Iraq, Afghanistan, Venezuela, Cuba, and Greenland if they think America is their saviour and in general do-gooder of the free world.

0xDEAFBEAD 6mo ago
Which people, exactly, are you asking? "That same ice cream shop owner thanked me repeatedly for my help in invading and ultimately overthrowing Saddam Hussein’s regime in 2003. I told him that Canada didn’t take part in the invasion, but he didn’t care. Kurdish people were brutally persecuted by Saddam for over 30 years, and look back on the Saddam years with pure terror. The shop owner refused to take payment for the ice cream and offered that I stay with his family in their apartment upstairs." https://goodperson.substack.com/p/notes-on-my-travels-in-iraq https://goodperson.substack.com/p/notes-on-my-travels-in-ira... In Afghanistan, you saw their desperate attempts to flee the country as the US withdrew. Nonetheless, it was necessary to reduce our warmongering and military footprint. Afghani women being forced into burqas is ultimately not our business. In Venezuela, apparently, the main complaint is that Trump didn't go even further: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/venezuela/article314905965.html https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas... In Cuba, on the subreddit, there is a discussion of Trump saying that "Cuba is next" (after Iran). A mod of the subreddit writes (translated): "I am in Cuba, and I would say that 95% of the people here—those I know or have spoken with—are reacting to this with hope. That is something that many people on the outside do not see." See link below: https://www.reddit.com/r/cuba/comments/1s5s1ip/trump_cuba_is_nextcomment_made_during_iran_war/ https://www.reddit.com/r/cuba/comments/1s5s1ip/trump_cuba_is... And I'm sure you could find a few Greenlandic Inuit who are tired of Danish colonialism as well. My point is that simply "asking people" is not a particularly reliable or effective method. It's much better to stay complicit, reduce military spending, and avoid being a warmonger.

jicko 6mo ago

I don't think people pointing out American hypocrisy are under a delusion that China is a saint. They're just pointing out the hypocrisy. It's also a delusion to think that the world is free under US hegemony. It's mostly better for those who cooperate, and the incentives are good. But it's not "free". The only entity free to do whatever it wants under US hegemony, is the US. The unoriginal whining is mostly about China or any country that isn't the US, really. Asia is unimaginative and can only copy. Europe is lazy, blah blah blah. Because Americans who can't take being told that their country isn't #1 in the morality olympics seem to also not know much about other countries at all. Like look at all the whining about China being communist. It's fcking hilarious. They've been an authoritarian, state-run capitalist country for decades by now. Just google their social spending vs other countries, will you.

Matl 6mo ago

> is not some sort of “saviour” or alternative. It is an enemy of the free world. I try to not use things produced by my adversary to not fund my own doom. Are you aware that this is how America is increasingly perceived around the world? It's not a 'free world' when America dictates and the others are supposed to just take orders. May be you're fine with that, feeling on top of the food chain, but everyone needs friends at some point. What does the 'free' in 'free world' even mean any more? You're not allowed to express your opinion on college campuses anymore, (lack of domestic freedom), and if you're a country, you're increasingly facing trade barriers from the US, (lack of freedom in commerce). I'm not saying that as a sovereign country you don't have a right to impose these restrictions. I simply wish the US would treat other countries as sovereign.

juleiie 6mo ago
America is still a democracy. Its leaders may be vile today but they are bound to change. Unlike China. I cannot condemn whole nation on the basis of two elections. That’s the beauty of it all. In a democracy there are no irredeemable nations. There are just phases better or worse. China was always evil and cracked down on anyone who questioned power of highest leader. If you think you are going to convince people that somehow an authoritarian state is preferable to a western liberal democracy in any way then you are foolish. Or paid by the state. I love democracy and I love freedom. I will tirelessly work to oppose people like you until my last breath. That I swear. All the disinformation, all the propaganda will be dispersed at the iron flank of NATO. You will never have this land. Europe is my home and it is free and free will remain till I breathe. So I dare you commies, come here to Poland and try anything. We will crush you and you will see what red really looks like.
- Matl 6mo ago
  > America is still a democracy. Its leaders may be vile today but they are bound to change. I disagree that it is a democracy. It's a corporatocracy and it's been for decades. But the elections are a nice PR. The Trump thing of not having a PR filter over policies that were there long before him is just making people question whether system a.) is indeed better than system b.); a.) Pseudo democracy where the will of corporations, but not people is implemented and that the people up for elections are so compromised by special interests by the time we get a choice that it doesn't matter anymore i.e. the US and most of the West. b.) A system that does away with the spectacle of national elections, with the social contract being that the leadership better be competent and peruse national interests and development, but is not directly elected i.e. China. That competency is supposed to be ensured by only allowing people who have proven competence at lower levels, (some of which they are directly elected to). There's a question about how sustainable either is. I would prefer a third option c.) where you can elect relatively competent leaders, but that doesn't seem to be an option these days. What Trump is unquestionably doing however, is making a lot of fans of the idealized system of democracy c.) think that perhaps option b.) > a.) even if less than ideal. Just because you call yourself a democracy doesn't mean you're one. Just ask citizens of the DRC.