this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2023
154 points (100.0% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15914 readers
9 users here now

It's the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I apparently skipped level ??? and went straight to believing the Black Book is fascist propaganda. I didn’t realize I was supposed to stan Pol Pot first!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GorbinOutOverHere@hexbear.net 70 points 1 year ago (24 children)

I have literally never seen anyone defend the Khmer Rouge, ever lol

[–] CriticalResist8@hexbear.net 22 points 1 year ago (2 children)

you can find them but they're fringe. Usually weirdos who are just dipping their toes in marxism and think the khmer rouge must have been lied about, and then outright weirdo agendaposters there to wreck communism with their terrible takes. You can spot the latter because they're historical revisionists outright, like cherry-picking quotes and parts of documents that support their narrative and usually nothing more substantial to offer if you press them.

[–] GorbinOutOverHere@hexbear.net 13 points 1 year ago

I'm just saying I ain't never seent it

[–] DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 1 year ago

Yeah, I've seen a depressingly large number of the first lot. (Though that number is still only in the low double digits, any is really a depressing number).

I think it is as simple as them being idealists. They've "read Pol Pot" or whatever and assume that because he wrote something halfway decent on paper, all the of the actual actions of the Khmer Rouge are irrelevant.

Alternatively they might take the attitude of "the west lies about every other AES, therefore everything bad that happened in Cambodia was also a lie."

load more comments (21 replies)