this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2023
127 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13538 readers
786 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Just reposting this excellent point from lemmygrad

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] a_blanqui_slate@hexbear.net 6 points 1 year ago (16 children)

How are we supposed to convince people of our vision of a better world if we can't even get the easy stuff like "don't murder children" down? Christ even the liberals have the sense to pretend to feel bad about drones strikes on weddings when pressed.

[–] Egon@hexbear.net 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

I also think murdering children is bad. I think the specific situation with royal family of a monarchy is significantly different. Reducing my opinion to "machinegun kids lol" strikes me as very bad faith.
Either way I don't really think what you and I think of the murder of a royal family more than 100 years ago matters enough to get into an argument that can only sour relations. Seems unproductive. I apologise for making the mistake of stoking this argument.

[–] a_blanqui_slate@hexbear.net 6 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I'm not looking to sour relations and am not going to take your position on the matter personally, and it's not that you stoked this argument, it's that I'm actively evangilizing a humanism first leftism. I think as soon as machine gunning kids enters into the political toolkit, regardless of what problems it resolves, we've lost the plot. Whatever nuance you want to inject into the scenario is fine, but at the end of the day it does boil down to you thinking that under certain circumstances it's acceptable, so I don't think I'm unfairly characterizing your position at all.

[–] supplier@hexbear.net 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

literal infanticide becomes a political necessity as a product of MONARCHY

If they wanted their children to be safe, then they should not have forced them to be the sole inheritors of a brutal dictatorship

[–] a_blanqui_slate@hexbear.net 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

political necessity

Just because people stomp up and down about 'political necessity' doesn't actually conjure that ideological abstraction up into material reality. China didn't machine gun Pu Yi and incidentally, their communist party is still running the show. I don't know how difficult it is not to machine gun a 13 year old, and no amount of "you made me do this" are going to change the fact that we're the ones making the (erroneous) decision to machine gun 13 year olds.

Kind to people, ruthless to systems, folks.

[–] Rod_Blagojevic@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If Chinese rebels new this online argument was going to happen they probably would've killed whoever this guy is that they let live.

[–] Harrison@ttrpg.network 5 points 1 year ago

whoever this guy is that they let live.

The last "Emperor" of China

[–] a_blanqui_slate@hexbear.net 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I mean they literally let him live after being a Japanese puppet during their atrocity spree in the 30's and 40's, so I think my dumb ass using him as a morality puppet would seem just about par for the course to them.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)