this post was submitted on 05 Jan 2024
132 points (100.0% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15910 readers
23 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
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] theposterformerlyknownasgood@hexbear.net 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I guess it must have felt really important for you to make that distinction.

it is in fact very important to make the distinction between the crime of genocide and revolutionary violence targeting an institution that is itself engaged in genocide, yes. That's important. I don't know why this is confusing to you. The majority of the people involved in revolutionary violence against the fascists were themselves of the same population group as the targeted priests, sharing the same ethnic and religious background.

If I said "The execution of the Romanov family by the Bolsheviks meets the formal definition of regicide" do you think I'm saying "I personally condemn the act of executing the Tsar" or do you think I'm saying "This act met the criteria for regicide"?

Again, this does not meet the definition of genocide. It is not genocide. No one but you thinks this is genocide. The fascists have not made that case, the catholic church have not made that case, historians don't make this case, the UN doesn't make this case, the ICC doesn't make this case, no one but you. You are sitting on an argument so fucking stupid that you are possibly the only person who has ever made it, and declaring how actually if you call this argument dumb you're arguing with consensus reality.

You're shadow-boxing and you've convinced yourself that you're actually engaging in argumentation.

You're an idiot and trying to flip the script on who the idiot here won't save you from being a fucking moron.

[โ€“] ReadFanon@hexbear.net 10 points 10 months ago

it is in fact very important to make the distinction between the crime of genocide and revolutionary violence targeting an institution that is itself engaged in genocide, yes.

Where have I said that "targeting an institution is genocide"?

The Catholic church was suppressed through legal and extralegal means. In many cases churches and religious orders were liquidated. Nowhere did I mention these things as being part of genocide.

The majority of the people involved in revolutionary violence against the fascists were themselves of the same population group as the targeted priests, sharing the same ethnic and religious background.

Hutu militias targeted Hutu moderates during the Rwandan genocide.

Sharing an "ethnic and religious background" isn't some escape clause for genocide. Most of the people on this site have a "Christian background", however the fuck you're actually going to define that tortured phrasing, but that doesn't mean that they are Christians.

If I said "The execution of the Romanov family by the Bolsheviks meets the formal definition of regicide" do you think I'm saying "I personally condemn the act of executing the Tsar" or do you think I'm saying "This act met the criteria for regicide"?

Again, this does not meet the definition of genocide. It is not genocide.

Regicide is different to genocide but go off.

No one but you thinks this is genocide.

Like I said, it meets the definition of genocide. Why are you still confused between statements of fact and statements of opinion?

I can tell you what beliefs are heretical to the Catholic church. I can literally tell you whether something you believe would meet the definition of heresy to a Catholic. That does not mean that therefore I think that your beliefs are heretical or that you are a heretic.

[CW: SA]

Up until recently in law it was legal in most countries to have unconsensual sex with your wife.

If someone asked me "Do you think that in America, a husband forcing his wife to have sex in 1953 met the definition of rape?" I would say no.

If you asked me if I believe it was rape, I would say yes.

Yelling out loud meets the definition of ejaculation. I don't think that people exclaiming things is ejaculation.

Are you so incapable of grasping the distinction between statements of fact and statements of opinion or are you just unable to hold two separate positions on a topic as being true in your mind?

You are sitting on an argument so fucking stupid that you are possibly the only person who has ever made it, and declaring how actually if you call this argument dumb you're arguing with consensus reality.

Yep. I sure did say this and I sure did claim that the consensus reality is that it was genocide. Good point, shadow-boxer!