“Normie” is related to “normal”, “tankie” is related to “tanks”. The word “lib”, which I use, is a shortening of “liberal”. I could make up a slur to refer to liberals such as “dronies” referring to drone strikes by the Obama administration they support, or “bombies” for supporting Europe when it bombed Iraq and Libya and Yugoslavia. I hope it’s self-explanatory that the word “tankie” is explicitly a lot more violent.
You can absolutely be pro-public transit without also endorsing or excusing all the other shit
Yes, that’s what people usually do when they praise Dutch bike cities for example. Bringing Netherlands as an example doesn’t mean you condone Netherlands being the heir state to a genocidal empire. Bringing up China in the context of public transit should be regarded well.
Now, if there were precedents of mass imprisonment, law abuse, discrimination, and outright murder of communists, my argument would hold. Oh, wait, the red scare happened, and McCarthyism, and mass executions of communists all over fascist Europe, and…
Or are you seriously pretending that this didn’t happen? You’re talking to a Spaniard, communists were systematically executed under the American-backed Franco regime. As for France, Operation Gladio was literally a plot of assassinations of communists
So you DO understand why I explained you my reasoning for criticising the word “tankie” used as a left-punching slur, and you’re just playing dumb instead of engaging with anything I said.
I could make up a slur to refer to liberals such as “dronies” referring to drone strikes by the Obama administration they support, or “bombies” for supporting Europe when it bombed Iraq and Libya and Yugoslavia.
Actually, I think that’s a good idea. Call out people that blindly endorse violence or support a given government uncritically. I’d still rather have a bombie government that bombs the middle east than a nazi one that does so too, but worse, and also actively tries to remove any potential for resistance from their own people, but saying “A bombie isn’t as bad as a nazi” at least carries the subtext “(but still bad)”.
(Obviously, not bombing would be best. Imperialism is a despicable policy.)
It also kinda sidesteps the ambiguous definitions and interpretations of liberal philosophy. For instance, I’d consider imperialism to be decidedly illiberal, given its disregard for the consent of the governed, but that obviously isn’t a universal understanding. I’d rather not get into that here, so let’s just agree to call bombing-apologists bombies.
Bringing up China in the context of public transit should be regarded well.
The post brings it up in the context of a particular candidate’s opinions on China’s mode of government and civil liberties. If it specifically pointed out “China’s public transport is…”, I’d agree with you. But just because this aspect is nice, that doesn’t mean China as a whole should necessarily be regarded well.
(Again, I just want to point out the logic arising from the premise that the candidate does defend China; whether that premise is true is beyond me, and whether the claim is true is not something I’ll argue about here. Trying to have a chill, civil Sunday and all.)
The post brings it up in the context of a particular candidate’s opinions on China’s mode of government and civil liberties
A western lib (or bombie)'s propagandized opinion on China’s civil liberties, degree of democracy or mode of government are worthless if this person is not informed. I only focused the conversation on the public transit part because that’s what’s relevant to this community, but if you want to discuss how democratic China is in comparison to Europe, we can discuss the Podemos party in my homeland being destroyed by a state apparatus + private media manufactured plot of lawfare, we could discuss Alexis Tsipras not being allowed to enact the Democratic will of Greek people under threat of the Troika, we could discuss Berlin’s popular referenda of rent control being struck down by the highest court in Germany, or we could discuss Macron using emergency constitutional powers to raise the retirement age in France against the Democratic will of the people.
“Normie” is related to “normal”, “tankie” is related to “tanks”. The word “lib”, which I use, is a shortening of “liberal”. I could make up a slur to refer to liberals such as “dronies” referring to drone strikes by the Obama administration they support, or “bombies” for supporting Europe when it bombed Iraq and Libya and Yugoslavia. I hope it’s self-explanatory that the word “tankie” is explicitly a lot more violent.
Yes, that’s what people usually do when they praise Dutch bike cities for example. Bringing Netherlands as an example doesn’t mean you condone Netherlands being the heir state to a genocidal empire. Bringing up China in the context of public transit should be regarded well.
The N-word is related to colour, I dont get it why that matters whether something is a slur or not.
Now, if there were precedents of mass imprisonment, law abuse, discrimination, and outright murder of communists, my argument would hold. Oh, wait, the red scare happened, and McCarthyism, and mass executions of communists all over fascist Europe, and…
Or are you seriously pretending that this didn’t happen? You’re talking to a Spaniard, communists were systematically executed under the American-backed Franco regime. As for France, Operation Gladio was literally a plot of assassinations of communists
Are you sure this was meant to be a reply to me?
Well, you’re making bad faith replies to words used to describe people who are consistently repressed under capitalism, so yes I’m responding to you
I said slurs can be based on colour and you’re saying that I pretend that communist were not persecuted, do you see why I’m confused?
Why did you respond that to my comment then
Because I think you were wrong? In fact I find your original argument kind of ridiculous.
So you DO understand why I explained you my reasoning for criticising the word “tankie” used as a left-punching slur, and you’re just playing dumb instead of engaging with anything I said.
Actually, I think that’s a good idea. Call out people that blindly endorse violence or support a given government uncritically. I’d still rather have a bombie government that bombs the middle east than a nazi one that does so too, but worse, and also actively tries to remove any potential for resistance from their own people, but saying “A bombie isn’t as bad as a nazi” at least carries the subtext “(but still bad)”.
(Obviously, not bombing would be best. Imperialism is a despicable policy.)
It also kinda sidesteps the ambiguous definitions and interpretations of liberal philosophy. For instance, I’d consider imperialism to be decidedly illiberal, given its disregard for the consent of the governed, but that obviously isn’t a universal understanding. I’d rather not get into that here, so let’s just agree to call bombing-apologists bombies.
The post brings it up in the context of a particular candidate’s opinions on China’s mode of government and civil liberties. If it specifically pointed out “China’s public transport is…”, I’d agree with you. But just because this aspect is nice, that doesn’t mean China as a whole should necessarily be regarded well.
(Again, I just want to point out the logic arising from the premise that the candidate does defend China; whether that premise is true is beyond me, and whether the claim is true is not something I’ll argue about here. Trying to have a chill, civil Sunday and all.)
A western lib (or bombie)'s propagandized opinion on China’s civil liberties, degree of democracy or mode of government are worthless if this person is not informed. I only focused the conversation on the public transit part because that’s what’s relevant to this community, but if you want to discuss how democratic China is in comparison to Europe, we can discuss the Podemos party in my homeland being destroyed by a state apparatus + private media manufactured plot of lawfare, we could discuss Alexis Tsipras not being allowed to enact the Democratic will of Greek people under threat of the Troika, we could discuss Berlin’s popular referenda of rent control being struck down by the highest court in Germany, or we could discuss Macron using emergency constitutional powers to raise the retirement age in France against the Democratic will of the people.
Pretty sure I explicitly said I don’t, but thank you for offering your argument anyway. Have a nice evening.