• 0 Posts
  • 26 Comments
Joined 10 months ago
cake
Cake day: March 2nd, 2024

help-circle

  • dandelion@lemmy.blahaj.zonetoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldInteresting analogy
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    My point is that your baseline for legitimacy and moral acceptability is based on the attitudes taken by the colonizers, then and now. It can feel pragmatic and reasonable, but I think it only seems like a defensible position because the “ex”-colonizers (I mean, the U.S. hasn’t been decolonized, has it?) broadly agree that “colonialism is bad”, though it does seem like strong support for Zionist Israel by colonial countries like the U.S. and UK is a clear counter-example to this.

    Ultimately if you look closely and found Zionist occupation illegitimate, you will certainly think so of other occupations. The reasons you give for ignoring the illegitimacy of other occupations don’t feel that different than those given for ignoring the illegitimacy of the Israeli occupation.



  • yes exactly - don’t use an anti-Semitic trope when criticizing Zionism, lest you be confused for an anti-Semite; this weakens the meme significantly and for no good reason (other than maybe to pick up support from conspiracy nuts and right-wingers by using a dog-whistle while still being palatable to people who don’t see the dog-whistle, but this is a bug rather than a feature in my book)





  • It’s surreal to me that there are people who don’t know what life before Wikipedia was like, lol.

    Maybe it’s relevant to understand that the increased access to information hasn’t always translated to people being more informed. There are many people in my life who don’t actively look things up and who don’t have the curiosity or willingness to even check Wikipedia.

    So it is still now a bit like what it was like pre-Wikipedia - people mostly relied on other people for knowledge, and knowledge was thus local and socially shared, not necessarily that factual or based in books. I still think this is the dominant way people live, but now social media is an extension of that “local” socially-mediated knowledge. TV and radio were sorta like social media before, it was the way things became “viral”.

    I think now like then, looking something up on Wikipedia sets you apart from a lot of people, it makes you bookish, nerdy, or pedantic - as if the folk knowledge wasn’t good enough for you and you have become a traitor to your people by seeking something more from the stacks.


  • dandelion@lemmy.blahaj.zoneto196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneReject campism rule
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 days ago

    I think the “left” they are talking about are more like tankies or at least socialists who lean towards authoritarianism.

    I know some people in my local DSA who uncritically support the idea that Russia is incapable of imperialism and who probably would have supported Assad because they were an ally of Russia.


  • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campism

    Campism is the belief that the world is divided into large, competing political groups of countries (“camps”) and that people with left-wing politics should support one camp over the other camps.[1] Unlike nationalists, campists do not support any countries for reasons such as ethnicity or national identity. Instead, campists support their camp for ideological reasons, because they believe their camp promotes their ideology, such as socialism or anti-imperialism.

    TIL, thank you!