comfy
I feel like the Taiwanese air force wouldn’t bother with these unofficial patches if there weren’t at least some truth to it.
I don't see the logic in this sentence. What makes those soldiers a more reliable source than you or me? Taiwanese people read memes too.
Should openly fascist people be allowed to vote [for government] in your opinion?
Why should they? As in, materially, how does society benefit from that? How does the democratic decision-making tool become more useful from it? I consider democracy to be a decision-making process, so I don't care for vague idealistic assertions like "every adult should have the right to vote" unless there's a benefit from it. And allowing an explicitly anti-liberal, anti-democratic, bad-faith opportunist (and fascism is explicitly and openly all of those) to vote is harmful to the democratic process and increases the odds of it making a bad decision.
I agree, it's very tactless.
Where is that constraint coming from? "Death to [x]" is a statement of a desire.
"Death to Americans" would be a call for the deaths of citizens. Obviously Iran doesn't consider the typical American citizen to be oppressing them, so they are not interested in calling for that.
Someone yelling "death to America" could still be supporting the death of George W. Bush or Donald Trump, who are Americans. It could even involve combating many in the US military. That's still very different from calling for "death to Americans", because the target is the regime, not its citizens simply for being citizens.
But I still think you've raised an interesting discussion to have so I've tried to answer it.
In an ideal world, regime change. Relatively peaceful dissolution is preferable and possible (consider the death of the Soviet Union).
However, given the ruthlessness of the people with the most power in the US, I suspect they would gladly kill millions of Americans before even considering a peaceful surrender. People are shot by the state in regular protests, let alone one directly threatening the state (case in point - Jan 6 had a protester killed by police). So unless some interesting lucky opportunities open up (such as a military coup), the USA will (continue to) kill Americans to maintain stability, regardless of whether those opposing the USA kill a single American.
Given that situation, it sounds like any resistance to the US is bad because will likely involve deaths of innocent people. Yes, but the other side of the story is that to do nothing ''also'' results in the deaths of innocent people. To the people running the show, it's completely normal to oversee the constant atrocious social murder of many thousands each year through poverty, artificial scarcity of food and medication, healthcare denial and other neglect in the name of profit. We overproduce enough food to feed everyone, there's enough land and property to house everyone.
To do nothing is to allow many Americans to keep dying each day from easily preventable deaths. To fix that system will most likely kill many Americans in the process. You can almost simplify it down to a trolley problem - there's no clean solution whichever choice you make. But, for each of us, there is a correct decision.
When someone says "death to America", they aren't saying "death to Americans". A government/state is a regime, not all it's people, despite how much as nationalists love to stoke that sort of patriotism. So I have no problem with the slogan, I call for the fall of the US imperialist regime.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_to_America#Interpretation_and_meaning - has some confirmations from various Iranian politicians and a travel writer.
I haven't given it a try yet, I'll have to give it a read.
(just checking you actually meant schizoid, which is notably different to schizophrenia. both could make sense here but imply different things)
Nearly all media is state controlled. Even privately owned media companies because both the media and the state are just tools the owning class uses to maintain power.
More info on this:
This is what democracy looks like, and it should be respected.
Why should it be respected? Should we respect it any more than the US democracy which elected a thug? A system isn't automatically respectable just because it's one type of democracy.
You're not just gonna leave us hanging without a link, right? ...right?