I really take issue with the language here. You're saying that China is not utilizing leverage it has within the United Nations because they like the rules too much? In what way do you think they benefit from the precedent being set here? If they do, then why did Russia and China have their own alternate deal that had to be tabled due to US threats?
How can you say China is not fucking around, and in the next breath, say they are fucking around in the United Nations, and they're fucking around with human life on a scale that should terrify everybody? How can you say that?
I'm sincerely interested if you lay out a comprehensive response I'm going to write it down. I've been asking as many people as I can. To lay the cards on the table, I think that what people are doing here by saying they support China even though they think that they support genocide is as harmful the idiots running around saying they're responsible. I mean, look, you're probably going to start talking about how they're the largest trade partner of every country in the world (the US applies unilateral sanctions via its control of the financial system its not a semiperipheral country that survives via selling its labor power to the core (e.g. not semiperipheral like subimperialist Saudi Arabia)), or how there's an unsourced article saying that they sold literally six less than two fistfuls of drones to the UAE, so focus on the resolution if either of you respond. I'm just focusing on this one Dropsite article and the role of the alt media in western propaganda. This makes no sense on its face based on resistance statements re: PLO or the leverage China has even before considering its the only reason Iran is even around rn
I don't know what I expected to be honest it's not like anyone in the US grew out of the Bush era protest movements more anemic than even Vietnam
@demerit@lemmygrad.ml
I really take issue with the language here. You're saying that China is not utilizing leverage it has within the United Nations because they like the rules too much? In what way do you think they benefit from the precedent being set here? If they do, then why did Russia and China have their own alternate deal that had to be tabled due to US threats?
How can you say China is not fucking around, and in the next breath, say they are fucking around in the United Nations, and they're fucking around with human life on a scale that should terrify everybody? How can you say that?
I'm sincerely interested if you lay out a comprehensive response I'm going to write it down. I've been asking as many people as I can. To lay the cards on the table, I think that what people are doing here by saying they support China even though they think that they support genocide is as harmful the idiots running around saying they're responsible. I mean, look, you're probably going to start talking about how they're the largest trade partner of every country in the world (the US applies unilateral sanctions via its control of the financial system its not a semiperipheral country that survives via selling its labor power to the core (e.g. not semiperipheral like subimperialist Saudi Arabia)), or how there's an unsourced article saying that they sold literally six less than two fistfuls of drones to the UAE, so focus on the resolution if either of you respond. I'm just focusing on this one Dropsite article and the role of the alt media in western propaganda. This makes no sense on its face based on resistance statements re: PLO or the leverage China has even before considering its the only reason Iran is even around rn
I don't know what I expected to be honest it's not like anyone in the US grew out of the Bush era protest movements more anemic than even Vietnam