I’m not sure whether the version of this I saw previously was the original and this post was cropped, or if this post is the original and the other text was added later. But I much prefer the context here:
Ahh see this I can get behind, reminds me of the Soviet anti alcohol poster that’s become a meme too
Good original intent, less good modern applications
The dawn of nationalism was definitely the mistake of the previous age I think. Peoples should be able to self govern autonomously, but not under a guise of “the nation” which inherently forms an out group to be excluded.
I like the Arabic/American way to do it, “You wanna be one of us? Well then you’re already half way there!”
I speak very little Arabic but my teacher has told me that I already know enough to get the long list cousin’s welcome among most L1 speakers lol.
After we stop pretending that the morally superior view is one where everyone is equally awful.
Being sympathetic I get what the picture is trying to convey. Really ask yourself if different is worse or is it just different.
Being realistic it smells of in every conflict everyone involved is evil. And that simply is not always true. Giving a real world example is the invasion of the Ukraine. There is no both sides in this. One is a democracy the other is a dictatorship. One is defending their homeland and the other is invading. One of it loses is looking at genocide and the other if it loses has some egg on their face. They are not the same.
One side thinks the answer is “do fascism”, so I think it may be fair to conclude that one of the proposed answers is at least wrong in every situation.
Until the third paragraph, it sounded like something you might think was reasonable for lefties to do. Then I got to the bits about cutting regulations to promote fossil fuels and, according to an “anonymous source” (which I frankly don’t trust because it’s from a biased newspaper,) weaponizing the DOJ and national guard against critics.
This feels dangerously close to some EnlightenedCentrism nonse
Yeah i’ve learned not to trust this kind of simmetrical worldview, even when it makes me feel smart for being above it.
I’m not sure whether the version of this I saw previously was the original and this post was cropped, or if this post is the original and the other text was added later. But I much prefer the context here:
Ahh see this I can get behind, reminds me of the Soviet anti alcohol poster that’s become a meme too
Good original intent, less good modern applications
The dawn of nationalism was definitely the mistake of the previous age I think. Peoples should be able to self govern autonomously, but not under a guise of “the nation” which inherently forms an out group to be excluded.
I like the Arabic/American way to do it, “You wanna be one of us? Well then you’re already half way there!”
I speak very little Arabic but my teacher has told me that I already know enough to get the long list cousin’s welcome among most L1 speakers lol.
What do you mean?
It is quite literally implying “both sides actually same!”
It’s addressing the concept of demonization, a la Israel and Palestine. It’s via these mechanisms that other people are dehumanized.
Not Karen v Karen at the pta meeting.
“Glorious leader” sure sounds like a pretty direct reference to the Kim dynasty.
Aww yes enlightened centralism
Miss.
Again it’s about any group demonizing another.
The process of generating the “subhuman” other based on misinformation.
It’s not about holding people to their honest record.
Playing the middle and saying “both sides” is completely different than what this image is displaying.
Miss.
Again it is about exactly what I said. “Our glorious leader” is not about other people it is both sideism.
It’s about playing both sideism.
What side are you on in Russia-Ukraine? No question dodging “enlightened centralist”.
Can you talk without using buzzwords and pop-quizzes on irrelevant shit?
After we stop pretending that the morally superior view is one where everyone is equally awful.
Being sympathetic I get what the picture is trying to convey. Really ask yourself if different is worse or is it just different.
Being realistic it smells of in every conflict everyone involved is evil. And that simply is not always true. Giving a real world example is the invasion of the Ukraine. There is no both sides in this. One is a democracy the other is a dictatorship. One is defending their homeland and the other is invading. One of it loses is looking at genocide and the other if it loses has some egg on their face. They are not the same.
Hmmm it’s almost as if politics and ethics are very nuanced and one answer is never correct in every situation…
One side thinks the answer is “do fascism”, so I think it may be fair to conclude that one of the proposed answers is at least wrong in every situation.
Yes, every right-wing politician is pushing for ‘do fascism’
Probably like they did your mom last night. BOOM GOTCHA
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025?wprov=sfla1
Not as hard as right wing simps get did by reality.
Until the third paragraph, it sounded like something you might think was reasonable for lefties to do. Then I got to the bits about cutting regulations to promote fossil fuels and, according to an “anonymous source” (which I frankly don’t trust because it’s from a biased newspaper,) weaponizing the DOJ and national guard against critics.