Why are you following my inquiry with a nonsequitor whataboutism I have nothing to do with? I am unsure what davel’s citations have anything to do kittenzrulz123’s flagrant genocide apologia. Could you be so kind as to enlighten me how they relate?
It’s impossible to competently read those screenshots and come away with the idea that, say, kittenz is “denying genocide” re: Pinochet. The others are similarly ridiculous, they just don’t mean thst at all.
Instead of gesturing to a post with like 10 screenshots of text, why not quote kittenz and say what you think is genocide denial.
Sure, I can transcribe the exact excerpts I read above:
Apologia A:
For example we objectively know that most of the claims against Stalin were falsified. Not to say he was perfect but even the CIA admits they falsefied it.
Apologia B:
Salvador Allende was a great democratic socialist who supposedly did everything right and look what happened to him
Apologia C:
[President Biden image captioned with “No, I don’t think I will.”]
For example we objectively know that most of the claims against Stalin were falsified. Not to say he was perfect but even the CIA admits they falsefied it.
Literally nothing about genocide.
Salvador Allende was a great democratic socialist who supposedly did everything right and look what happened to him
Literally nothing about genocide and you seem to completely misunderstand kittenz orientation to Allende.
[Captain AmericaCX image captioned with “No, I don’t think I will.”]
Obviously a reply to someone telling them to stop talking.
So you have nothing. I think you should take some time to ask why you are so confident even though it really seems that you are having difficulty reading and understanding what’s in front of you. I don’t mean the latter as an insult, it is perfectly fine to not immediately understand something. The issue is that you act very certain about a topic where you are actually uncertain.
Kittenzrulz123 never “apologized” for genocide, as this implies accepting that the alleged genocide is even real to begin with, and then stating that it’s good. Kittenzrulz123 took the correct stance that there’s no actual evidence for genocide in Xinjiang.
The accusation of genocide denial had no specific context given so you just have to guess. These are lazy anticommunist liberals they gobble up invented genocides when it suits the narrative of their masters.
Unless you can specifically ground exactly what genocides were denied? Show the posts and comments.
I don’t see any apologies for any genocides in those screenshots. If you’re talking about Stalin/USSR specifically, there was no genocide, so there’s no apology for one.
kittenzrulz123 isn’t denying genocide, here. Claiming that Stalin wasn’t as bad as Hitler is mainstream liberal historian consensus, and most modern historiography shows he was better than Churchill. There’s no denial of genocide by Hitler, nor a defense of Pinochet. Instead, there’s support for Salvadore Allende, who unfortunately was coup’d precisely because his path to socialism was not revolutionary, and a denial that Stalin was as bad as Hitler, which is just historical fact.
The people making these accusations simply believe, without investigation, that China is committing genocide against Uyghurs. Any pushback on this is labeled genocide denial, in bad faith, because none of them have done even a mildly critical review if what has happened in Xinjiang nor the truly absurd US state department/intelligence connections of the small and dishonest group of think tank grifters pushing that particular narrative.
There are no logs to post that would satisfy them. They seek to slander and avoid thought, not discuss the topic of genocide with any level of seriousness. This is about their egos, not any actual concern about Uyghurs. I’ve never even met one of these people who can name an element of Uyghur culture. They’re just a rhetorical weapon to these national chauvinists.
Well, right now PRC is still aggressively demanding shores and sea routes of other nations.
Your link is just to a Lemmy search but I’m guessing you’re referring the SCS? And China isn’t really demanding the SCS it just plain has it.
I have seen some documentaries on mistreatment of Uyghur
That is just another link to a search on YouTube, not a documentary. But there was a concerted effort to produce spurious reports and manipulative documentaries so this could mean almost anything in terms of the accuracy of what you watched.
but I am talking about kittenzrulz123’s own genocide apologetics which lead to their removal in 196 as moderators.
Are you? You haven’t listed them and the only implication so far is that it’s being minimally media critical regarding accusations against China’s treatment of Uyghurs. A position that is correct and that I already explained can be twisted in bad faith to be labeled genocide denial. Why are you just repeating things? I already responded to this!
Am I lead to believe kittenzrulz123 would dismiss others concerns of genocide?
Your link is just to a Lemmy search but I’m guessing you’re referring the SCS?
It’s also doing exercises in Japan, Malaysia, Philippines, etc., why it’s not just SCS.
Are you?
that is indeed my inquiry…
You haven’t listed them
Jorunn did, not I. I fail to read China or Uyghurs anywhere in the screenshots. Could you show me which one I am missing?
???
Did kittenzrulz123 lie to you or something?
China has zero military exercises in Japan, Malaysia, or the Philippines.
that is indeed my inquiry…
You can’t name them you just demand evidence to the contrary vaguely.
Jorunn did
Except they didn’t. Those screenshots don’t show any genocide denial.
I fail to read China or Uyghurs anywhere in the screenshots. Could you show me which one I am missing?
I already did in another comment it’s just them saying they don’t think there’s scholarly consensus. Why does everyone else have to describe what kittenz actually said but you don’t? Produce actual quotes not screenshots that don’t deny genocide.
The only question I have is why hasn’t kittenzrulz123 posted counter logs proving that they were not a genocide apologist.
Why haven’t you proven that you don’t deny the genocide of white South Africans?
Is it because it didn’t actually happen? Well there’s your answer.
Previously.
Oh look, who could have guessed, https://quokk.au/post/1070450#comment_5416609
SCP-style collaborative anticommunist creepypasta
Why are you following my inquiry with a nonsequitor whataboutism I have nothing to do with? I am unsure what davel’s citations have anything to do kittenzrulz123’s flagrant genocide apologia. Could you be so kind as to enlighten me how they relate?
You see, genocide good when “socialist” states do it
What genocide are they allegedly excusing?
the ones Jorunn excerpted in spoiled screenshots: Stalin, Augusto Pinochet, and American ones.
The kulaks were not a people but an economic class, and a famine is not a genocide[1].
Where are they apologizing for Pinochet or the US? That doesn’t even make sense.
Both. Which is why I want kittenzrulez123 to counter log.
It’s impossible to competently read those screenshots and come away with the idea that, say, kittenz is “denying genocide” re: Pinochet. The others are similarly ridiculous, they just don’t mean thst at all.
Instead of gesturing to a post with like 10 screenshots of text, why not quote kittenz and say what you think is genocide denial.
Sure, I can transcribe the exact excerpts I read above: Apologia A:
That’s not biden. That’s captain america.
oh thanks!
That makes the denials worse.
Literally nothing about genocide.
Literally nothing about genocide and you seem to completely misunderstand kittenz orientation to Allende.
Obviously a reply to someone telling them to stop talking.
So you have nothing. I think you should take some time to ask why you are so confident even though it really seems that you are having difficulty reading and understanding what’s in front of you. I don’t mean the latter as an insult, it is perfectly fine to not immediately understand something. The issue is that you act very certain about a topic where you are actually uncertain.
Why haven’t you posted evidence you aren’t a child molester.
For the same reason you don’t have to show counter logs proving you’re not an “apologist” for white genocide in South Africa.
So, you would personally allow the screenshots set the narrative that kittenzrulz123 apologize to genocide, than set an anti genocide stance?
Kittenzrulz123 never “apologized” for genocide, as this implies accepting that the alleged genocide is even real to begin with, and then stating that it’s good. Kittenzrulz123 took the correct stance that there’s no actual evidence for genocide in Xinjiang.
Did we read the same screenshots? How does Stalin, Pinochet, and Biden have anything to do with 新疆?
???
The accusation of genocide denial had no specific context given so you just have to guess. These are lazy anticommunist liberals they gobble up invented genocides when it suits the narrative of their masters.
Unless you can specifically ground exactly what genocides were denied? Show the posts and comments.
Sure:
None of that has kittenz denying a genocide.
Stalin’s, Pinochet’s, and Captain American’s.
I’m referring to this:
Which deals pretty explicitly with the allegations of genocide in Xinjiang. What genocide are you referring to?
That read to me like pugjesus trying to pull a whataboutism, which like kittenzrulez123 I would ignore. I meant the ones below:
These were the exact reasons they were demodded for.
I don’t see any apologies for any genocides in those screenshots. If you’re talking about Stalin/USSR specifically, there was no genocide, so there’s no apology for one.
You don’t see Salvador Allende’s genocide and Captain America’s being mentioned in these screenshots?
kittenzrulz123 isn’t denying genocide, here. Claiming that Stalin wasn’t as bad as Hitler is mainstream liberal historian consensus, and most modern historiography shows he was better than Churchill. There’s no denial of genocide by Hitler, nor a defense of Pinochet. Instead, there’s support for Salvadore Allende, who unfortunately was coup’d precisely because his path to socialism was not revolutionary, and a denial that Stalin was as bad as Hitler, which is just historical fact.
But genocide apologetics nonetheless.
Kittenzrulz123 was asked to cease them, and with outright refusal, they were demoderated.
Seeing as Kittenzrulz123 has choson to excommunicate, I will read this as desiring to maintain genocide apologetics in the future.
The people making these accusations simply believe, without investigation, that China is committing genocide against Uyghurs. Any pushback on this is labeled genocide denial, in bad faith, because none of them have done even a mildly critical review if what has happened in Xinjiang nor the truly absurd US state department/intelligence connections of the small and dishonest group of think tank grifters pushing that particular narrative.
There are no logs to post that would satisfy them. They seek to slander and avoid thought, not discuss the topic of genocide with any level of seriousness. This is about their egos, not any actual concern about Uyghurs. I’ve never even met one of these people who can name an element of Uyghur culture. They’re just a rhetorical weapon to these national chauvinists.
Well, right now PRC is still aggressively demanding shores and sea routes of other nations. I have seen some documentaries on mistreatment of Uyghurs, but I am talking about kittenzrulz123’s own genocide apologetics which lead to their removal in 196 as moderators. Am I lead to believe kittenzrulz123 would dismiss others concerns of genocide?
Your link is just to a Lemmy search but I’m guessing you’re referring the SCS? And China isn’t really demanding the SCS it just plain has it.
That is just another link to a search on YouTube, not a documentary. But there was a concerted effort to produce spurious reports and manipulative documentaries so this could mean almost anything in terms of the accuracy of what you watched.
Are you? You haven’t listed them and the only implication so far is that it’s being minimally media critical regarding accusations against China’s treatment of Uyghurs. A position that is correct and that I already explained can be twisted in bad faith to be labeled genocide denial. Why are you just repeating things? I already responded to this!
???
China has zero military exercises in Japan, Malaysia, or the Philippines.
You can’t name them you just demand evidence to the contrary vaguely.
Except they didn’t. Those screenshots don’t show any genocide denial.
I already did in another comment it’s just them saying they don’t think there’s scholarly consensus. Why does everyone else have to describe what kittenz actually said but you don’t? Produce actual quotes not screenshots that don’t deny genocide.
PS you are messing up the quote feature.