[ckaihatsu]

I just saw this now.
Let me share the fact that one of my friends was in The Congo when Lumumba was captured. He knows for a fact that the order to execute him came from the Americans.
My friend is still alive but in hospital under treatment. He is in his eighties now.

Yup, thanks for sharing -- Lumumba was quite a guy, and it's very tragic, though instructive, what his efforts came to.

[ckaihatsu]

Do not get me wrong, why I advocate the continual of colonialism (or a new colonialism) is exactly that it is easier to hold the West accountable than the locals.

From almost everywhere in Africa (even South Africa in this case), India, China, Russia and to a lesser extent Latin America, no country is doing well, either because the administrators do not hold the necessary resource for them to take up the necessary responsibility, or the locals simply do not understand this very concept of taking up the responsibility. (at least India is changing I believe)

This is a *horrible* statement, and sounds eerily similar to the colonial-era racist ethos of 'The White Man's Burden':

The imperialist interpretation of "The White Man's Burden" (1899) proposes that the "white race" is morally obligated to rule the "non-white" peoples of planet Earth, and to encourage their progress (economic, social, and cultural) through settler colonialism,[15] which is based upon the Roman Catholic and Protestant missionaries displacing the natives' religions:

The implication, of course, was that the Empire existed not for the benefit—economic or strategic or otherwise—of Britain, itself, but in order that primitive peoples, incapable of self-government, could, with British guidance, eventually become civilized (and Christianized).[16]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_White ... rpretation

---

There is no doubt that the West made serial and serious mistakes in the Middle East. If anything, they at least should try to cooperate with Turkey and / or Iran, instead of just Saudi Arabia (which is another bad country, although Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is keen on doing some kind of window dressing. In comparison, China's patience in Hong Kong seems to have gone) and Israel (some of whom are too obsessive in fulfilling their "destiny").

After the U.S., Turkey Should Be Next to Leave Syria

https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/art ... -albatross

[Pants-of-dog]

IN the video the movie makers clearly state that the reason for climate change is the growth of the economy.

Prove it wrong.

They further state that people do not need all the things they have or want. They clearly state people could live with less.

Prove it wrong.

[Julian658]

Prove it wrong.



Prove it wrong.

Watch the video POD.

[Pants-of-dog]

Watch the video POD.

If you cannot show how the video is wrong, then it is very possible that modern industry has created the climate change problem by creating all sorts of goods and services that people do not need.

[Sivad]

This is a *horrible* statement, and sounds eerily similar to the colonial-era racist ethos of 'The White Man's Burden':

It's not racist, it's just mostly incorrect. He's right that western societies do have more people who are better informed with a wider circle of moral concern, and that western governments are more politically accountable, but that hasn't translated into more ethical foreign policies by western powers for a number of reasons. Mainly because while western societies do have comparatively more well informed principled people there's still not enough of them to make a significant difference and because without strong backing from a much larger power local governments are far more vulnerable to backlash from abusive policies so they have to tread far more lightly.

If I lived in the developing world I would definitely prefer autonomous local tyranny to western imperialism. It's a lot easier to topple a tin-pot than oust a western backed puppet.

[Donna]

Just to refresh the record, Member Sivad believes that white Europeans are "culturally and genetically" superior to other races.

[Julian658]

If you cannot show how the video is wrong, then it is very possible that modern industry has created the climate change problem by creating all sorts of goods and services that people do not need.

Who gets to decide what goods or services I do not need?

[Donna]

Who gets to decide what goods or services I do not need?

Aggregate data should matter here, not individual preferences which can be manipulated by advertising.

[Pants-of-dog]

Who gets to decide what goods or services I do not need?

Anybody with the ability to use reason and logic.

Because of the fact that human medicine is complicated and therefore requires specialists, you do not get to choose if or when you need it, and other factors, we all know that the basic human needs healthcare.

We also know, using our brains, that humans do not need (for example) plastic salad tongs from the dollar store that were made in a sweatshop by the lowest bidder and that break the first time you use them which is probably for the best since they are also toxic and should not be touching food.

[Donna]

Yeah, that never happened. ... whatever your deal is it doesn't matter because Sivads don't give a fuck

Yes it did. It was in a thread about Hindutvu riots in early March. You were goaded into endorsing white supremacism.

"The success of European civilization is due to a complex mix of geography, history, culture, and population genetics." Sivad

And when you were pressed for more nuance, you bailed out. It was really pathetic and hard to forget.

[ckaihatsu]

If I lived in the developing world I would definitely prefer autonomous local tyranny to western imperialism. It's a lot easier to topple a tin-pot than oust a western backed puppet.

These days those two terms are basically *synonymous* -- the 'comprador bourgeoisie'.

[Patrickov]

Well, no, I think you're being too dismissive -- the *political* aspect is very important:

What I have observed is that they failed spectacularly.

[Patrickov]

Just to refresh the record, Member Sivad believes that white Europeans are "culturally and genetically" superior to other races.

If so then his previous message does not serve his narrative at all. I hold high regard of him for making observation and statements beyond his standing.

[Patrickov]

This is a *horrible* statement, and sounds eerily similar to the colonial-era racist ethos of 'The White Man's Burden'

Two things.

1. Anybody using this to refute me simply does not understand how helpless we find ourselves against a giant tyranny like China (I actually do not believe any regime coming after Chinese Communist Party -- organisations like Falun Gong pretty much show what such regimes would look like), as well as how the British administration had been good in comparison.

2. When colonisation had not happened it is of course one can say it is wrong to impose it, but for those places that had it happened, the West were both obliged and more capable of making it work again. Handing it back before doing so is, to me, a second mistake.

I admit that I agree with some of those thoughts in principle, but that's my deductions from my observations on my city for the past 20+ years. The key is, administration is about responsibility, and some group of people seen as handling that better, thus asked to take that -- and thus held accountable, is not necessarily positive, so it is not "white supremacy" (which IMHO means White people have rights to kill and exterminate other people, which is an entirely different thing)

[Sivad]

Two things.

1. Anybody using this to refute me simply does not understand how helpless we find ourselves against a giant tyranny like China (I actually do not believe any regime coming after Chinese Communist Party -- organisations like Falun Gong pretty much show what such regimes would look like), as well as how the British administration had been good in comparison.

2. When colonisation had not happened it is of course one can say it is wrong to impose it, but for those places that had it happened, the West were both obliged and more capable of making it work again. Handing it back before doing so is, to me, a second mistake.

I admit that I agree with some of those thoughts in principle, but that's my deductions from my observations on my city for the past 20+ years. The key is, administration is about responsibility, and some group of people seen as handling that better, thus asked to take that -- and thus held accountable, is not necessarily positive, so it is not "white supremacy" (which IMHO means White people have rights to kill and exterminate other people, which is an entirely different thing)

There's no question that Hong Kong would be far better off under UK governance. If I lived in Hong Kong I would be terrified of the PRC. I can't imagine living under a constant immanent threat of PRC fascism.

[Sivad]

Yes it did. It was in a thread about Hindutvu riots in early March. You were goaded into endorsing white supremacism.

"The success of European civilization is due to a complex mix of geography, history, culture, and population genetics." Sivad

And when you were pressed for more nuance, you bailed out. It was really pathetic and hard to forget.

I wasn't "goaded" into anything, you're not smart enough to "goad" me. I can always see you coming from a mile off. And I didn't bail out, I stopped responding when you started shrieking racism at me in a fevered fit of ideological delirium.

There's nothing in that statement that's even slightly racist, let alone "white supremacist". It's not even controversial, it's the overwhelming consensus of everyone who has ever studied it. Only the crackheads in the cultural studies department will dispute it but nobody takes those fringe fuckwits seriously anyway.


But it is funny though how Donna goes around calling people racists and supremacists while shilling for the PRC fascist ethno-state and ranting about how "white people have dark souls".

[Pants-of-dog]

@Sivad

You do often argue that immigration is bad for democracy because it lets in all these backward and politically weak people. When you describe Latinos that way, it certainly sounds racist.

Back to the topic, this film seems dumb. It seems to have the usual half baked crappy arguments that neo-liberals always bring up.

[ckaihatsu]

Well, no, I think you're being too dismissive -- the *political* aspect is very important:

Decolonization has been used to refer to the intellectual decolonization from the colonizers' ideas that made the colonized feel inferior.[7][8][9]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decolonization

What I have observed is that they failed spectacularly.

If you happen to mean that former colonies are *still* very economically dependent on their former colonizers, as for markets, then yes -- and I've already said as-much. It goes to show that capitalism remains *hegemonic*, even after *political* national-liberation in the developing world.

[ckaihatsu]

Do not get me wrong, why I advocate the continual of colonialism (or a new colonialism) is exactly that it is easier to hold the West accountable than the locals.

From almost everywhere in Africa (even South Africa in this case), India, China, Russia and to a lesser extent Latin America, no country is doing well, either because the administrators do not hold the necessary resource for them to take up the necessary responsibility, or the locals simply do not understand this very concept of taking up the responsibility. (at least India is changing I believe)

This is a *horrible* statement, and sounds eerily similar to the colonial-era racist ethos of 'The White Man's Burden'

The imperialist interpretation of "The White Man's Burden" (1899) proposes that the "white race" is morally obligated to rule the "non-white" peoples of planet Earth, and to encourage their progress (economic, social, and cultural) through settler colonialism,[15] which is based upon the Roman Catholic and Protestant missionaries displacing the natives' religions:

The implication, of course, was that the Empire existed not for the benefit—economic or strategic or otherwise—of Britain, itself, but in order that primitive peoples, incapable of self-government, could, with British guidance, eventually become civilized (and Christianized).[16]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_White ... rpretation

Two things.

1. Anybody using this to refute me simply does not understand how helpless we find ourselves against a giant tyranny like China (I actually do not believe any regime coming after Chinese Communist Party -- organisations like Falun Gong pretty much show what such regimes would look like), as well as how the British administration had been good in comparison.

2. When colonisation had not happened it is of course one can say it is wrong to impose it, but for those places that had it happened, the West were both obliged and more capable of making it work again. Handing it back before doing so is, to me, a second mistake.

I admit that I agree with some of those thoughts in principle, but that's my deductions from my observations on my city for the past 20+ years. The key is, administration is about responsibility, and some group of people seen as handling that better, thus asked to take that -- and thus held accountable, is not necessarily positive, so it is not "white supremacy" (which IMHO means White people have rights to kill and exterminate other people, which is an entirely different thing)

1. I can't agree that China is such a 'tyranny' just because it happens to be bureaucratic-elitist -- by comparison we have a *plutocratic* bureaucratic-elitism in the U.S., which looks out for the interests of the *wealthy* and doesn't care that thousands are dying from a virus -- it's still calling for people to go back to work, at the risk of their demise.

I wouldn't do any *flag-waving* for China, nor for the U.S., for that matter, since both are on the side of the prevailing *ruling class* of each particular country. The history and composition of the respective ruling classes of the two countries may be different, but they're both still *hegemonic*, particularly over the *working* class of the two countries.

2. No, it's better to at least see *political* independence, even if the *economic* dependence continues. Economically there's no *alternative* to market hegemony, under capitalism, which is why for *true* economic and political independence, for all of the underdeveloped areas worldwide, we need to have *socialism*, so that the working class everywhere can finally be fully self-determining, collectively. This will continue to be entirely *impossible* under capitalism.

'White supremacy' means that there's a clear historical legacy of *Caucasian* types being in power -- just look at the history of Europe, which has been deterministic for the whole world, and into the New World (North and South America). No, we don't have fascist authoritarianism, fortunately, but we do have *fascist sympathizers* in power, mostly notably Donald Trump, but extended to the larger U.S. administration, even under Obama, as we saw with the U.S. support for fascist Ukraine, during Euromaidan.