- 16 Aug 2021 14:36
#15185751
It's not a gotcha line, and the main point was that true self-determination is largely bullshit. The point isn't that he secretly (or not secretly) condones violence. HOwever, when people claim this sort of thing, it does try to dress things up as though it's some sort of moral high ground. Sure, it is, but that's not how things work historically.
With respect to US independence, since you guys want to keep talking about specific examples of stuff. The lie we are told is that everyone was on board (self-determination/consent). This is simply not true, a small group of people actually manipulated the shit out of the population into going along with it. Samuel Adams in particular was the key propagandist and conspiracy theorist of the revolution. Historians have largely come to agree that he stoked/setup the Boston Massacre by place different opposing groups in the same place at the same time. Basically gathering powder kegs and letting the sparks fly.
Then the victors turn around and say "It was consent (sef-determination) along!". It's bullshit. It was manipulated like hell.
History is made by a small group of people with enough means and enough intelligence on how to get enough people to join, and enough people to basically just go along and not resist. Once the dust settles, and things appear to look ok for those that are just going along. FINALLY, some start to believe in the cause retro-actively, become patriots that celebrate independence day, whatever. IN the end, they never actually self-determined shit. The other end of that, is if shit turns out no to be good, whatever government/dictator/etc. that took over will just claim consent anyway and censor anyone that disagrees, nice and easy. In any case, there wasn't really some sort of organic and real popular support. this self-determination isn't as real as people would like to think. This is why I call bullshit.
Heisenberg wrote:How do you think the US got its independence? Or conquered an entire continent and wiped out almost the entire Native population? How did the North defeat the South in the US Civil War?
If you really want to play this game, the entire history of politics is essentially "humans being brutal to each other and forcing their will at gun point". The power dynamics, means and ideological ends - plus a hundred other factors - involved in these struggles determines how we assess them.
It did actually matter whether Ho Chi Minh or the French won in Indochina, just as it mattered in Algeria, Kenya, Rhodesia, Cuba and a hundred other colonised countries. Trying to use this "you really want to say you're OK with violence" line as some kind of gotcha is unbelievably silly. Everyone but the most determined pacifist is OK with political violence at a certain point.
It's not a gotcha line, and the main point was that true self-determination is largely bullshit. The point isn't that he secretly (or not secretly) condones violence. HOwever, when people claim this sort of thing, it does try to dress things up as though it's some sort of moral high ground. Sure, it is, but that's not how things work historically.
With respect to US independence, since you guys want to keep talking about specific examples of stuff. The lie we are told is that everyone was on board (self-determination/consent). This is simply not true, a small group of people actually manipulated the shit out of the population into going along with it. Samuel Adams in particular was the key propagandist and conspiracy theorist of the revolution. Historians have largely come to agree that he stoked/setup the Boston Massacre by place different opposing groups in the same place at the same time. Basically gathering powder kegs and letting the sparks fly.
Then the victors turn around and say "It was consent (sef-determination) along!". It's bullshit. It was manipulated like hell.
History is made by a small group of people with enough means and enough intelligence on how to get enough people to join, and enough people to basically just go along and not resist. Once the dust settles, and things appear to look ok for those that are just going along. FINALLY, some start to believe in the cause retro-actively, become patriots that celebrate independence day, whatever. IN the end, they never actually self-determined shit. The other end of that, is if shit turns out no to be good, whatever government/dictator/etc. that took over will just claim consent anyway and censor anyone that disagrees, nice and easy. In any case, there wasn't really some sort of organic and real popular support. this self-determination isn't as real as people would like to think. This is why I call bullshit.
Last edited by Rancid on 16 Aug 2021 15:02, edited 1 time in total.
I can think of 11780 reasons Trump shouldn't be president ever again.