@Botond173's banner p

Botond173


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 06:37:06 UTC

				

User ID: 473

Botond173


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 06:37:06 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 473

Color me shocked that nobody selected a peasant Anarchist who was easily duped by Bolshevik salami tactics to be the symbol of united Ukrainian nationhood. Instead they had to chose the cringe nerd for the sole but very obvious reason because they knew they could always portray him to the normies as a victim of Nazi repression, because "he was in a concentration camp". (In reality, he was under the equivalent of house arrest under comfortable conditions, because he had qualms about one aspect of the proposed National Socialist European New Order, namely that it didn't include an autonomous Ukrainian state.)

Europe is, and always had been, land of free market and LGBTQ+ rights

sure...lol. We'll see how much of a good political sell this will turn out to be. I suggest you don't hold your breath.

In order to preserve a newly found national myth that is "pretty dumb"?

Yes, any city dedicating a statue to its founder and leaving it to stand is a completely self-evident course of events. There's no need to back that up.

There are two different types of political extremism, I think. A Republican wave would make the leftists desperate and more extreme outside power structures (to the extent that they even exist outside those). The opposite would make them arrogant and more extreme within them. The only things that would deescalate their extremism in the long run would be federal student debt cancellation, the nationalization of healthcare, a federal minimum wage and so on.

They are making an effort to prevent the D scenario. That's a big difference.

From their point of view, the issue isn't that the Soviet were bad per se, but that they also invaded their land. I think it's fair to say that the real sentiment is "Soviets should have never invaded us!". In other words, "If only we had a different past".

The occupation was obviously forcible, but the arrival of Russian immigrants was, as far as I know, not, and can only be viewed as the indirect consequence of the former. Other than that, yes, there are differences, but that's not the point. On one hand, treating ethnic diversity as a moral good unto itself, and mass immigration as the laudatory facilitator of it, and ethnic homogeneity as inherently dangerous when practiced by White Western Goyim, while at the same time upholding Baltic and Ukrainian Nationalist narratives about the Soviet crime of mass immigration in order to dissolve the inherently precious heritage that was local ethnic homogeneity, is completely dishonest and laughable.

You can't write this and then not give us anything!

Check the quotes in the original comment, I suggest.

I suggest 'human biological determinism' as the alternative meaning of HBD. At least that's how I've seen it defined in the past.

O9A is very obviously a CIA honey trap.

I'm going to argue that it was celebrating the military victory on Latvian soil over, you know, literal Nazis ("garbage humans", "deplorables" etc.), alien occupiers, aggressors, oppressors etc. It's not a monument, as far as I can tell, to the reannexation of Latvia, or to the establishing of Soviet military bases in Latvia i.e. "occupation", or to Russianness, a Russian empire, or to Stalin.

So I clicked on the link and took a look. I don't disagree with the findings of that study, but I think there's definitely some nuance warranted here.

If we define 'sexual predation/assault' according to 21st Century feminist terminology, then the cited research is definitely correct. After all, I think it's self evident that it's usually not low-status men who make - and, presumably, get away with - 'inapproriate' sexual advances, do sexual acts without specifically asking for consent etc.

However, if we use the word 'rape' in the original / based / non-normie sense of the word, i.e. rape-rape (h/t to Whoopi Goldberg), a brutal and violent act, then I think we're safe to say that low-status men are more likely to perpetrate it.

I'd prefer the Stalinist approach that was directed at the wrong target i.e. kulaks. Starvation, forced labor, deportation, killing.

Yes, that's what I actually believe, and I know Russia has diplomats and embassies. Where's the evidence of attempts to convince Russia with words?

It's pretty moderate if that moderation is selective. After all, I'm sure he'd never argue that buying natural gas, oil, raw materials etc. from Russia is the pragmatic thing to do.

I mean that this stance, objectively speaking, goes beyond "moderate" support, when looking at international relations as a whole. As far as I can tell, only the US provides support to Israel that is even less moderate than this.

His stated stance is basically that Finland should refrain from condemning Israeli settlement policies in West Bank and should keep buying/selling weapons from/to Israel because that's the pragmatic thing to do, and this sort of a "moderately pro-Israel" stance is also common in the Finnish right simply because pro-Palestinianism is associated with the left.

Huh? Really?! Does this stance count as moderately pro-Israel "just" in Finnish right-wing circles, or also in Finland as a whole? Because if it does, I find it even more difficult to take any of this posturing seriously.

So do the governments of NATO member states have any agency in all of this or not? For Poland and the Baltic states to make that decision, there needs to be a palpable intention on NATO's part to expand westwards, a call to be answered. Mexico can only join any alliance if it gets invited by that alliance, presumably because it wants to expand into the American continent. The issue here is not what it does or does not have a right to do.

That's actually pleasantly surprising.

You know what Ukrainian nationalists mean when they speak of "Europe", don't you?

Well, it isn't. I was just completely surprised that you'd come up with that hypothetical among all possible ones, considering that, as far as we know, Hitler planned to erase cities in occupied Russia, not found them.

But I'll say this: had the Nazis ever actually founded new settlements in present-day Ukraine, and at least one of these still existed, there's only one political group that would ever conceivably honor its founding, and that is Azov symphatisers.

And if Mao Zedong happened to create shelters for dispossessed landlords...

...no, wait, he has done exactly the opposite.

I object to the notion of it being smart.

Not particularly, but that'd surely be consistent though.

Yes, a settlement that wasn't Ukrainian in any sense of the word but (maybe) geographical, which was a fishing village transformed into a port city and naval base.