☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ @ yogthos @lemmy.ml

Posts

17,502

Comments

11,537

Joined

6 yr. ago

Moderating

---

says the chud ceaselessly posting racist cartoons 🤣

Friendly reminder that this fascist is promoting slavery and dictatorship.

https://historicly.substack.com/p/tibet-china-and-the-violent-reaction

your values on display right here

CIA Cables (1948): The Dalai Lama government was an absolute dictatorship and "one of the most corrupt and decadent to be found in the world today", 90% of Tibetans wanted Communist liberation, only the 10% of wealthy landowners would be pro-US

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP82-00457R001800890009-0.pdf

Free Turtle Island!

Ah yes, dubious sources like Columbia International University, CTV, AP, and so on. 🤣

Aww little muffin wants attention. Go huff some more gas and come back with some better material loser. Dance for me little fash.

oh hey remember how your racist ass slithered away when I actually provided sources on how full of shit you are? 🤣 https://lemmy.ml/post/39575573/22480188

oh you can tune the effects in it not to be overbearing

I really love how much I get under your skin fash. Seems like you're just fucking with yourself here while I live rent free in your head. Every time you reply you let me how upset you are and it warms my heart.

Oh Glide, you adorable little rascal. Should try reading the drivel your wrote when you're sober. The only one doing straw man bullshit here is you I'm afraid. Thanks for confirming that you are just a racist troll with an axe to grind though. Life's gonna get hard for human garbage like you going forward, and I'm here for it. If my presence here makes you uncomfortable, that's tough. Get used to it little fash.

What points am I dodging specifically? I've directly addressed the argument and pointed out with examples how sophistry is being used to obscure the fact that what's happening in Canada is functionally indistinguishable from the apartheid in South Africa. I love how you attack my writing style while distracting from the substance of my argument.

You continue to substitute etymology for material analysis. Your argument collapses the moment we distinguish between a word's linguistic origin and its legal political definition. International law did not freeze the concept of apartheid in 20th century South Africa any more than it limited genocide to the Holocaust. The Rome Statute's definition exists precisely to universalize the crime beyond its specific historical manifestation.

Your attempt to dismiss material reality with dictionary semantics demonstrates your utter lack of capacity to think logically. While you fixate on the Afrikaans word, Indigenous peoples live under the Indian Act's segregated legal status, confined to underdeveloped reserves while their resources are extracted for settler capital. This is the literal structure of racial domination that international law defines as apartheid.

While you parrot debunked claims about Xinjiang that have been refuted by numerous international observers, you ignore Canada's actual ongoing colonial violence. This isn't even about defending China. It's about your refusal to acknowledge that Canada maintains a settler state through systematic racial oppression.

The actual bad faith here is your insistence that we must only use South Africa as our reference point while ignoring that Canada perfected these techniques of Indigenous dispossession and control centuries earlier. Your semantic argument is just sophistry to avoid acknowledging that apartheid is the active architecture of every settler colonial state, including Canada.

The only one using words with no regard for what they mean is you. Take the L and run back to reddit where trolls like you belong.

Imagine being so gullible to genuinely believe that a country would have booming tourist in a region they're conducting a genocide. Looking through your comment history it's pretty clear what sort of a racist troll you are. Bye.

why am I not surprised

Your comment perfectly demonstrates how liberal pedantry functions to obscure material reality. Your semantic argument about apartheid is superficially appealing but fundamentally ahistorical. Apartheid is not some unique cultural product of South Africa. It is a defined crime under international law, specifically the 1973 International Convention and the Rome Statute, which characterize it as inhuman acts committed to establish and maintain racial domination. To claim the term applies only to South Africa is as intellectually bankrupt as claiming genocide only describes the Holocaust.

The material conditions in Canada and the United States meet the legal definition precisely. First, the Indian Act creates a separate legal status for Indigenous people based on racial classification, directly mirroring South Africa's Population Registration Act. Second, First Nations are confined to impoverished reserves comprising a fraction of the territory, a deliberate policy of segregation and underdevelopment identical to the Bantustan system. Third, Indigenous peoples continue to be systematically dispossessed of their land and resources without consent, as corporations and the state extract wealth for settler benefit. Fourth, the legacy of forced assimilation through residential schools and the ongoing removal of Indigenous children into state care constitutes cultural genocide. This is not ancient history. It is the active structure of the settler state.

Your attempted deflection regarding China only reinforces your bad faith. While Canada performs social progress, it presides over the ongoing genocide of Indigenous peoples. China, in contrast, has achieved unprecedented poverty alleviation and extends substantive equality to its ethnic minorities. Your moralizing about authoritarianism is the tired rhetoric of a declining empire, a desperate attempt to project its own inherent violence onto others. The real failure of values lies in defending a settler state built on and sustained by apartheid. Your narrow definition of the term is not scholarly rigor. It is an active act of colonial erasure.

oh good point

Canada is a literal apartheid state that's been committing a literal genocide against the native population well into the 90s. Canada still occupies unceded First Nations lands, has engaged in intentional elimination of culture and language of First Nations people. So, not sure what these 'values' you refer to are exactly.

That's right, can't have people actually travel to Xinjiang and see it for themselves. Makes it really hard to push racist propaganda against China. 🤡

And has the situation changed today in a way that makes the story no longer relevant?

correct