227
the ongoing merger of liberalism and fascism (lemmy.ml)
submitted 10 months ago by to c/memes@lemmy.ml
77 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

the remaining differences are mostly about aesthetics and not about the use of violence to maintain hegemony

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 19 points 10 months ago (5 children)

Has evidence on the vote tally stuff being fake come out? The whole thing is so plastered with imperialist propaganda it's hard to find anything trustworthy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    Tbh any doubt I had in his legitimacy is lessened by the U.S abducting him. That demonstrates he's a legitimate problem for the U.S, which makes it more likely he's a legitimate boon for the people of his own country (doesn't confirm it, mind you)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 13 points 10 months ago (2 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Could you clarify why it's not good reasoning?

    • A = u.s. abducts leader
    • B = leader is a problem for the u.s.
    • C = leader is a boon to the people
    • D = leader is (likely) legitimately elected

    Argument:

    • If A then B
    • If B then C
    • If C then D
    • A
    • Therefore D

    We just need "If C then D" to chain A to D since the comment up top didn't mention it . Oh, I think I see a problem here. In the us with leaders we constantly have "D and not C," and even worse than the not C's are the nazis. Ok, I'll stop.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [+] 5 points 10 months ago (1 child)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago

    Yes that makes sense. The premises are too shaky for the argument to be sound despite the valid structure (which the commenter did not use and I pulled out of my ass).

    I was mainly writing it out as an exercise to myself but left it because it kinda worked as a joke lol

    I do very much appreciate an earnest answer.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 12 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    The only "evidence" I've ever seen cited (by western media of course) was all stuff the US does on a larger scale: blocking candidates from ballots, closing/changing polling places at last minute, etc (can't remember the rest, it was too stupid to take seriously). I have however read several accounts that the elections were overseen by hundreds of world officials and has been repeatedly said to have been one of the most democratic elections ever.

    Hmm, believe this or the US who has been meddling in South America for 70+ years? 🤷‍♂️

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 6 points 10 months ago

    Yeah I did hear that tons of observers said this, but if you search you only find articles with "independent observer says foul".

    It's honestly hard to resist the constant trolling / psychological terrorism by MAGA and the smarmy gaslighting by the "left". Makes you "want to believe" the less painful option. I mean seriously it's the exact same playbook trump used on Jan 6th lol.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent