all 55 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 64 points 1 year ago* (47 children)

Misinterpretated? What's the misinterpretation? That there isn't a genocide happening in the middle east? Or that it's okay if the ones doing the genociding were victims of a previous genocide?

  • source
  • hideshow 47 child comments
  • [+] -46 points 1 year ago (45 children)

    Looks like you are the one misinterpreting. Are you going to recognize the genocide against the Uyghurs by China, or are you going to deny it is happening?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 45 child comments
  • [+] 46 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [+] -29 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 24 points 1 year ago (19 children)

    Is that happening in the middle east?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [+] -27 points 1 year ago (18 children)

    Gonna deny it’s happening in China? Gonna just avoid genocide when it’s convenient?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago* (17 children)

    Are you mentally challenged or just illiterate?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [+] -23 points 1 year ago (16 children)

    I can’t hear you through your genocide denial.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (15 children)

    Mentally challenged, got it. Nobody here is denying any genocide, you fucking twat waffle.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [+] -19 points 1 year ago (14 children)

    I think you are denying the genocide against the Uyghurs by China. If you are not denying it, please correct me by saying very specifically that “China is committing genocide against the Uyghurs.” And then I will apologize. But I don’t think you can do it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (13 children)

    China is committing genocide against the Uyghurs.

    Now, go on back to school and learn how to read and follow context.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [+] -17 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    My apologies. Thank you for clarifying

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    That was wild man, did you think you where on one of the tankie instances?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [+] -18 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Sort of. I had them tagged as a China simp based on something they had said before. I don’t know what that was, but I have updated their tag so this confusion will not happen again, now that they have passed that litmus test

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    This is the exact bullshit that keeps genociders and race supremecists in power. "If you don't pass my personal baseless litmus test, you're not a real leftist, and are in fact a literal Nazi."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    The litmus test is the Tankie test. You are incorrect in your assumptions

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Sorry, I can read your response in my inbox but Connect won't let me see your reply to respond to in the full thread. But no, I'm not a fascist, leftist or otherwise. I've met and talked to Uyghur people living through and fighting against the cultural genocide happening in China, I know it's very real. My point was that you keep making enemies of your political friends on the basis of useless purity tests that ultimately just create more division and enable genociders worldwide. I don't think this was intentional on your part, I saw your explanation of the user tag and I totally get it. Lemmy is a tiny community, I've certainly tagged people negatively and then seen them in other threads saying things I agree with and been suspicious. Ultimately though, I think it's much more likely that I judged someone too harshly based on one or two comments than that they are some kind of misinformation propaganda bot or whatever, so I usually just ignore them if I don't have something to contribute to the actual discussion occurring. You just came in and completely changed the subject because you thought you already knew the opinion of the person you were talking to, causing unneeded confusion and adding nothing to the topic at hand. That's why people think you're the genocide denier, even though you're not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago

    No, people think I’m a genocide deny because they don’t want to read and they want to get that dopamine rush. Most likely those people don't actually give a shit about genocide at all, they just need something to care about temporarily to get themselves through the day.

    Anyone who gets angry with me for criticizing Muslim genocide in one part of the world— in a thread about Muslim genocide in another part of the world— is missing the point that it’s all about Muslim genocide, and is a total fucking ass hat that does not deserve an ounce of my respect. Absolutely zero things that any of those people can say ever change my mind or make me feel bad about myself. The more they do it the more I know for sure that they don’t give a shit about genocide, they just care about crushing the west or getting their daily dopamine, or being part of a horde mentality.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 41 points 1 year ago* (9 children)

    Wtf are you going about? Recognizing the genocide being perpetuated against the Palestinians does not mean you can't recognize the one against the Uyghurs. Of course that's a genocide, too

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [+] -34 points 1 year ago (8 children)
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Weak.

    It's a public forum and I'm talking to you. If you don't want public input, don't participate in public places.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] -25 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    If you can’t handle people not willing to respond to you when they are talking to somebody else don’t participate in public places

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Oh, I can handle it. I was just letting you know that to say "I'm not talking to you" in a public forum is dumb, kinda like you seem to be.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -18 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Let me rephrase, I’m not interested in talking to you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    See? I'm saying something simple. You didn't have to respond. I didn't expect you to. Yet for all of your saying you don't want to talk to me you sure keep on doing it.

    Dumb.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    You also could have just read my comment and realized I did not want to talk to you, but to get that dopamine you decided to keep going.

    Dumb.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    I recognize all current genocides. Now will you stop using other genocide to justify another?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] -14 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    That isn’t what I’m doing. That’s what you’re saying I’m doing. Big difference.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Ok so can you admit there is a genocide happening in Gaza right now. Just so I'm clear on your position.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    There is a genocide against the Palestinians by Israel happening in Gaza right now.

    See how easy it is to just say it.

    Now you say the same about the Uyghurs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 27 points 1 year ago

    "We didn't intend for 'Never again' to be a political statement! It was just supposed to be virtue signaling!"

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago*

    "Never again" can't only mean never again for Jews. Fine for Palestinians, tho.

    Got it.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    Whoopsie, we upset some wealthy Zionist donors, so we retract all statements on inclusivity and have decided to change our motto to "definitely again".

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    So just virtue signaling. But when such messaging actually matters they cower under pressure from fascists.

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    Never again*

    *Terms and Conditions apply

  • source
  • 22 comments in c/usa@lemmy.ml view that post
    [–] 73 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Being against genocide is pretty controversial these days...

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 40 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    So now the message is to be scared to stand up for what is right?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 37 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    So... Never Again™ actually means only the Jews. Got it.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    What the hell? So “Never Again” doesn’t actually mean “Never again” anymore?

    What the fuck is wrong with everyone these days?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago

    “Never again” can’t mean never again for Palestinians.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    So their new slogan gonna be “ok, maybe just this one more time…for now.”

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago

    Yeah, and it's bullshit that they did. Cowards

  • source
    • Never again under my discretion only
  • source
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    The language in this is almost hilarious in just how hard they're trying to throw someone under the bus. This was something they thought of, and pre-planned what, before the genocide? And then they have taken actions internally and fired so-and-so for it because it was all their fault!? Gosh, what a pickle!

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    I don't get it, what was the message sent by the first post?

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    It seemed to acknowledge that peoples other than Jews can also be victims of genocide.

    This is considered controversial because Israel, which attempts to position itself as representing Jewish interests, is perpetrating a genocide on non-Jews as we speak. They deny that they are committing genocide.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Well but if they deny they're committing genocide then they still can be against genocide right?

    This is a rhetorical statement btw
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I agree with your rhetorical statement, but I think I'm missing some implication.

    It's a true statement, I just don't understand what you're pointing out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment