autismdragon

There is literally no difference between oppressor and oppressed, you imbecile you, absolute moron.

Personally my stance isn't so much that I think its "acceptable" as I think its "an unfortunate reality". Revolutions are not clean, ever. Individuals involved in it do bad things. Holding the oppressed to the standards of having a completly clean revolution (impossible) is just counterproductive. I support the revolutionaries even if not every action they take is morally right. I dont withdraw my support for something that is good on the whole because of individual acts that are not good.

Its also worth noting that Israel chose to put civilians on the front lines of a settler project, and that this is kind of the obvious consequence of that. It can easily be argued, I think correctly, that they wanted this so they could look like the victims. Despite them being the oppressors.

the vast majority of cases Israeli operations don’t intend to harm civilians.

What's the public health effect of legalized cigarettes vs, say, pot?

Communists are generally in favor of legalizing fucking heroin lol. ETA: Full drug legalization means full drug legalization. WE also want to treat drug addiction like a public health issue of course.

Are cigarettes being banned to provide pretext for cracking down on radicals or minority communities?

Hey what was Eric Garner doing when he was killed again?

I just don't understand how a group of people who are all for drug legalization are suddenly supporting a policy like this (from a Tory no less)? Why are we suddenly in favor of drug prohibition? Am I missing something?

Cool things that leftists always support: making drugs illegal.

Cool things that have historically worked and not made things worse: Prohibition.

Like seriously what the fuck is this shit since when did we believe in making drugs illegal.

Damn you got really mad at someone for saying that they are interested in why pro-state socialists feel that way and want to learn. Why does someone wanting to learn make you so angry? Maybe because you're closed minded and refuse to listen and learn in the slightest?

Someone with as much obvious privilege as you, who wields it in conversations freely, calling others priviledged for the mere act of engaging with people who think differently than them is quiet rich.

ETA: I think you need to maybe think about introspecting instead of lashing out when someone accuses you of being a priviledged white gay westerner "pulling up the ladder". Because that is a quiet common phenomenon (see men like Pete Buttigieg for example). White gays who aren't poor saying "ok, we won marriage equality, dont care about the rest of it" is very frequent and you ARE acting like that in this thread.

As an anarchist you should agree with "marriage is a patriarchal institution" since that take was pretty much invented by anarchists.

I'm not a Christian, but one of the things I've always felt Jesus was really on point on was when he said "take the beam out of your own eye before taking the speck of dust from your neighbors".

I think this can be applied to geopolitics very well, even if you think the other country has the beam and you have the speck of dust, its still advisable to focus on your own countries problems. Its hypocritical not on a personal level, but on a national level. To use a non Christian phrase, its throwing stones in a glass house. Idk what specific country you're from, but unless its China you can't do much about China's issues with queer rights, so why focus on them? Focus on wherever you're from.

Like literally the only thing a Westerner can "do about" Chinese queer rights issues is encourage war/regime change, which you should know does not have a good record of working out for the effected country. And thats the problem we communists have when people start talking about China's problem. We know our countries want regime change in China, so we see this shit as supporting of that. Its basically a threat.

Have you ever criticized someone for looking at the issue through a very eastern lense or is that reserved for people you deem as western-enough?

No, I haven't, because I'm a westerner lol. Like I said, I focus my criticisms at home.

They didn't get explicit permission, but they also didnt get shut down.

Also, the "filmed without permission" is weird phrasing anyway. Does every indy movie in other countries get explicit permission from the government to be filmed? A Wiki article for, say, an Australian indy movie about queer people that covers Australian oppression of the indigenous wouldn't go out of its way to mention "the government didn't give permission for it to be filmed" because why would it? The government doesn't need to approve such project. Including the "government didnt give permission" feels like editorializing to make things sound more sinister then they are.

Didnt say it was a government event. Said the governemnt would implicitly have had to allowed it to happen, or it wouldn't have. Or at least, thats what people who think the Chinese government is an all powerful oppressive force would say. Which is my point.

ETA: Like the fact that a festival like that exists AT ALL, in the nation's capital, proves that the government isnt an evil opressive anti-queer regime that people paint it as.