• Chipthemonk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    The west is not some evil entity as you make them out to be. Sure, the west has done some bad shit, but it is far more progressive than many Islamic states that actively enforce misogyny.

    It seems to be in vogue these days, especially with people that lean left, to shit on the US and the West. I find it unfortunate that so many privileged people in the west shit think it’s so cool to make their own culture out to be the aggressors and bad guys. They think that, by describing the west in a negative light, they can elevate themselves out of it or something.

    I agree that banning shit is not a good idea, fundamentally, but when a culture brings in dumb shit, people should resist that dumb shit and adopt the good stuff. That’s the idea of a melting pot.

    • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Most of the West by land area is built upon the graveyard of peoples slaughtered for their land and on the backs of people enslaved for their labor, but yeah that’s just “some bad shit”.

      How about you Westoids deal with your own litany of unspeakable crimes against humanity by giving back your stolen lands and paying full restitution to the surviving descendants of your victims before you get on your high horse about how the Islamic world you’ve continuously bombed for the last two decades isn’t “progressive” enough.

      Maybe people wouldn’t have to flee their homes and bring their “dumb shit” with them if you didn’t keep blowing their shit up.

      • Chipthemonk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ah the classic stolen lands argument. You seem to think that the lands were widely populated with a dense civilization by people that had a concept of land ownership. You might be surprised to know that the americas were not densely populated in the slightest and most of the people who migrated to the americas through Siberia (the “natives,” who are actually just early migrants from the Middle East like all early Homo sapiens) don’t always have a concept of land ownership because they lived nomadic lives.

        Your arguments are juvenile.

        • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ahh I see. So genocide is a-okay as long as the victims weren’t densely populated and didn’t think of land in line with the European sense of ownership.

          Really, if they didn’t want to be brutally murdered, there should have been more of them and they should have created bits of paper saying who owned what land.

          Makes sense.

          • Chipthemonk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Your argument is in fashion, but it’s simply not the reality. I suppose your argument is so popular and widespread because the history curriculum has not done a good job educating people.