If you're still trying to pull "both sides" to defend a country murdering and abducting children, you have no footing to stand on.
They don't care. It's meant to muddy the waters, confuse people who only pay attention to world affairs on the surface level. Repeat it, and people remember it. Doesn't matter who responds to you. Doesn't matter what they say to refute it. All that matters is getting the material out there, making it pop, making it catchy. Then all you have to do is rely on spotty human memory to do the rest.
It's even better when you get third parties passing along your propaganda too, and all the implications it drags with it.
"This is not war of Russia and Ukraine. I am against such definition. This is Putin's war."
- Boris Nemtsov, before he was shot on bridge near Kremlin wall
I am a centrist, when I say both sides are bad, it doesn't mean both sides are bad in every single conflict but that both sides have their issues. For example, Ukraine has a problem with Nazism, but that doesn't mean they should be invaded by Russia.
The reason why this strawman meme like OP posted, gains traction is because most centrists don't really bother wasting time and effort arguing online.
Russia has only strengthened the position of the Nazis. A society fighting a desperate defensive war can't afford to exclude any help. If Nazis want to go fight the Russians, go let them. Either way, regardless of who dies, you win. And if the Nazis survive until the end of the war, we can thank them for their service with slightly comfier pillows in their jail cells.
Centrism isn't a political position. It's an attitude. It means you have a tendency to view dichotomies as false, and further that the truth, as you understand it, exists somewhere between two presented (false) dichotomies.
Centrism means different things depending on political context. It could mean you're a socialist, a capitalist, a fascist, a bolshevik. It doesn't present a political view in and of itself, and as such it's usually an incredibly unprincipled stance.
Do you look at class through a socialist lens or a fascist one? As in, do you believe the classes are opposed in their interests or aligned?
Do you support the state's monopoly on violence and subsequent declaration of private property rights?
Do you view allowing the interests of capital to steer the global economy via institutions like the IMF as a grave injustice or the invisible hand of the market doing what's best for humanity?
The answer to these questions, if you look into things, will often align in a coherent way. It's unlikely, for example, that you'll take a socialist lens on classes in viewing them as conflicted while also supporting the declaration of property rights in direct opposition to the interests of the worker.
If you're in the U.S and you're a self-described centrist, you're likely a capitalist who's simply undecided on some social issues. If you were brought up religious but went to secular public school, that would cause some dissonance in analyzing social issues. However, this inability to form a coherent view shouldn't be the main feature of your self-described political stance.
It's better to just say you haven't done enough research to come to any reasonable political position. It's much better to accept that humans don't know everything and know where your own knowledge falls short.
it doesn't mean both sides are bad in every single conflict
But you're implying it. You're implying far greater equivalence exists than there is.
If English isn't your native language, then let me help you.
both sides are bad
Is wrong. That is a final judgement, and it is wrong
both sides have faults
Is correct, and what you mean. It still isn't good, but is closer to what you mean.
Also, on the topic of left, right, centrist and moderates (etc), you should be aware of the concept of the Overton Window. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window) I am not going to support the entirety of the concept, but the basic relevance is that "if the general trend of the times is for people to be more right wing, then what you thought was central becomes what was right wing in the past". This is a fault / problem with describing an idiology not on its own, but only in relation to others.
Language is used for communicating ideas and thoughts, and if you don't use it "correctly", in the manner that other people use it, then you will be misunderstood.
Ukraine has a problem with Nazism, but that doesn’t mean they should be invaded by Russia.
This tells me that you both think that Putin invaded Ukraine because of the nazism (he didn't) and that you shouldn't invade a country for being full of nazis (you absolutely should) Congratulations, the average liberal once again managed to support the worst of both sides.
There is a "peace organization" here in Sweden, Svenska Freds, that are hard core pacifists. No matter what - pacifists. Their reasoning is like children. War is bad, everybody should be friends, the end. Reality should conform to this simple principle.
In the early days of the invasion, their loud public stance was that Sweden should not support Ukraine with military equipment. Ukraine was just as bad as Russia for defending themselves with weapons when they should use reason and diplomacy.
Then they got all weepy in the media when people called them useful idiots for Russia.
Absolutely hate those sorts of people. I'm a pacifist too, but not at the cost of my own life.
Pacifism. Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side you automatically help that of the other. Nor is there any real way of remaining outside such a war as the present one. In practice, ‘he that is not with me is against me’. The idea that you can somehow remain aloof from and superior to the struggle, while living on food which British sailors have to risk their lives to bring you, is a bourgeois illusion bred of money and security. Mr Savage remarks that ‘according to this type of reasoning, a German or Japanese pacifist would be “objectively pro-British”.’ But of course he would be! That is why pacifist activities are not permitted in those countries (in both of them the penalty is, or can be, beheading) while both the Germans and the Japanese do all they can to encourage the spread of pacifism in British and American territories. The Germans even run a spurious ‘freedom’ station which serves out pacifist propaganda indistinguishable from that of the P.P.U. They would stimulate pacifism in Russia as well if they could, but in that case they have tougher babies to deal with. In so far as it takes effect at all, pacifist propaganda can only be effective against those countries where a certain amount of freedom of speech is still permitted; in other words it is helpful to totalitarianism.
exert from Orwell on Pacifism and the war
This reminds me of that cunt Caitlin Johnstone saying the simple solution in Ukraine was detente. As if that is an option when you're defending against the entire removal of your culture, history, heritage, and people.
*raped, tortured, and shot
The children were ravenous demons! Foaming at the mouth!
Our hands were forced. We had to kidnap them from their families we killed and send them to residential schools.
Omg, (after we killed their parents with missiles) we found all these poor orphans, abandoned!
Nazi Satanist drug-addicts, no doubt. It was self-defense.
Is about Elon fucking up last month with starlink?
Don't get Musky Billionaire involved please, he's just puking out nonsense.
As is the protagonist in this comic. So it’s a fair assumption.
did china shoot children recently?
I dont get it.
I mean, yes, definitely they have. But they were probably Uyghurs or something so sympathizers don't mind.
Only devil's advocate in war I will ever advocate for is "what happens to the populace when their government eventually gets collapsed"
Russian government is corrupt as hell and the military is fucked, dont get me wrong, but if we get a repeat of Brazil/Korea/etc. where a 'west-friendly' dictator is installed, I would rather them be under their current gov
Whether a Western-backed dictator would be better or worse is hard to say. All dictators are, of course, terrible, but it's difficult to discern just how terrible each one is before they come to power. In any case, we can and should demand better of our governments than that. We may be deeply flawed democracies, but we are still democracies, and must stand in support of our ideals, not dictators, no matter how West-friendly. Fuck, at least some of the time.
It's Russia. It will be a dictator or nothing, it is their culture and has been for centuries.
I personaly don't give rat's arse what happens to russians when their government collapses. They brought it onto themselves, both by being "apolitical about it all" or by supporting and cheering the government all the way back ten years ago when it was just "little green men" and "polite people".
And how about the millions who weren't okay with Putin, but were forced into silence because one person can't fight governmental tyranny? Like, I don't support Russia's invasion and I think Putin needs to pay, but do millions of Russians who had no say whatsoever (and were brainwashed for decades through expertly crafted propaganda) deserve to starve alongside their children for the actions of a monster?
If you say 'yes', then tell me if all Americans deserve to suffer the consequence of Trump's presidency when the majority didn't even vote for the guy.
I don't blame Ukraine for defending their home, but I do blame the US for pulling strings everywhere and causing tensions that lead to war. It's something that has happened again and again, and no one really cares because it's usually not a problem of the West.
Ok ill bite, how did the us pull strings
Wtf pugjesus... i though you were based... and now you are pulling this type of bullshit that the dumbass partisans idiots pull to shit on people that have a non extreme point of view that ends up not allining with theirs?
Cmon m8 we can do better than this, if anybody is arguing seriously that the invaders are as bad as the invaded, they are either dumb, tankies (mostly both), CCP/Russia shills, trolls or litteral children on a "comrade" face, (and therefore neither of these should be taken seriously) not centrist and neither people that are looking for the truth of the things argue that the victim here is the villian, and the ones that do are not doing it on good fate and are not looking for a middle point.
And the worst part is that there isnt really a middle point in that situation, the only one i could think of is that war is bad and colonialism is bad (cuz thats whats looks to me russia is trying to do here to Ukcraine) and even then those point at the fact that the main instigator here (Russia) is the bad guy.
Its like that other dumb post that was looking to shit on non extreme viewpoints trying to shit on centrism putting it between genocide and not genocide, like wtf one of those is a ridiculusly extreme point that cant have a middle ground, so the main point of that dumb post was to justify lashing against those that doesnt allign to either extreme stance by grouping them with the people they dont like, and with partisan shills it thends to be the other political party, even if one cant really form part of that party since one can be not an US citicen.
Not sorry for long text btw.
Do better.
Man, I'm not here saying "If you don't support The People's Party you are One Of Them". I'm not trying to say that everyone who doesn't support Fully Automated Gay Luxury Space Communism is a Reactionary Dog, or that there are no moderate positions which are valid. I'm criticizing the self-professed centrists and moderates who argue that 'both sides' are guilty in the war and for that reason, we shouldn't be involved. You can say they're dumb, and you might be right, but they exist in non-negligible numbers.
Bipartisan is working with both sides, I think you mean partisan, taking a side. Confused me for a moment.
Oh.. ok true on the partisan stuff... im gonna change that.
And im glad to hear that your take is more nuanced than what i though before.
But the meme itself still gives me those partisian american culture war bs vibes that i described before, so thats why i got the wrong idea.
I give you the status of based while the metodology of the meme is not based unfurtunatelly.
they are either dumb, tankies (mostly both), CCP/Russia shills, trolls or litteral children on a “comrade” face,
Unfortunately this is a non trivial group, and they need to be reminded often that they are idiots. I've seen far too many "left wing" people take the position that Ukraine should just roll over and that it's all someone else except for Russia's fault.
They need to be made aware that they are taking a pro Russian imperialism position, and asked how they would feel if it was instead the US invading the Philippines because they wanted closer ties to China, or something along those lines.
War is undesirable, but ironically it's necessary for having a positive peace. If people give into aggressive demands all the time because they'll otherwise wage war, you still end up with peace, but it's a negative peace. It's servitude.
Russia can unilaterally end this war, and the world needs to keep putting pressure on them to do so.
The thing is that they do not take those reminders and go "Yeah i was wrong, im gonna change my believes" when they see this shit, they go "YEEE mOrE wEsTeRN pRouPAgAnDa hEil MeOW, whiNniE puu iS rASceisT nnhhhhiiiiieeeeeeeee (starts playing the USSR anthem)".
And besides my critiscism was against the fact that centrism doesnt really looks to find a middle point between war and not war, it looks to find a naunced take on it or the one thats colser to the truth, and offc the more naunced take would be no war, but in this meme its kinda perversed into partisian thinking like the US culture war bs does, that if you not agree with every single thing my side says then you are a tankie, and i dont whana be a tankie, they are not based, but while i agree mostly with what your side says, somethimes they can say or do some things that i dont like and i whant to be able to disagree with them.
Now i dont really have any good example for this situation since Russia is clearly the bad guy in that one and the one thats comiting more war crimes if trying to colonise another country isnt enough of a war crime, the only thing i could think of is the videos of russian soldiers being killed by drones where in the comments are full of assholes rallying and yelling horrible things about the dead russian guy, and praiseing its dead. I mean, i like to watch fucked up videos like most people but like... rallying like that is just straight up wrong, the poor guy was probably some russian kid that got forcibly drafted into the army because he was caught smoking weed or something, it reminds me a lot of the 1984 book where they had like a "Hate hour" or something like that where they put a mob in front of a giant telescreen and put images of a enemy of the government (dont remember his name but he was pretty much Throtchsky) and rallied people against it and started shouting like an angry mob and as soon as it stoped everyone stoped.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone call Ukraine just as bad as Russia
I have, unfortunately. People talking about "Donbass genocide" and the like, asserting Russia is anti-imperialist, eagerly gobbling up Russian propaganda like it was their last meal.
Go check out the Hexbear and Lemmygrad instances, then.
Welcome to ‘Murica.
I’ve seen GOP idiots in my local news comments try to somehow convince others that Ukraine is stealing money from “us” that could be used to rebuild after our fires, etc, and that they deserve whatever they get.
People are fucking morons.
It's incredible watching them suddenly become doves. Like it's in America's best interest to see peace in Ukraine, and Ukraine is the one that needs to roll over to make that happen. Somehow, Russia leaving is never mentioned.
Ukraine is a very flawed country. It has a real problem with corruption, nationalism and treatment of minority language groups (not just Russians). Still a better country than Russia, and trying to move towards a liberal democracy which is also at least better. But people tend to ignore thier faults completely.
You can't have been on lemmy for long then. Because tankies thinks Ukraine is bad and Russia is good, which is even worse (although both opinions stesms from the same Russian propaganda).
You haven't, but people here will swear up and down that they've seen it because they saw a post that didn't scream SLAVA UKRAINI or whatever. It's kinda like the OP image where they create a strawman and pretend that's what the reality is.
Funny how your nonsense is proven as such by comments in this very thread saying what you claim doesn't exist.
At most I have seen nato skepticism or antiwar sentiment accused of being supportive of Russia or demonizing Ukraine, but the equivalence of Ukraine and Russia are both equally bad actors isn't really a thing.
Pretty shit example considering what Ukraine did to civilians during 2014 but good on you for picking a side!
