I thought the series was going to be for chuds tbh because of Elon and Milei constantly referencing it.

DO NOT TAKE THESE PEOPLE’S INTERPRETATION OF ANY MEDIA SERIOUSLY. You could give them the most based leftist piece of fiction ever and they’d still manage to convince themselves that it’s right wing somehow. Elon literally thinks that Karl Marx’s writing are pro capitalists, that’s how media illiterate these bozos are.

Chinese state-sponsored hackers have exploited vulnerabilities in Microsoft software to breach sensitive systems around the world, including those of the U.S. government agency that oversees nuclear weapons

I’m picturing some American general about to order a nuke strike when just as he reaches for the controls his Windows^TM control panel choose that moment to auto-update and reboot.

MediaBiasFactCheck

You don’t know if you can trust an article but don’t want to bother looking at it’s sources? Introducing TruthBox^TM! No need to think for yourself anymore! With TruthBox^TM all you have to do is enter the article’s publisher and TruthBox^TM will automatically tell you what you should think without you having to activate a single of your brain cells! TruthBox^TM! Buy TruthBox^TM and stop thinking today!

Subscribed

“In 2077 where do the poop water go?”

“We will save on cost by not hiring any human workers.”

“But if you don’t give a wage to anyone, who will buy what you sell?”

I love how Elon is explicitly trying to create a yes-man bot to agree with anything he says but it keeps backfiring.

Very cool

The 2030s decade in China is gonna be insane.

Try the Tankietube instance, it’s administrated by tankietanuki and there’s a lot of us on it.

I’ve seen all of the season 1 of the anime, it’s really good.

Who said that it was intentionally made famine with the goal of killing people? And where?

That’s the “mainstream” narrative so I assumed it was what you were arguing, sorry if it wasn’t.

Are you hung on the original commenter calling it “mass murder” and your point is that it wasn’t premeditated?

Essentially. Yes.

Would the governing body of PRC in 1962 attributing the famine to government errors convince you otherwise? Would the Chinese government 20 years later confirming the same convince you?

I’m not sure where you’re going with this. That the famine was accidental and (in part) caused by bad policies and mismanagement is what I’m saying happened. You’re agreeing with me there.

If not, can you imagine a fact that would convince you? What is it?

If you think the famine was accidental but the government’s bad policies caused it/made it worse, I already agree.

If you think that the famine was intentional and the government was trying to kill peoples by starvation, I would need proof that they at least discussed it internally in order to be convinced. Leaked internal documents, testimony from peoples who were there (and can prove that they were), recording of meetings between party officials, that kind of things.

I’m sorry, but why would that matter? We tend to judge people by their actions, not their intent, when it comes to mass deaths.

Right?

Right?

Maybe it’s my autism but dismissing a relevant question by implying that the person who asked it is immoral/unempathetic for even asking it seems pretty defensive to me, and is a non-argument regardless.

Literally what the first commenter gave - there was a widespread famine in China, it’s caused by Mao agricultural policies.

Now that one is on me, I could have worded that better. By cause-effect relationship in this context I meant the cause who’s effect was that the government chose to take whatever course of action you believe is responsible for the famine. Peoples take decisions for reasons, bad reasons sometimes, yes, but reasons nonetheless.

It’s not about agreeing with the reasons, it’s about coherency. That an entire government, a group formed of thousands of peoples, would act all in concert with no motive, especially for a project on such a large scale and which would take so many resources, is nonsense. If you can’t present either proof that they really took the conscious decision to manufacture a famine or a motive to explain why they would want to do that, the claim that the famine was intentional is extremely dubious at best.

Also, speaking of a government’s actions as if only the one person at the top was to blame is something peoples trying to speak about politics and history seriously should avoid.

What are you contesting here? There was no famine? Famine is the narrative? Or that it wasn’t caused by policies but by… What? Weather? Weather was good.

There was a famine. But it was not man made with the purpose of killing a large portion of the population, again, as the other commenter pointed out, why would they do such a thing? And why did they stop doing it? It makes no sense.

The famine was the produce of a great number of different factors, inefficient and backward agricultural methods, bad weather, compound effects of WW2 + the Chinese civil war, mismanagement, trade embargoes, etc… But others could explain it better than I can.

An other point we disagree on is the number of deaths from the famine. Numerous western academics intentionally inflate the death tolls of countries ruled by communist parties, most infamously “the black book of communism” and the “victims of communism foundation” who literally count Nazi invaders killed by the red army and peoples who could potentially have been born but weren’t as victims of communism.

I don’t understand your point, please clarify it, in a way that isn’t just calling your interlocutors stupid or defensive.

I called you defensive but I did not call you stupid, nor did I imply it.

Ha yes, from Marxist aesthetics to fucking yogurt ads.

It matter for the same reason a tribunal need to know the motive of a crime to give it appropriate punishment. It’s not about the morality of the action, it’s about a logically sound and coherent picture of the event.

Peoples doing something bad for terribly bad reasons is coherent, peoples doing something bad for no reason at all isn’t. The fact that you don’t have any explanation as to why an entire government composed of thousand of peoples would do such a thing -like it or not- is a very big hole in your narrative, and rise some serious questions about it’s consistency and therefore about it’s likelihood (because an incoherent statement can never be true no matter what).

Insisting that the event happened the way you say it did without providing any rational or cause-effect relationship and becoming defensive when explicitly asked to provide one puts both your narrative and your argumentation in it’s favor in the same category as those of conspiracy theorists who insists that “they” lie to us and immediately gets mad when asked to explain why “they” would.

I this was a parody of liberal politician it would be called too on the nose, yet here we are.

Evidence that liberals thinking it’s ok to be bigots as long as the peoples they are being bigots to are bad (according to them) exhibit #5354

And our gays are fire 🔥 🤘

Peoples still believe that lie about the column somehow running out of fuel and food and whatever redditors felt like saying this week while heading for Kiev?

I was there years ago when r/Ukraine started spinning that lie and I still have yet to see so much as a shred of evidence that this column ran out of whatever they said it ran out of, or that this ominous column that they said for months was about to reach Kiev was even real in the first place.