• DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    They love doing this shit, it’s an incredibly easy way to just dismiss what people say without ever listening to them.

    If these people actually listened to what we say on these, they would realise we don’t “deny” genocides, we put a historical event into full context. And with the full context, it turns out it wasn’t meanie head baddie Stalin and Mao murdering people for no reason, but a complex web of actions done by multiple people, and a lot of mistakes and errors.

    Then again, these are the same people who will say “never again” to the holocaust right before empowering nazis in their country so they can stop the “redfash tankies.” The same people who go on about the “We-gear genocide” are also the same sort of people who salivate at the idea of putting all Asian people in concentration camps.

    • cayde6ml@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Their real opposition to the Holocaust is that Hitler never completed it, not that it never should have happened in the first place.

      • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Exactly! They ignore why holocaust denial exists. It is just a “bad thing” without context. Because context is anathema to the liberal worldview because reveals history as the complex thing it is rather than the simplistic “good guys vs bad guys” narrative libs ascribe to.

        • cayde6ml@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I agree with your sentiment, and while I agree reality has many shades of grey, I find that generally speaking through history and violence, its fair to say one side is more or less on the progressive, altruistic, and wants to minimize suffering, aka the closest thing to “good guys” vs the obviously blatantly evil or regressive side.

          • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            History doesn’t have “good guys” and “bad guys” though, it has people, and good and bad actions. We shouldn’t fall into the trap of excusing awful behaviour because it is done by someone on “our team”

            The liberal mentality doesn’t have good or bad actions, just good and bad teams. The “right side of history” nonsense. If someone is a designated “bad guy” then they are automatically bad, even if they have to make up reasons why. They don’t believe in motivations behind actions, just tautological nonsense about “bad guys doing bad guy things because they are bad guys.” and in turn, by refusing to understand why something has happened, they make it inevitable that it happens again. We need to be better than this, and avoid past mistakes.

            • cayde6ml@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I don’t think that just because someone is good or bad or on “our team” excuses their actions, and I agree the bigger overall point is to learn from mistakes and crises.

              • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Oh sorry! I realise I was sounding accusatory there, I didn’t mean to sound like that. I meant in general, you weren’t sounding like that at all.