Orc. Mongol Tumens had iron discipline enforced by capital punishment after Unification. They preferred extermination of cities instead of raping and pillaging for psychological warfare. Still atrocious but there is a difference.
-
The Sietch will be brought offline for HPG systems maintenance tomorrow (Thursday, 2 May 2024). Please remain calm and do not start any interstellar wars while ComStar is busy. May the Peace of Blake be with you. Precentor Dune
Russia-Ukraine War Political Discussion
- Thread starter Zachowon
- Start date
- Status
I can see that, and frankly the Mongols preferred a enemy surrendered out of fear, because it was less costly, and Mongols also actually respected diplomats and diplomatic protections.
Where as Russia and Putin do seem to be doing their best Sauron/Mordor impression.
For a country so officially anti-LGBT Russians do a lot of raping of men. The Chechen battalions are even worse. There are thousands of suppressed reports of Russian mobniks being sexualy harassed or raped by Kadirov's Chechen soldiers.
If you escaped execution the victim was awarded divorced primary wife status and was given half your horses and half your valuables. You were responsible for the upkeep of any children and they were able to inherit equally as the rest of your children. If you murdered her and were found out you were tortured to death for days and refused burial rites, your soul forever cursed by Tengri.
King Arts
Well-known member
You know liberals always scream whataboutism whenever hypocrisy is brought up. Sorry but no fuck anyone who seriously brings up that term.
Are you stupid? Mongols were famous for raping and pillaging. If you resisted there would be rape and pillage, and then mass executions. The Mongols were worse than modern Russia. Because Mongols would have used nukes on Ukraine once it became difficult to crack.
Except we do have others here, even more conservative than me, who will call out stuff as 'whataboutism' for what it is.
So no, usage of the term isn't the mark of a 'liberal', and it is a mistake to treat the word 'liberal' as a bad thing; classical liberals are some of the most valuable people for trying to rein in the excesses of the progressives.
And no, 'liberal' and 'progressive' are not the same thing; liberalism doesn't care about race politics, progressiveness does care about race politics.
King Arts
Well-known member
Can you show me those links, because I feel only idiots "call out" whataboutism. Hypocrisy is always relavent. If you are condemning someone's actions and you yourself are doing similar things then take the plank out of your eye.
Also no classical liberals were the ones that opened the door to progressives they were the proto progressives. Their insistence on individual rights above the stability of the community and tradition is what led to where we are now.
Are just not reading the fucking links scattered through out this thread and the others regarding the Russian invasion of Ukraine?
Because that question only makes sense if you aren't actually reading any of the links.
King Arts
Well-known member
First this thread is 137 pages you can't expect me to remember or know what everyone has said. But I think you are the only person who has used the term whataboutism, there are people criticizing Russia and that's ok. There is much to blame Russia for. But that term started as a liberal term, popular in spacebattles. Who here has said whataboutism?
The term for it got popularized more recently by shitlibs, but that doesn't mean accusations of the action behind it are their invention. The older term for it was a bit spicier, and aimed at the Soviet propaganda efforts.
And you are lynching Negroes - Wikipedia
King Arts
Well-known member
To be fair, that argument is also shit. United States was shit towards blacks.The term for it got popularized more recently by shitlibs, but that doesn't mean accusations of the action behind it are their invention. The older term for it was a bit spicier, and aimed at the Soviet propaganda efforts.
And you are lynching Negroes - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
DarthOne
☦️
I don’t trust either, because both have good reasons to lie or at least embellish the truth. Russia to save face and Ukraine because they’re winning and have every reason to have an ax to grind.
War is shit and does bring out the worst in people, but countries with cultures of corruption often commit far more war crimes.
And that's the beauty of this propaganda trick. But that doesn't make it a valid argument, as opposed to a propaganda trick.
It's a "your country isn't perfect so stop complaining about our war crimes/communist oppression" argument.
mrttao
Well-known member
Whataboutism is when you try to dismiss someone's argument with "you didn't complain about X,Y,Z. this means you approve of X,Y,Z, this makes you hypocrite".
This is a logical fallacy because:
1. usually they did in fact complain about those other things. they are just not doing so in that specific conversation. Thus this is lying about their position.
2. they were not necessarily aware of it, therefore you can't say they approve
3. that isn't the topic of the conversation. so why would they start listing off everything bad that happened ever?
4. two wrongs don't make a right. You cannot dismiss someone pointing out that X is bad with pointing out Y is also bad.
However, in this case we did not have a whataboutism.
If someone goes around and makes the argument of
Thus pointing out all those apparently forgotten examples of misdeeds by western countries is directly refuting the argument. It is not a whataboutism.
Here is an example of whataboutism:
This is a logical fallacy because:
1. usually they did in fact complain about those other things. they are just not doing so in that specific conversation. Thus this is lying about their position.
2. they were not necessarily aware of it, therefore you can't say they approve
3. that isn't the topic of the conversation. so why would they start listing off everything bad that happened ever?
4. two wrongs don't make a right. You cannot dismiss someone pointing out that X is bad with pointing out Y is also bad.
However, in this case we did not have a whataboutism.
If someone goes around and makes the argument of
this statement clearly indicates that Russians are uniquely evil in a way that others are not. That the way Russians act is far worse than all the non-orcs (implied in this case to be the western nations).
Thus pointing out all those apparently forgotten examples of misdeeds by western countries is directly refuting the argument. It is not a whataboutism.
Here is an example of whataboutism:
actual whataboutism example said:
You mean moscovites.When in the end of 19th century they started become russians,they were cyvilized.And then soviets take power,and they behave like orcs.Now,they are postsoviets,so they behave like orcs again.
Compared memories prisoners in soviets and any other country except germany and Japan during WW2.Soviets were ,and sti are,orcs.
Minor correction. Tsarist Russia was a hellhole for peasants and worse for ethnic non-Russians. Purga were regularly carried out against ethnic minorities and scapegoated groups. Ethnic languages and cultures were banned on pain of Siberian gulags. All were required to Russify and conform to Muscovite Russian culture.
True,but they still do not genocided nations.Well,with exception of one tribe in conqered Buchara,if i remember correctly.They were evil,but not as evil like commies.
The nobility actively treated serfs as chattel and abused them as badly as the American South did black slaves. There is a reason serfs fled into Siberia risking death in the taiga rather than stay a serf. The further away from the city you were the more abusive and callous the treatment. In the city the nobles had to at least pay lip service to noblesse oblige and the laws. Out in the country the worst nobles saw serfs as mobile furniture or human shaped livestock.
Last edited:
- Status