OBJECTION! @ Objection @lemmy.ml

If someone claims something happened on the fediverse without providing a l

---

Read more

Posts

18

Comments

1,622

Joined

1 yr. ago

Saying that people are licking boots "accidentally" by calling out and refuting misinformation is not notably better than saying that they're licking boots intentionally. "I should be able to say whatever I want about this country, true or not, and if people push back, they're accidentally licking boots" doesn't become ok because it includes the qualifier "accidentally."

If I've misinterpreted you, you're welcome to explain how or what you meant. Or to drop it in favor of my other points, which you seem to be evading.

The Ghorman massacre was referenced

Ghorman has been a part of Star Wars lore for ages, yes. There is nothing about the word "Ghorman" that connects it to Gaza. The things that connect it to Gaza are mainly twofold, first, the specific phrase "Ghorman Plaza," (which did not exist in the lore prior to Andor, to my knowledge) and second, the intentional use of the word "genocide" in connection to it, especially in Mon Mothma's speech. Just "Ghorman" vs "The genocide in Ghorman Plaza" is a huge difference.What the writers did was to take an existing, largely undefined part of Star Wars lore, and flesh it out in a way that ties in to current events.

I have no clue why you think I'm saying the word "Ghorman" has anything to do with Gaza, on it's own or as it existed in the lore.

Which country do you think the people masscred in Tiananmen square were from? Were the people massacred there people known for making silk?

This is incredibly dumb, and I'm just highlighting this part of your comment as an example to others of how far a brain is capable of stretching something to make it be about what the person wants it to be about. Obviously, there's no reasoning with that, but the whole plot regarding Ghorman revolves around a foreign, occupying force planning to exterminate or drive out a population in order to seize resources. There is zero connection to China, apart from silk.

Yeah they referenced silk thinking “I’m sure people will get get the connection from silk to textiles to Palestinians.”

People in the Star Wars universe probably don't really remember Ghorman as "the place that makes silk" in the same way people from our universe don't think of Palestine as "the place that makes textiles." But it's important to be included to illustrate that Ghorman had an economy and culture before it became known as the site of a massacre, regardless of the Empire's attempts to erase it, in the same way that it's important to remember Palestinian culture despite Zionist attempts to reduce them to animals. I doubt the audience was expected to specifically to make the connection, but even if you're unaware of Gaza's history with textiles (and even if it wasn't intentional), it still conveys the message in broad strokes.

Obviously, this wouldn't convey anything meaningful if it were about China. But then, that's the level on which reactionaries understand art.

Ctrl+F plaza

Phrase not found.

See, again, people like this are exactly why we need the protagonist to look directly at the camera and explain things to them. Because the average Westerner's worldview is so propagandized that when they see a work critiquing their own government, they assume that it must be about foreigners, because obviously we're number one and everyone else is worse than us. If you make a US allegory look bad, they assume it couldn't possibly be about the US. Combination of media illiteracy and a delusional, chauvinistic worldview.

I’m pretty sure the Israel Gaza war kicked off with terrorists masscring people in villages and taking hostages, but it wasn’t the IDF doing that shit. Did Andor portray that at all?

Well, the show kicks off with Andor shooting two corporate security guards, after they tried to rob him. Does that count? I mean, it's not like Palestinian resistance to Israeli colonization and apartheid is unprovoked.

Anyway, which silk producing country massacred peaceful protesters in a public square?

The silk producing planet did not massacre peaceful protesters in a public square. The Empire, an occupying force in Ghorman, massacred Ghormans. I guess if Ghormans had massacred Imperials, your China comparison might make a certain amount of sense. But that's the complete opposite of what happened in the show, where the "silk producing planet" was the victim of genocide, not the perpetrator.

Incidentally, Gaza is also famous for textiles, or at least, it was, before the dark times. Before the Empire.

Next you're going to tell me that the original trilogy wasn't about the Vietnam War

Did I or did I not add the tongue-in-cheek qualifier “accidentally” to licking boots to signify the benefit of the doubt of the people falling into this trap?

What "trap"?? The "trap" of correctly refuting misinformation? How generous of you!

Not so distant if we’re going to be fighting a proxy war against them.

Oh, well that's very simple. Don't fight a proxy war against them. I think I may not have expressed my position properly: there are no foreign threats anywhere that are anywhere near as important and dangerous as the ones here at home.

Let's do a quick quiz. Question 1: I can't afford health insurance. The people primarily responsible for me not having access to healthcare live in which city?

• A. Pyongyang
• B. Moscow
• C. Beijing
• D. Tehran
• E. Washington D.C.

Question 2: Which country's government poses the greatest threat to my safety and has the greatest ability to imprison/kill/harm me, as an American?

• A. North Korea
• B. Russia
• C. China
• D. Iran
• E. US

Now, would you kindly explain to me why I should rally behind the people who are most likely to harm me and who are the reason I don't have healthcare against people thousands of miles away?

Can I not talk about a pitfall that I often see with people defending NK, as an “inb4” if you will? Because I hope you reread the sentence that way.

The problem is that even if there are people like that, the criticism gets directed at people with much milder takes. And in this case, you replied to someone with .ml saying "why do .ml's..." and "y'all..." You were clearly including them, even though all they'd done was to identify some things that are objectively misinformation.

Why so eager to jump in like that about a known violator of human rights that has voiced unconditional support for Russia, a country actively picking a fight with the entire West side of the world?

Because of... the truth? Does being a "known violator of human rights" make it ok for people to spread lies? Does it make someone a bad person to refute things that are objectively false? At that point, how could we even determine if anything said about them is true, if their critics are happy to lie, and to attack anyone who calls out lies?

I don't care who you're talking about, whether it's North Korea, Iran, Trump, fucking, Nazi Germany, whatever, if people say false things about them, then I'm going to correct those falsehoods. There's this whole social disease that correcting misinformation about something inherently means you support it. If someone says "In North Korea, they kill you for having the wrong haircut" and you say, "No, they don't," then congratulations, you are now "defending North Korea," you are now a "North Korea apologist," or, as some would say, a "tankie." And then you ask why there's so many "North Korea apologists."

Some of us value truth and integrity more than we value bashing whoever the news tells us to hate. And because we have the audacity to interrupt the whole Orwellian "Five Minutes Hate" thing, that makes us traitors if not foreign agents or bots.

If North Korea is my "enemy," it's certainly a very small and distant one that's not really worth messing with. Speaking as an American, my biggest existential threats are all domestic, like the rise of fascism and exploitation by the rich. I can see no reason why I would support my domestic enemies meddling in the affairs of other countries for their own benefit, and if I don't support my government taking hostile action towards North Korea, then there's pretty much fuck-all I could do about it in any case, is there? So what difference does it even make what anybody's stance is on it, what's the big deal if some people take it too far? The only relevant question with North Korea is "Should our government fuck with them or not" and the answer is obviously "not."

Andor is just one such example of this.

This shit is why I joke that every work of fiction needs to end with the protagonist staring directly at the camera and explaining what the audience is supposed to take away from it, 1950's style, because people are too stupid for subtlety. Yes, yes, very clever to name the site of a genocide "G[horman Pl]aza," and have a character specifically emphasize the word "genocide" in a Senate chamber, but StrikeEagle784 sees all that and goes, "Wow, cool lasers" without understanding anything about anything.

Now, imagine if Andor ended with Cassian taking a seat and saying, "Hi, I'm Cassian Andor, and I hope you enjoyed the show. Were you moved by the plight of the Ghormans and inspired to fight the Empire? Well, just like how the Empire conducted a genocide against Ghorman, in real life, the US and Israel are committing genocide against the people of Gaza. That's actually the reason why that's in the show. Early on, I tried to turn a blind eye to injustice, but I found that ignoring the problem didn't make it go away. This is also true in real life. In summary, the genocide in Gaza is bad and you should do something about it."

Would that be stupid and annoying? Yes. But this is the level of art that we deserve. At least, it's the level of art that StrikeEagle784 deserves.

Let's just review this conversation, shall we? What the other person said was:

Do you seriously believe they execute ppl for having the same haircut as Kim? And then execute ppl for having a different haircut from him?

They execute generals all the time, then the generals appear alive a few months later. That’s that mystical Juche necromancy for ya.

So, that's two examples of egregious misinformation that they pushed back on. How did you respond?

And y’all invariably paint NK as these absolute saints

We can push back against misinformation without accidentally bootlicking.

The reason we """bootlick""" and """treat them as absolute saints""" is that you chatacterize any attempt to push back on blatant misinformation as """bootlicking.""" So no, it is impossible push back on misinformation without "bootlocking," because, by your standards, anything short of uncritically accepting every bad thing said about a US rival (that is, anything short of actual bootlicking towards the US) counts as "bootlicking."

If I'm wrong, then show me what in their comment led you to conclude that they were bootlicking, aside from refuting misinformation.

I appreciate you doing your part to fact check, but I invented that rule, and I always have the receipts. Don't come for the king.

Case in point, the thread in question was removed, but I was able to find the relevant comment through the search function. A comment from Unruffled, reading:

If the community rules don’t ban GenAI images then you can assume a) they are allowed, and b) complaining about them is not allowed.

As a follow up, I asked, "Is there any way to get a list of .dbzero communities that do/don’t ban AI so that I don’t have to block your entire instance?" to which they replied, "Lol must keep your eyeballs pure eh?", at which point I blocked the whole instance.

You're free to ask Unruffled to clarify their stance or ask some other mod who might overrule them or whatever, but until you can show me a statement otherwise, I'm assuming that the rule is:

If the community rules don’t ban GenAI images then you can assume a) they are allowed, and b) complaining about them is not allowed.

Because that's what I was very directly told.

Liberalism is the ideology of capitalism. Capitalism is right-wing. Leftism is defined by anti-capitalism.

In the UK, for example, the "Liberal Democrats" are right-leaning. It's primarily in the US that "liberal" and "leftist" are used interchangeably, because once there was no longer a substantial (self-indentifying) socialist presence to scaremonger about, the right started scaremongering about liberals by equating them to socialists, and the meaning stuck. But I reject that and stick by the original meanings, which are used internationally.

The difference between peace and an indefinite ceasefire is a scrap of paper. For all intents and purposes, they're at peace.

"Koreans started the Korean War by invading Korea, so naturally the US had no choice but to drop a ton of chemical weapons on civilian targets, to defend itself.

Also, I'm an anarchist."

Cool.

It's more of a liberal delusion that they're "usually" antiwar, but the one that's happening now is always "different." Liberals are right-wing, and generally their (especially US) meddling with regime change ends up installing a fascist who kills or imprisons the left.

What war? The Korean War from 70 years ago? Because they've been at peace since then, but some loonies in this thread want to go over and start trouble with them.

Damn, maybe we should stop doing them then.

Jesus Fucking Christ. Stop trying to "liberate" other countries. Don't you understand what that entails? Rampant slaughter of civilians followed by propping up a colonial regime. How many times are you gonna try this shit before you learn? When has it ever worked?

At least DPRK minds it's own business. Imo, the country most in need of a war of liberation is the United States, which not only has a backwards, oppressive regime that's disappearing people off the streets, but also has been directly involved in multiple wars of conquest and aggression, and indirectly involved in more. Whatever you wish upon Korea, let it happen here, let's let China or someone bomb our cities and set up a government they like. Will you be greeting them as liberators? Not so fun when the shoe's on the other foot, is it?

Someday I hope y'all are able to see yourselves for the warmongers you are. I have no idea how liberals are able to convince of themselves as "peace-loving" while saying shit like this.

Personally, I subscribe to "Live Internet Theory." I assume that the vast majority of people I interact with are real people, and bots are very much an exception, and often easy to identify.

The Internet connects people with different views who wouldn't otherwise meet and who might not express their opinions if they did. Most of the time when I see people lob accusations of being a bot at someone, it's either because their worldview is too limited to imagine a person thinking differently from them, or they just want to use the accusation as an excuse to write them off. The reality is, I think most people who post like expressing themselves through posts, and rather than go through a bot and posting that, they just wouldn't post.

Maybe I err too much on the side of assuming people are human, but I'd rather do that than assume a human is a bot. Especially because I find the biggest "Dead Internet Theory" types tend to be insufferably unimaginative and close-minded, and I don't want to be like them.

We have a few communities regarding GenAI, but the opposite is the case: we had to implement a rule to stop external mass downvoting and brigading in those communities

It's not "a few communities" it's every community unless explicitly stated otherwise, according to the mods.

Will do.

Please tell me specifically what makes this qualify as news. Will you now publish every anniversary from around the world?

No, but this one is important because there are people on here who want to deny these massacres ever happened. Also, it's an ongoing controversy.

Or are you just another person trying to antagonize Poles and Ukrainians? Because it clearly looks like the latter.

That's kind of a strange perspective, isn't it? If someone made a post about the anniversary of, say, The Trail of Tears for example, then I, as an American, would not be offended in the slightest. If I made a post about the Nazi German invasion of Poland, would you say I was "trying to antagonize Germans and Poles?"

Here’s another suggestion perfect for future anniversaries you could commemorate:

Whataboutism.