However, hurtful speech was supposed to be protected since America had its start, though I later found out that 1A protected practicing Catholics, and completely ignored Protestants (making the latter slaves to the former).

That’s… not even close to true.

That’s literally its fucking purpose. NATO as a treaty organization has no other functions than defense and standardization. Everything else is a question of the choices of individual countries. Fuck man, even at the height of the Cold War NATO countries were out supporting opposite sides of conflicts.

I don’t really know what kind of boogeyman org you think NATO is, but I might suggest listening less to campists.

“which spontaneous comment might generate a shitstorm”

Yeah, if it was an issue of them making off-color comments, it might be one thing. Using their position to amplify pro-genocide positions, and silence anti-genocide voices? Another thing entirely.

Putting up with some degree of eccentricity and problematic behavior is legitimately something you have to deal with if something isn’t being run by committee (which has its own set of issues). But the core issue with the Lemmy devs is that they’re fascists who seek to amplify fascist talking points, not that they’re ‘untrained’ in PR. Fuck them.

!map_enthusiasts@sopuli.xyz

I knew about wall guns, but I had no idea they were used in the Revolutionary War!

Either that cities have only really been around for ~5000 years, and that’s with a generous definition of ‘city’ and a very broad swathe of the world not having cities entirely for thousands of years after that; or that rural and agrarian-dominated societies historically have experienced most of the same core issues that urban-dominated civilizations have.

This was not the argument. You are moving the goalpost. The argument was:

the fundamental functioning of people does not require ordering to be viable. Self-ordering is still ordering.

That’s a misunderstanding of what I said, though I’ll gladly concede to poor wording on my part. Ordering in the sense that it is imposed by someone else; self ordering is thus innately opposed to ordering in the sense I was using it in the original claim; though, again, I concede to poor wording. “does not require ordering” was meant in the definition 2 sense, not definition 1, which I thought was implied by the imperative infinitive.

Self-ordering is still ordering. Whether a government is involved in enforcing it or not is irrelevant, there will be enforcement of agreements even if the only ones conducting the enforcement are the concerned parties. That is order.

Sure.

Sure, they don’t have to be planned and regulated in advance, but eventually common agreements will produce a regulating group with enforcement authority because organizing in this way is more efficient for the market overall.

This is a point of legitimate disagreement - while it is more efficient (and desirable), I agree, it is not inevitable.

In any case, your argument is in agreement with the core point - that people do not NEED ordering (definition 2) from an authority to organize their own affairs.

But agreement without hierarchical imposition is self ordering. Common currency and measurement standards can and do arise without the imposition of state fiat.

The great advantage of markets, as observed by Adam Smith, is that they’re self-ordering. No grand plan has to be drawn up by any central authority, not even an advisory one, for even very complex and completely disconnected supply chains to be coordinated between firms with great geographic distance and numerous degrees of separation between them.

If you had read any of the sources I provided, you might see that there’s more to this conflict than just a simple land-grab.

🥾👅

Well we agree on this, at least.

Clearly we don’t, as you consider Ukraine’s resistance to its territory being annexed and its people genocided to be the function of NATO puppeteering.

“US interference in Euromaidan is a conspiracy theory” - Public actions and statements by U.S. officials during Maidan (Victoria Nuland meeting protesters, leaked Nuland–Pyatt call discussing preferred Ukrainian political figures) are evidence of U.S. diplomatic involvement and attempts to influence the post‑Maidan government.

“It’s debatable whether it was actually a CIA coup!” and “The literal US ambassador to Ukraine discussing the political situation with the assistant secretary of state” are fucking miles away from each other, but that kind of motte-and-bailey argument is the bread-and-butter of far-right bootlickers.

“NATO is merely a “defensive alliance” and not a credible threat to Russia”

NATO is absolutely a credible threat to Russian imperialist ambitions.

NATO forces have been used to further western imperialism (which you claim to be against, no?) in places like Libya

Western Imperialism is when the UN approves a no-fly zone in an uprising against a brutal dictator, and the more the UN approves it, the more Imperialism it is.

and Afghanistan.

You mean the only time in NATO’s history when Article 5 was fucking invoked? Jesus Christ.

Structurally, it ensures that European members stay subservient to Washington and broadly fall in line with US foreign policy.

Fucking what.

The addition of multiple countries like Poland, Finland, Hungary and the Baltic States were obviously seen by Russia as signs of encroachment beyond NATO’s original mandate.

Yes, how dare those countries desire a defensive alliance against the possibility of foreign intervention. Russia will have to invade multiple neighboring countries to show them how baseless their fears of invasion are!

It astounds me the level of bootlicking campists are willing to engage in.

Funny how you call me a “bootlicker” and make loud pronouncements about my assumed worldview, when I expressly did not claim to support Russia, or it’s invasion of Ukraine.

“I just spread blatantly untrue Russian talking points in support of their war aims, I’m not actually in support of them! 😭”

Boot leather taste good, buddy?

Still no response to the actual points I raised either, despite your whingeing about me bringing up that your sources were all common and blatant propaganda canards.

Like I said, with this conflict it’s either black or white apparently.

…

God forbid I hear your opinions on the very reasonable war aims of that Hitler fellow back in 1939. Wouldn’t want to see things as just ‘black or white’ after all.

Maybe imperialism and fucking genocide is bad?

No, of course not. It’s the Ukrainians who are wrong. And the West was clearly puppeteering them into defending themselves.

Like I said, dare to question the orthodox, black-and-white view of this conflict and it quickly devolves into shouting and name-calling.

Sorry that you want to spread pro-genocide talking points and be treated with asspats instead of disdain. Maybe go find a circle of like-minded pro-genocide types, like a Zionist forum, for example.

So instead of engaging with these ideas intellectually or producing counter claims, you automatically dismiss them as “Russian talking points”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini's_law

Sorry that you want fucking bizarre ideas like “Euromaidan was a far-right coup”, “Russia was just really concerned about minorities!” and “Trump was never favorable to Russian interests!” taken seriously, bootlicker.

And funny how you ignore the actual points I brought up in refutation, but I guess the innate desire of all of Russia’s enemies to submit to imperialism and genocide is an axiom of your worldview.

Fantastic XD

I believe you have my stapler…

that US officials and diplomats actively supported the uprising in 2014

Are we really getting into Euromaidan conspiracies now?

NATO expansion continued despite warnings that Russia would perceive it as a direct threat

Funny how Russia perceives a defensive alliance as a direct threat. It couldn’t be because they’ve openly made insane statements like questioning the sovereignty of the Baltic states, which they regard as rightfully Russia’s, or… you know… invading multiple fucking neighbors and annexing their territory.

The US and NATO have arguably perpetuated the war in Ukraine because it creates profits for the military-industrial complex, rather than actively trying to bring about peace.

“Ukraine would have welcomed genocide if only the US and NATO weren’t egging them on!” is such a fucking bizarre position.

A US-Backed, Far Right–Led Revolution in Ukraine Helped Bring Us to the Brink of War

The war will only be solved through negotiations that allow ethnic Russians in Ukraine to have autonomy and Moscow’s protection, as well as Ukrainian neutrality, which means the country cannot join NATO.

The Kyiv-CIA partnership deepened under the Trump administration, yet again putting the lie to the baseless idea that former President Trump was somehow amenable to Russia’s interests while in office.

Jesus fucking Christ. Any other Russian talking points you’d like to mindlessly circulate?

I’m biased against urban agriculture since it caused all of the problems humanity has been beset with for the last 10,000 years.

That’s… an extremely questionable analysis.

“Agrarian”, rather than “agricultural”, usually refers to a society that is oriented around rural agriculture by smallholders in opposition to urban civilization.

… none of that is correct.

… the functioning of markets comes to mind.

There’s no fucking way, that can’t be tr-

oh my god