this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2024
84 points (100.0% liked)

askchapo

22774 readers
296 users here now

Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.

Rules:

  1. Posts must ask a question.

  2. If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.

  3. Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.

  4. Try !feedback@hexbear.net if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

So far historically it was "they're not Christians", then it was "wrong location" (cause they wanted the land/resources), then it was "they're not the right race", then it was "wrong economic system", and now it's "wrong culture"; what's next do you think?

EDIT: By justifiable I don't mean it's actually justifiable, I mean most people will consider it justifiable.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PM_ME_YOUR_FOUCAULTS@hexbear.net 70 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

To protect the treats

I'm not kidding at all

The open embrace of imperial violence to maintain one's own personal lifestyle will be an increasingly popular position as material conditions deteriorate: Treatlerism

[–] frauddogg@hexbear.net 40 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'd argue this is the third tenet of the evergreen "life, liberty, and 'the pursuit of happiness'"

[–] PM_ME_YOUR_FOUCAULTS@hexbear.net 20 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The pursuit of my happiness even at the cost of your life and liberty

[–] RedDawn@hexbear.net 9 points 1 week ago

Basically the justification for bombing Yemen, “they’re threatening the sea lanes and international shipping!!”

Nevermind that they are doing a targeted embargo to stop a literal genocide, the specter of treat stoppage is used as justification for violence in response.