Hacker News Reader

Your "do nothing" / "everything is equivalent" sentiment is just a total abdication of thought and responsibility in my view.

You remind me of my graduate student instructor in college that called the film Casablanca imperialist propaganda because in her view that's what WWII was.

You and she are out there. That's fine. The rest of us must act.

he is trying to lull you into a feeling that you have no moral ground and you should just do nothing, because nothing matters and must let it all happen.

this is standard propaganda on social media

> he is trying to lull you into a feeling that you have no moral ground and you should just do nothing, because nothing matters and must let it all happen.

No I am not lulling him into anything. I am introspecting and speaking my mind. Not everything is propaganda. The time to do nothing should have been 30 years ago after the fall of Soviet Union. The time to do nothing was when multiple Western scholars, politicians and diplomats advised against NATO expansion to the East. That time is long gone. Ukraine is already invaded. Other non-NATO countries might be next (based on the outcome of this War). We are way past "propaganda influencing opinion" here. We are already at point of introspecting failures of the past.

> Are you 100% sure that you aren't being shown a filtered version of what is actually happening?

Of course we are, but I'm 100% sure I can be gay or go protest against my government without having to fear for my life or going to jail for months/years yeah. I can watch TV programs run by radical ecologists, far right or communist people. I can vote and elect people who are at least doing 25% of what they're supposed to do instead of having the same dude and his buddies running the country for their personal profit for 25 years straight

Russia or (current) Afghanistan aren't Hell on earth but if you think they're just as good as Germany you're lying to yourself more than your government is lying to you. The West is fucked up in many ways but the average westerner isn't as fucked as the average dude living under a "totalitarian" regime.

> What use is a Democracy if you cannot stop an unjust War? What is the difference between your State and the so called "Totalitarian State"?

Now I get why you created a throwaway... what's the difference between France and Afghanistan ? What's the difference between Germany and North Korea ? What's the difference between Switzerland and Saudi Arabia ?

> Yet I won't shy away from admitting that we are bloody hypocrites.

You shy away from admitting authoritarian states are a bad place to live in if you want to do anythign other than drinking the governmental kool aid and give up a lot of your personal liberties

> Now I get why you created a throwaway... what's the difference between France and Afghanistan ? What's the difference between Germany and North Korea ? What's the difference between Switzerland and Saudi Arabia ?

Were the French citizens able to stop France from invading Libya, Syria, Iraq even after knowing that the causes/reasons were wrong? No. So how do you call it a "Democracy"?

To answer your point directly: no country in the World is truly Democratic. Most of them have varying degrees of Authoritarianism built into their structures. Your "Democratic Rights" typically extend only to voting your representatives, free speech/expression and other fundamental rights. Beyond that, most of the State actually functions like an Authoritarian regime with wide powers to do whatever it wants to do for the most part. Even checks and balances are only effective if there is no nepotism/political affinity/lobbying etc. Which is why, even with widespread anti-War sentiment during the second Iraq War, the elected Governments did not care. Many still went ahead with the War. All based on lies that Saddam had WMDs.

> You shy away from admitting authoritarian states are a bad place to live in if you want to do anythign other than drinking the governmental kool aid and give up a lot of your personal liberties

Of course it is bad place to live. I don't even need to admit something that is so obvious. I am just saying that the "Free-World" is slightly better than the Authoritarian regimes. The "slightly better" aspect is fundamental rights and ability to vote. But what I find amusing is that everyone only harps on that as if it is the be all and end all. Fundamental rights are just a stepping stone. The rest of the structure is still Authoritarian and that needs to change. It cannot change if you keep comparing the Free World to Authoritarian regimes in only the good parts. Compare the bad parts too and see how much better/worse you are. That is the only way to improve existing structures. Even in the "Free World" you have maximum incarcerations (US tops the list surpassing China — not something to be proud of) with people being jailed for frivolous things.

Obvious Russian propaganda is obvious, but I will bite.

"what moral standing do I have to say: 'Russia bad'?"

A. Two things can be bad at the same time - Russia's unprovoked slaughter of the Ukrainian population is bad, and the US government fabricating reasons to invade Iraq in 2003 is also bad. I would not be surprised if a vast majority of people hated both Putin and Dubya for these wars of aggression.

B. Some atrocities are worse than others. Clusterbombing hospitals and nurseries on a nationwide scale in a war of aggression, or threatening to blow up nuclear power plants and release radiation in the same war are fairly high up that scale of atrocities.

> Rather, do you in the free World see what is being shown to you in the free World as the Truth? Are you 100% sure that you aren't being shown a filtered version of what is actually happening? You just believe you are in a free World and that all actors are acting, not out of self interests, but for the greater good?

100%? Of course not. But I'm 100% sure our media is less filtered than Russia's.

Once again, there are degrees: more or less filtered, more or less distorted, more or less honest.

> Even Grenada wasn't spared (11th tiniest country in the World) with hardly any military. Bombed by USA. The Prime Minister of Grenada assassinated.

The leftist Communist government executed its own Prime Minister; the U.S., Barbados, Jamaica, Antigua & Barbuda, Dominica, Saint Kitts & Nevis, Saint Lucia and Saint Vincent & the Grenadines invaded in order to restore order, in accordance with the Governor-General of Grenada itself and in response to the appeal of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States.

It was hardly a case of unprovoked U.S. action.

Well, Russia is engaging in that behavior right now and NATO countries have larger refugees issue right now as consequence. Plus, they expect to be attacked by Russia next if the war on Ukraine goes in Russian favor.

The Churchill is completely irelevant, as irrelevant as Stalin.

"How many countries have dictators invaded?"

Stalin? Mussolini? Hitler? Read a history book before making such outrageous claims and false analogies.

Even Hitler (the worst Dictator in recent history) pales in comparison to how many countries the West has bombed and destroyed. Millions dying. Millions more homeless. Millions moving from one country to the next as refugees. All this happened post World War 2, in relative "peace time".

Churchill is not a false analogy. He actually was responsible, single handedly, for the Bengal Famine of 1943 which killed 3 million Bengalis.

USA has invaded 84 countries. I would like you to give me one Dictator who has invaded as many countries as USA alone has. Just one will do. That will really put things into perspective.