Mm. Very America centric of you to believe that no one should care if America commits or supports genocide in other countries.
It's definitely possible they're amplifying these developments to maintain confidence in the Chinese market, but I doubt they're outright lying about the discoveries. I think it's also likely that some of what they've been talking about has been in development for a while and that China is choosing now to make big reveals about them.
I think a big part of this miscommunication was the language used earlier, like civil service and conscientious objectors. In a system like you've described, i don't think that having that as an option is necessarily a bad thing so long as it is voluntary. There are lots of benefits to programs that incentivise community service. I don't particularly like the way we recruit high schoolers into the military already, I genuinely just think a lot of the practice is manipulative and misleading. But so long as it is voluntary, it is what it is.
I was heated, sure. I responded to the notion that conscription can or should be brought here the same way I would if someone said "times are tough were going to have to start using slave labor to save the economy." Mandatory enlistment, forcing everyone in society to join the military, is equivalent to that, in my opinion. It is one of the most objectionable things any society has ever done, in my opinion.
Thanks for ignoring my whole comment. If you're defeatist, you've decided that it's all over, then stay out of the conversation. Your genocide defending commentary is not required or requested. If you're not done, you're not defeatist then demand that your political party do better.
I mean I mostly agree. The subject of the post is the possible candidate of a 2028 election.
We're ideological allies in so far as defending queer rights. Even in so far as being willing to personally involve myself in defending them, little that someone of my physiology can do. That isn't the same thing as conscription though.
Conscription is authoritarian, definitionally. Education and conscription are two entirely different things and it is wildly disingenuous to try and equate them.
Cute line, I'm not trolling though. If you're unwilling to defend your position then just stop responding, stop making a spectacle of yourself.
Harris would not have eased Israel, she herself said as much.
This comment isn't about the 2024 election, it's about the next one. Can the DNC not provide a candidate who refuses to arm a military committing genocide?
Can they put forward a candidate who doesn't want to play an active role in arming a genocide? Is that just too much to ask? Genuinely asking, cause it kind of sounds like that's what youre trying to say. 2024 election is done, it's over. This is about what comes next.
I never said anything about incarceration for skipping school. Skipping school and refusing the draft are 2 entirely different things.
If you can't or don't want to defend your position, you're not obligated to do so.
Fascists are nothing if not predictable. Tariffs arise naturally from far-right ultranationalism. There's a few reasons for this.
One is that it plays directly into notions of national/racial exceptionalism. "Our country/race is better than all the rest. Other nations/races should have to pay exorbitant fees just to do business with us."
Second is that it severs ties with international mechanisms of diplomacy and peacekeeping. It serves as a convenient way to detach a state from its allies (who stand in the way of its conquests). This is typified by events like the Japanese Empire's withdrawal from the League of Nations, in that case not over tariffs but a war of conquest, but tariffs can provide similar opportunities to break apart treaties and start preparing a populace for the conditions of all out war.
Thirdly is that it stops trade with other nations. This forces manufacturing facilities to be bolstered in the nation, isolationism. This means that once all-out war is declared, the nation has the full-scale production facilities to create machines of war at the pace required to sustain large-scale conflicts. This creates the precarious situation of having more production than you do resources (because you can't trade for them anymore), but this problem is solved by conquering territories rich in natural resources.
And fourth, it serves as a direct prelude to declaring all out war. Trade wars are nearly always present prior to full-scale conflicts in modern history. Both Nazi Germany and the fascist Empire of Japan were widely sanctioned internationally in the years leading up to the Western, Eastern, and Pacific fronts of World War 2. These trade wars actually served fascist interests in so far as they made the lives of their citizens already feel constrained and pressured. An escalation to all-out conflict wasn't that great a change when already all their sons were being drafted and common household goods were becoming scarce and rationed.
Trump is not original. We've seen these events play out before under a variety of different circumstances. The move of economically isolating the United States from the rest of the world perfectly serves the fascist conquering aspirations of his Christian white nationalist voting base. They'll grumble about cost of goods, but they lap up his ultranationalist "making the world pay us" rhetoric like they're dying of thirst.