Yeah, I see this kind of sentiment everywhere these days. Just because people disagree about things doesn’t mean it’s a subjective issue you can just wash your hands of. Sometimes you just have to dive in, figure out who’s right (or less wrong) and hope your assessment is correct. It sucks if you’re the kind of person who wants to never be wrong, but the adult world is messy, we often can’t afford that luxury.
Thank you. I was wondering if there was a term for this. It is, in my opinion, the most caustic force across public places of discourse today. Humans seem to have an overriding need to "balance the books", perhaps to avoid conflict with their peers or presume logical conclusion must hold two sides in equal reverence. There is nothing fair about this rape of a country, no feebly concocted realpolitik to soberly justify the murder of hundreds and soon thousands of people who want to live free of an abusive parent.
Well, from their point of view, a military pact with the explicit goal of keeping them under control has first taken their land and is now threatening to get even closer to their border and encircle them. Just take a look at the Cuban missile crisis to see how the US reacted in a comparable situation and in that case, the distance from the missiles to the capital was a lot longer. For Russia, this is more like the missiles are already in Cuba and now Mexico is considering to join the Warsaw pact.
Everyone thinks they're on the right side. Now, obviously I think we (as in EU+US) are the good guys here, but it's quite clear that a lot of people were both very convinced and very wrong about this and I don't consider us unfailable.
In this case that has been made pretty easy to see. Even large numbers of Russians agree with that.
> Now, obviously I think we (as in EU+US) are the good guys here, but it's quite clear that a lot of people were both very convinced and very wrong about this and I don't consider us unfailable.
Indeed. But this isn't the Cuban missile crisis (which was provoked by the USSR to begin with) and the Ukraine isn't anything like Cuba.
Note that Cuba was - in spite of everything - never actually invaded with the intent to occupy, and it's not as if the US couldn't have done that if they had wanted to do so.
> In this case that has been made pretty easy to see. Even large numbers of Russians agree with that.
Just as large numbers of US citizens disagreed with the wars of the last decades.
> Indeed. But this isn't the Cuban missile crisis (which was provoked by the USSR to begin with) and the Ukraine isn't anything like Cuba.
Well, you could argue that the EU/NATO expansion did provoke this, too.
But I'm getting distracted here; I really don't want to defend Russia and especially not their recent actions. I also don't think that helping the Ukraine is a bad thing, quite the opposite actually. My point is that you don't get to both condone violence and keep your status as "peaceful" because it's against the right people. If German history has taught me anything, it's that accepting violence as right leads down a very bad path quickly. It might sometimes be necessary, but it's never "not bad".
> Well, you could argue that the EU/NATO expansion did provoke this, too.
You could, but it would be bullshit.
> But I'm getting distracted here; I really don't want to defend Russia and especially not their recent actions. I also don't think that helping the Ukraine is a bad thing, quite the opposite actually. My point is that you don't get to both condone violence and keep your status as "peaceful" because it's against the right people. If German history has taught me anything, it's that accepting violence as right leads down a very bad path quickly. It might sometimes be necessary, but it's never "not bad".
If you really had paid attention to German history you would have realized that sometimes violence is the only way to deal with an emerging threat. It is precisely the lack of decisive action that allowed Hitler the space to do what he did.
In your (our) opinion. But that does not make it an absolute truth.
> If you really had paid attention to German history you would have realized that sometimes violence is the only way to deal with an emerging threat. It is precisely the lack of decisive action that allowed Hitler the space to do what he did.
And that's why I ended my post with:
>> It might sometimes be necessary, but it's never "not bad".
I don't think that turning the other cheek is the right move here. My point is that we don't get to feel good about violence because it's against the right guys.
There we have that false balance thing again. It's documented bullshit, so you can choose to just see it as my opinion, but NATO has a couple of articles formulated especially to deal with aggression like this. To posit that joining an alliance - which didn't happen, another simple fact - because you are afraid of your aggressive neighbor is the cause of the aggression is a pretty extreme form of victim blaming.
> My point is that we don't get to feel good about violence because it's against the right guys.
Believe me, I'm a pacifist at heart. And what's happening now in Ukraine (and prior to that in Chechnya) makes my blood boil. I've seen first hand what life under Russia looks like, there is no way this is going to be whitewashed.
> I've seen first hand what life under Russia looks like, there is no way this is going to be whitewashed.
I'm really not trying to whitewash anything. I have friends in the Ukraine and I'm fearing for their live right now - and, to be honest, a bit for mine, since this conflict is really close to escalating near my actual home. The last thing I want to do is to condone Russian aggression.
My point is that it's really easy to get lost once you accept violence as good. So I can absolutely understand why Patreon chooses to stay neutral in a war, even if it's for (what we see as _and probably is_) the right side. Violence might sometimes be necessary, but it's never a "not bad" thing, especially since it's easy to see oneself on the right side and be wrong about it - which does not mean I think Russia is in any way right here, just to be very clear.
And I think we both agree that the aggression in the Ukraine is both wrong horrible and that violence is generally a bad thing, just to state the obvious - which is probably why we don't get anywhere with this discussion.
> My point is that it's really easy to get lost once you accept violence as good.
I don't think any normal person believes that violence is good. It's the last option on the table. But it is an option.
> and, to be honest, a bit for mine, since this conflict is really close to escalating near my actual home. The last thing I want to do is to condone Russian aggression.
Excellent. And if and when it does happen, then maybe you will understand a bit better why the likes of Patreon cutting off support for the defenders is effectively taking sides.
It doesn't cost Patreon anything to pass on those funds. But fine, if they want to take sides then that's cool with me, they just made it to my shitlist, not a cent through their company, ever.
> then maybe you will understand a bit better why the likes of Patreon cutting off support for the defenders is effectively taking sides.
It obviously affects the conflict; there's really no option not to play for them. I just honestly think that "it's for the right side" is a really bad justification to directly fund weapons. There are better ones in this case, no doubt, but the one the initial comment I replied to made wasn't one.
And I can also see why they don't want to start doing so; once they do, they are either in a position to fund less clear-cut wars or to decide which side in a war is right and both are positions they really don't want to be in. So it's not quite true that it costs them nothing to support the Ukraine (even though, just to be clear, we're in agreement that it would have been the right thing).
> they just made it to my shitlist, not a cent through their company, ever.
"Mexico joining Warsaw Pact / China" and "NATO Missiles" are common Russian propaganda talking points. When someone says those words, you know they are compromised - either willingly working for the enemy of free world, or manipulated into doing it.
("Russian sphere of influence" is another sign of Soviet-thinking, as is talking about "Ukrainian Nazis".)
