• 0 Posts
  • 22 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 23rd, 2023

help-circle
  • It is worth less in the sense that its impact is less than it could be. Like for example, would you be moved by such a statue being set up in Pyongyang or in 1946 Germany? Of course not. The statue only works because and as long as Europe, the EU, Belgium or the artists who created the statue can claim a moral superiority over China. That superiority largely hinges on whether and how past atrocities are admitted, rectified and prevented from happening again.

    Also, what has people like the commenter above outraged is that such a statue is not displayed in a contextless moral void but serves as a propaganda tool to diminish Western or European human rights violations in past and present - even if not intended by the creator. “But look at China” itself is a huge whataboutist argument. If the moral evaluation of states and such is too emotional a topic to see this point, then maybe you can see it at work in the climate catastrophe. “But look at China” has been and is a very popular argument despite being both completely illogical and actually wrong, and it’s a danger to the continuation of our civilization.













  • What do my personal goals have to do with anything? I want a society based on solidarity, justice, human rights, democracy and without discrimination. More and more people vote and voice support for nationalism, social darwinism, fascism and suppression of diversity. I know perfectly well what I want. I take offense that others don’t want my goals and actively want to criminalize me, suppress my rights and more and more openly kill me.

    So tell me how do I get my neighbors and fellow citizen to choose peace and love instead of hate and cruelty?

    If I knew the path, I’d go it. That’s the point you stubbornly refuse to engage with.







  • Calling it an immigration debate is a symptom itself, right? We’re usually not talking about people coming here to study and to work, which would be immigration. Instead the debate is about asylum for refugees, whether refugees get individual human rights or if they can be treated in bulk with imposed limits, where they can be sent and who has to deal with them, who builds walls, whether they can be drowned in the mediterranean or if it’s legitimate to shoot them at the borders, whether activists who rescue them from drowning are criminals.

    Stop framing it as immigration, which is a bit in each country’s purview to organize or not, and can indeed be debated. Here we’re talking about human rights for human beings who are in a desperate situation and deserve every help they need and if we can’t grant them that then we have failed our shared values, and our economic system and our political system are apparently unsuited for humanity and should be abolished. Refugees are welcome or you are an asshole and there cannot be any discussion about this, at all, in a modern democracy with human rights.