• Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    105
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m so disappointed with the global status this shithole maintains. They are spending so much money on bots and propaganda that if you look at Twitter, Tiktok or Instagram it’s full of organic spam and any comments calling out this disgusting place get removed or piled on.

    • ours@lemmy.film
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Khashoghi died because he funded a campaign against the Saudi Twitter bot army.

    • TheDarkKnight@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      If it helps, that money is leaving their country which is funded by a natural resource that is losing its economic value and they have nothing economically beyond that, plus will get drilled by climate change which they are responsible for in a lot of ways!

      So, temporary problem :-)

  • UnpopularCrow@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    85
    ·
    1 year ago

    How many PGA golfers lined up to join LIV golf sponsored by the Saudi regime? Last year this was Phil Mickelson simping for the Saudi government saying: “I certainly do not condone human rights violations. And addressing what happened to Jamal Khashoggi is awful. But I have seen the good that game of golf has done throughout history. And I really believe that LIV can be good for the game of golf as well.’’

    Money trumps morals.

        • Syrc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Millennial/Gen Z depending on definition here, I did not.

          And after watching it I’m still not convinced it wasn’t an impersonator sketch.

            • Krauerking@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              An idiot only getting the job because of Daddy’s merits, and it making you realize it really is a club for the wealthy to fuck around in.

              And so far what has been our decision from this nightmare? “Yeah the children of the oligarchs do suck, best to just stick to the ancient old fuckers, cause the original is best!”

        • ☭ Blursty ☭@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The USA is the most murderous and destructive regime on the planet. Why would someone take issue with a golfer playing in LIV and not the PGA? Makes no sense to me. It’s really weird how this Khashoggi thing gets so much press.

          • XTornado@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I mean… checking wikipedia LIV is literally funded and founded by the Arabia Saudí government, like they literally created it.

            PGA as far as I can see… isn’t exactly the same situation.

            So the connection would a little bit more direct on the LIV case.

            • ☭ Blursty ☭@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              Okay but a little more direct doesn’t really justify the single-mindedness in this story. The PGA wouldn’t be what it is without government support in one way or another, but even if it was 100% grass roots bootstrapped, the vast majority, if not all of these golfers support the USA. It’s just jaw dropping hypocrisy.

              • blackn1ght@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                It’s just jaw dropping hypocrisy.

                It’s really not; you’re doing some serious stretches here to try and turn this around into your anti-US narrative.

  • h3doublehockeysticks [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I always find it funny how hung up the media class has been on Keshoggi. Its a fairly intense bit of class solidarity I suppose. Like in terms of pointless and evil acts of the Saudi Arabia state it doesn’t even rank but its seemingly the only thing journalists remember

    • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Meanwhile all those dead Yemenis don’t even warrant a mention, especially since it might have poeple asking why we were over there helping kill them in the first place

      • krolden@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I saw a single decent report on Yemen and it was on pbs in like 2014 or 2015 maybe. It showed how the Saudis are bombing the shit out of them with ordinance made in the USA and all the starving children dying because of the blockade on any asstancd getting to them.

        I haven’t seen any comparable coverage since.

        • TWeaK@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          The war in Yemen had very little coverage in the West. People are talking about all the drones being used in Ukraine, but they’d been using drones with similar devastating effecet in Yemen - the main difference being they tended to target people rather than tanks.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        See, Yemen is a bad place where bad things are allowed to happen. By Western logic stuff only becomes real if it enters our imaginary bubble of perpetual safety. That’s also why 9/11 and the Ukraine invasion got such a big reaction.

        To be clear, the bubble is not real, it can all happen here.

    • TimLovesTech@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Probably because in a free from authoritarian government the free press is supposed to be the ultimate checks and balances on personal liberty. When you can’t even write something negative about a leader without being dismembered in a hotel and disposed of in duffle bags like trash, that should be ringing alarms for anyone that isn’t licking boots.

      • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        free press is supposed to be the ultimate checks and balances on personal liberty.

        So what does it mean when “free” press is all just owned by rich chucklefucks who have a vested interest in making things as unfree for the working class as possible?

        • TimLovesTech@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          It means that the alarm bells went off and people paid more attention to capitalism, and voting in people that actively worked against them, because those elected officials treated people they disliked even worse. Then we got a wanna be dictator that went full “journalists are an enemy of the state” because they say mean (TRUE) things about him. Journalists now choose between being able to eat, or sounding the alarm that costs them a job (and falls on deaf ears).

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Journalists are extremely protective of their own, they really like to believe they are a separate class above the regular people. They go as far as releasing press freedom indexes that include feelings, and penalize not granting them additional rights.

  • Aria@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Saudi-led Opec Plus cartel decided to cut production by 2m barrels a day – the opposite of what Biden administration officials had pleaded with the Saudis to do. After the shock of that embarrassing announcement, which threatened to raise gas prices around the US midterm elections, Biden vowed: “There’s going to be some consequences for what they’ve done.”

    I thought you liked the free market?

    • zephyreks@lemmy.mlM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s only free for American companies.

      When Canadian companies like Bombardier try to get involved in the free market, they get blocked by the US DOJ until they run out of money.

        • zephyreks@lemmy.mlM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Lol fair enough, but the CSeries is legitimately a really nice plane so it’s a shame that it ended up getting sold to Airbus for pennies.

    • jsdz@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That classic free market system where a cartel has regular meetings to set production levels to maximise their profits.

        • jsdz@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Actual free markets are almost as rare as actually existing socialism.

            • jsdz@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Really? I thought the most infamous example of triangular trade was more of a mercantilism thing.

            • jsdz@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              A “free market” as the term is usually understood is a well-defined thing, which of course has many problems and failure modes, but is not well-represented by a market dominated by a large cartel routinely controlling prices. It is also not the same thing as capitalism.

              • IceWallowCum [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                25
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                How is it defined? Usually understood by whom? Are you talking about abstract concepts or historical examples of “free markets” and their development?

                Cartels and monopolies are the result of “free markets” btw. The strongest agents will organize to dominate and destroy the competitors however they can.

                • jsdz@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  The free market is an abstract concept, one which rarely exists in anything like its ideal form due to its instability under current conditions of capitalist development. The original definition given by classical economics is still the prevalent one. Despite what slogans from some proponents of capitalism would have you believe, not only are free markets not identical with it, but capitalism tends to take markets further and further from anything resembling their theoretically ideal state of freedom.

      • StalinForTime [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        There is absolutely nothing inconsistent between free-markets and market concentration. If by a free-market, we use the standard neoclassical meaning of one where there is no/very little/minimal government or public regulation to influence demand or supply or the price mechanism, which in material terms implies that those are completely controlled by private capital and its owners, then there is nothing stopping this from being an oligopoly, a cartel or a monopoly. Actually lack of public regulation has generally lead to more concentration, not less.

        I think you are confusing the neoclassical ‘perfect competition’ (which does not, and cannot, exist in the real world) and neoclassically defined ‘free’-markets.

        Please don’t try drop econ-101 learns on Marxists if you don’t know the definitions of free-market economics, perfect competition or oligopolies.

        • jsdz@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          If it involves “an oligopoly, a cartel, or a monopoly” then it is not a “free market” according to what they taught me in econ 101, everything convincing that I’ve heard since, and what Adam Smith explicitly wrote down when he first described the idea. Wikipedia cites Karl Popper in saying that in classical economics a free market is one that’s “free from all forms of economic privilege, monopolies and artificial scarcities,” and that it’s a market in which economic rents are minimised. A monopoly is by definition antithetical to a free market. Any neoliberal suggestions that attacking the whole concept of public regulation of markets will always make them more free are simply lies, and should not be accepted.

          That there is at present little or nothing preventing any imperfectly but approximately free markets that might otherwise exist devolving into less free ones dominated by monopolies, cartels, corrupt and captured regulators, out-of-control rent seeking, frauds that rely on information asymmetry, and other such perversions is (obviously, I thought) the reason why I’ve been consistently saying that “free” markets are not something we see much of in reality. Perhaps that’s not exactly congruent with Marxism, but I don’t think it’s inconsistent with it either.

          • ProxyTheAwesome [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            1 year ago

            If it involves “an oligopoly, a cartel, or a monopoly” then it is not a “free market”

            Markets unregulated tend towards oligopoly, cartels and monopoly over time. Free market is interchangeable with private autocracy.

          • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            1 year ago

            “The free market is so wonderful that the slightest unpleasant activity makes the free market no longer wonderful but that isn’t the free market’s fault except everyone with means is able to make that unpleasant activity happen, which again isn’t the free market’s fault and we can not possibly have a better system.” morshupls

      • zephyreks@lemmy.mlM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        A free market is a distinct concept from a perfect market. You’re describing a perfect market operating under ideal conditions.

        A free market with laissez-faire policies lends itself directly to cartels and monopolies because a perfect market cannot exist without government intervention. Maybe you should’ve paid attention in ECON 101.

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          A free market is a distinct concept from a perfect market. You’re describing a perfect market operating under ideal conditions.

          The free market is a theoretical model assuming perfectly rational actors acting on perfect information and it is indeed ideal within those assumptions. The issue is that it’s not realistic. Real-world markets can be brought closer to the free market ideal by regulation. Don’t let those laissez-faire fucks confuse you what they’re peddling, by equivocation, is unregulated markets which are the complete opposite of free, what they want is institutionalised market failure.

          Next time a “free market advocate” shows up on your doorstep, tell them to give you all their trade secrets so that you have better information about everything, it’s what they want, after all.

        • jsdz@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I dunno, maybe they changed the terminology since I took it. Seems to me “free market” was not previously imbued with all that meaning you guys are reading into it. I’m not convinced it isn’t just an Americanism. To me a “free market” is simply one that’s substantially free of distortion, resembling to a notable extent a perfect market. But I’ll certainly avoid the phrase in future.

  • Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Lol no Saudi is weaker than it ever has been. The Saudis know their military is shit and their people won’t do anything to preserve their regime if the Iranians come after them. With the U.S. pulling out of the Middle East since Afghanistan they are flailing about seeking treaties with the Chinese and the Russians to guarantee their safety. However the Russian military and their equipment have proven to be very shit. The Chinese talk a good game but they don’t have the military to project power overseas and most of their equipment is based on Russian garbage.

    The US doesn’t need their oil as we are a net exporter now. They’ve also cut oil exports in the last year to try and prop up prices. There is also a very good chance they have passed peak oil production and simply can not produce more.

    So what does Saudi have left to offer? Peace with Israel and a conclusion to the Palestinian conflict… maybe. At least that is what they are offering Blinken for an Alliance during their latest visit.

    Don’t let the article fool you the Saudis are weak and know they are in trouble without US guarantees of peace.

    • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Do you really think the media would do that? Just outright lie to benefit their capitalist overlords?

      • tetris11@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Dont do that. The Guardian is a pretty good source. Yes they are alarmist at times, but they’re the last UK newspaper to lick a boot.

        • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The problem is systematic. It didn’t take long for BBC to go from respectable journalism to trans genocide.

          • tetris11@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            The BBC has reported the official line since time immemorial. Their director is now more pro-fascist than ever, but the Guardian is not the mouth-piece of the government as the BBC was, and have had their offices raided numerous times.

            • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Alright you’ve convinced me. They don’t attack journalists who are on the side of evil.

        • TWeaK@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Eh, while they are a good publication overall, the Guardian is the definition of permitted dissent.

    • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      As an American, I really hope that Saudi Arabia crumbles and implodes. It’s a horrible country with horrible leadership and governance.

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I hope you’re right. They sure have been breaking from the pattern lately, I guess it’s a logical explanation…

    • krolden@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The only reason the USA is exporting all that oil is because they don’t have the facilities to refine it.

      • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        No. The USA has a lot of natural oil reserves, but a lot of them are more expensive to extract than the global average.

        Even with American companies no longer investing in new production, the USA has a lot of oil it has access to extract.

    • zephyreks@lemmy.mlM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      How has Western equipment fared in the Ukrainian counteroffensive? Last I checked, the Leopard 2 and Challenger were relegated to backline support because they weren’t effective on the offensive and that Ukraine is still struggling with air defence (given that Russia has been tossing around FABs with impunity). The real takeaway from this conflict is that artillery is king and that tanks/planes can’t keep up in development pace with modern interceptors like drones and MANPADS. WW2’s doctrine of large-scale combined arms and blitzkrieg tactics may be a thing of the past.

      • Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The only country on this planet that is currently capable is SEAD is the USA. No single or combined European power/s can put together a strike package that can significantly degrade an enemies air defenses. I don’t think China has the capacity yet and Russia obviously doesn’t have it.

        I don’t expect Ukraine even with Western hand me down Vipers to take down Russian air defenses. They may be able to contest for air superiority over a sector of the battlefield but it would be costly.

        Stealth is a huge component of modern Western air warfare doctrine that allows fighters to operate in contested airspace. But stealth isn’t SEAD.

        For everyone else, light mobile artillery, long range rockets, AA and drones are going to be the way forward.

        • zephyreks@lemmy.mlM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Stealth is still susceptible to infrared, which is what Ukraine was using to shoot down Russian aircraft at the start of the war.

          If your CAS needs to get into visual range, it’s fucked. If it doesn’t, the usefulness of stealth gets called into question (particularly because, y’know, the entire point of CAS is to have a big bomb to drop on someone, and strapping that to a mounting point ruins your stealth profile).

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Since then, Mohammed bin Salman – Saudi Arabia’s crown prince and de facto ruler, who, according to US intelligence officials, approved Khashoggi’s assassination – has managed a near complete rehabilitation of his increasingly autocratic regime.

    Prince Mohammed has met with Joe Biden, Emmanuel Macron and other world leaders; he’s positioning Saudi Arabia as a global tourism destination; and he’s plowing ahead with plans to build Neom, his $500bn futuristic city in the desert.

    Trump dropped the pretense that the US-Saudi alliance is anything more than a transactional arrangement based on keeping global oil prices stable, common security interests in the Middle East, and negotiating large weapons deals.

    After Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine in February 2022, disrupting global oil markets, the prince seized his opportunity to pressure Biden into becoming a supplicant seeking lower gasoline prices for American consumers.

    Then last October, as the world braced for a surge in fuel prices due to the Ukraine war and sanctions against Russian oil, the Saudi-led Opec Plus cartel decided to cut production by 2m barrels a day – the opposite of what Biden administration officials had pleaded with the Saudis to do.

    After the shock of that embarrassing announcement, which threatened to raise gas prices around the US midterm elections, Biden vowed: “There’s going to be some consequences for what they’ve done.” Yet, a few months later, the US administration quietly dropped any pretense of holding Prince Mohammed and his regime accountable.


    The original article contains 1,260 words, the summary contains 240 words. Saved 81%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    31
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If you need help explaining just how fascist the west is to an average person, point out how they keep aligning themselves with some of the most savage murderous regimes in human history. There isn’t a single answer that doesn’t make them look like a complete monster.

    • anewbeginning@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      People who talk of the west as fascist must not know much of what’s going on in the east or eastern history.

        • Gorilladrums@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Calling something Fascist when it is very clearly and objectively not Fascist does not actually make it Fascist. The West isn’t Fascist. The point he was trying to make is that people like you have a world of view so narrow and ignorant that you don’t understand what Fascism is, hence the incorrect usage. A country like Azerbaijan or Turkmenistan are Fascist, a country like Germany or the Netherlands are not.

          • cloud@lazysoci.al
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            there’s a 99.99% probability you are sending this comment from a chinese piece of hardware your government is totally fine importing from china

            • Gorilladrums@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              China barely produces hardware, unless someone is specifically buying a product from a Chinese company. A lot of hardware isn’t even manufactured in China anymore, let alone designed and engineered.

              • cloud@lazysoci.al
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Just check for yourself, open up the devices around you and check where they are made…

    • Brainsploosh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      By that standard the only countries not monstrous are those too feeble to ally with.

      Plenty of countries on all continents have sided with oppressive regimes, and conveniently ignored atrocities as long as they’re aimed at someone else. In anything from the Korea or Pakistani wars, to genocides in Central America, to slave trading within the African continent.

      The West is due some criticism, but this approach is useless.

      • zephyreks@lemmy.mlM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        America itself has been an oppressive regime. Britain and France were both oppressive regimes not too far in the past (and still to some degree today).

        Why are people surprised that oppressive regimes ally themselves with other oppressive regimes? Geopolitics isn’t a story of “good” and “bad,” it’s a story of rational self-interest.

    • Rinox@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      If freedom of press is one of the ways you can assess how fascist a state is, which it is, then I wonder which countries you consider better than the west. China? Russia? North Korea? Yeah, all places renown for not silencing journalists, poisoning political opponents or ruling with an iron fist. All places where you can just criticize the government, publicly, on prime TV, in the journals, without repercussions.

      Also all places where they don’t murder people for their political views, where they don’t incarcerate them, torture them, send them to “re-education camps” or try to genocide entire ethnic groups in order to reduce dissent.

      At the end of the day, “the west” remains the only place where you can actually go on tv, in the squares and protest against the government decisions, criticize them and even vote for the government to leave power. Is it perfect? Hell no, it’s a disgusting system rigged by the rich and powerful, but it’s still miles ahead of any totalitarian, authoritarian dictatorship.

      Also it’s not like China isn’t buying lots of oil from Iran, a country which it’s as much a savage murderous regime as Saudi Arabia, and from Russia, an imperialistic warmongering nation. And the reason it’s clear, they need energy as much as the west needs energy. It’s the reason why everyone puts up with those kinds of people.

      The sooner we, as a species, can move away from oil, coal, gas and the likes, the better it will be for everyone. No more energy wars and a cleaner planet overall.

      • zephyreks@lemmy.mlM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        How much good has your criticism of the government done?

        Do you have affordable housing? Are your healthcare needs covered? Is your taxpayer money going to help improve your life? Is the homeless issue solved? Has your government avoided going to war? Has your government fixed the rampant racial inequality in the prison system?

        I say this like it’s to an American, but really it applies to most Western countries.

        • Rinox@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well, some of those point have improved in some countries of the western block. Not everyone is American btw. And I’m not saying the west is perfect, but when making a statement like “this is why the west is the worst” you also need to tell me who is better.

          Lots of these issues are extremely present in other non-western countries as well and even more so. Or are you telling me that outside of western countries everyone else has affordable housing, free, good and available healthcare, a good and fair justice system, no racial inequality and no wars?

          • zephyreks@lemmy.mlM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Sure, I’m not denying that conditions aren’t perfect, but the argument being made is that having a democracy influences government policy to align with citizens’ interests.

            Looking at per-capita wealth, the West should be doing much better on these key issues under the assumption that the government exists to make people’s lives better.

        • rambaroo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Who is doing so much better though? It seems like most countries have similar issues and it’s not really a West vs East thing. Costa Rica seems like one of the nicer places to live in the world right now, but it’s a “Western” country and it’s also tiny.

          I look at Eastern countries like Korea and Japan and see a ton of problems with workers being abused and authoritarian legal systems. Better than the US in some ways but worse in others. I would rather live in the US despite the worse healthcare cause I don’t want to work 12 hours a day.

      • ☭ Blursty ☭@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        China? Russia? North Korea? Yeah, all places renown for not silencing journalists, poisoning political opponents or ruling with an iron fist.

        They’re all better than the USA. The rest is what the US told you to think.

        • Rinox@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Yes, then try to go to Red Square in Moscow with a pro Ukraine sign, go to Tienanmen square with a sign against the occupation of Tibet or a sign against Xi. Even if you don’t believe that, just to see what happens.

          Then, do the same in any western country, with a sign against the local government or pro Russia or whatever you prefer. Just try it and report back please. Let’s see who has more freedom of speech.

          • rolandtb303@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Going with your example here, try to highlight Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine, and how there’s lobbies for Israel that are basically worldwide (it’s most prevalent in USA, AIPAC and CUFI being the big 2) spreading Pro-Israel propaganda. Israel’s propaganda machine also has bot farms (called war rooms) distributing propaganda just like the Kremlin bots.

            Try pointing all of that out, then see what happens then in the very country that touts its freedom of speech. (Hint: You get put on a list and you’re smeared so bad your job is in jeopardy).

            I suggest you read up on this, it’s interesting. Here’s a link for some reading.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_lobby_in_the_United_States

            Generally, pointing something out that a state doesn’t want to be pointed out will involve the state cracking down on you, it’s just state policy. Shouldn’t be but it is. I support all dissidence.

            • Rinox@feddit.it
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m gonna tell you a secret, no one is going to arrest you for saying what you are saying in the USA. I’m pretty sure most Americans are not even that much into Israel to begin with. It’s just a game of geopolitics.

              And we are talking about the USA again. The west is not just the USA btw. Also, I’ve been to Israel, a couple times now, and that place is so fucked up, it’s not even a joke.

              This being said, have you tried doing what I said? Answer me clearly. Go to Red Square, protest against the occupation of Ukraine. Go to Tienanmen square, protest against the occupation of Tibet. Just try it.

              I’ll go to Rome or Paris or London to protest against Israel if you want, it’s really not a big deal. Actually, it’s more likely somebody would join me than arrest me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

              • rolandtb303@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                This being said, have you tried doing what I said? Answer me clearly. Go to Red Square, protest against the occupation of Ukraine.

                Well in Russia’s case, they just arrest everyone and put them in jail for 5-15 years and make up laws saying that you can’t criticise the army/government or protest. So people stop protesting because they don’t want to go to the shithole that is Russian jail, or even worse like in one case with a schoolgirl doing a non-approved drawing, the father being subject to CIA torture methods (i recall one of them he had the russian anthem blasted at him at ear-damaging volume, which is what the CIA done in Guantanamo bay).

                Also, the elections are rigged in Russia (just so you know that information).

      • Aria@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        See the problem with this logic is that you’re weighing the west’s real actions at best, or probably their white washed actions against fairytale versions of their adversaries who only exist in the west’s propaganda. It’s not hard to be better than someone written to be a caricature of evil.

        • Rinox@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Or maybe it’s the opposite and it’s Chinese propaganda and Russian propaganda depicting a caricature of the west where everyone apparently is a Nazi, while suppressing all discourse about their evil doings? Maybe they’re the ones who created this fairytale.

          Have you ever considered that possibility? Or you really think Russia and China have never done any wrong and have no propaganda, they’re just squeaky clean? Because let me tell you then…

      • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        So it’s OK to fund death squads and start war at every country that even remotely approaches socialism if you allow the illusion of freedom. Got it.

        • Rinox@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Russia does the same to countries in their sphere of influence who even think about approaching the west. I’m looking at Georgia, Moldavia and now Ukraine. Also they really like to meddle in Africa and the middle east through PMCs like Wagner, prop up local dictatorships and harvest labor and natural resources for themselves.

          China is also trying their hand at the imperialistic game, although they are newer at it. They are trying to enter many African countries and stationing there Private Security Companies (which are paramilitaries still controlled by the Chinese government, because of course they are). In Asia they are also trying to increase their influence. In the South China Sea they are trying to claim other nations exclusive economic zones as their own while in the Indian Ocean they are trying to secure military ports by forcing 99 years leases (similar to the British lease on the port of Hong Kong). I believe this plan is called the string of pearls and I also believe Indians consider it a way of encircling them (China-Pakistan corridor, China-Myanmar corridor and in the ocean ports in Cambodia, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Djibouti and the Mauritius).

          Let’s say that all major powers have tried and keep trying their hand at imperialism. The only difference is that the US has a much bigger economic power than Russia and has been playing the game for a lot longer than modern China

    • Aria@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      The west’s own savage actions so massively dwarf anything Saudi has done in this period that it’s a pretty silly guilt by association point.

    • Gorilladrums@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is a brain dead take because it’s just guilt by association. Having diplomatic relations with countries around the world doesn’t mean that you endorse or support their government. A country that’s ruled by a shitty ideology like Fascism or Marxism is something to be weary of, but these countries do in fact exist and they do play a role in global politics and economics. For example, the UAE and Israel normalizing relations doesn’t mean that they support each other, but they recognize each other’s influence and understand that diplomacy and cooperation is more beneficial and productive than shunning each other.

      I mean we tried to sanction, shun, and ignore authoritarian countries like Cuba and North Korea for decades… How has that worked out for us? My point is that we can’t cut relations with every country we don’t like. There are situations where that should be the case and there are definitely arguments for us to be more cautious when dealing with these types of regimes, but we can’t cut ourselves off from the vast majority of the world (which is authoritarian) nor can we force countries to adopt our ways (we tried with Iraq and Afghanistan, it didn’t work).

  • dingleberry@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Putin taught Kim Jong, who taught MBS, who taught Modi. When one or two civilians lives are an acceptable compromise to retain a relationship with another country, you open up that route for all.

    Edit: The triggered tankies from Hexbear just soothe my soul. Cry more.

  • cloud@lazysoci.al
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Google the name of your favorite politician shaking hands with one of saudi arabia rulers

  • Anonymous_TorPerson@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Just wondering what you think, didn’t Jamal Khashoggi write articles defending Hisbullah and other terrorist orgs that Saudis didn’t like? I am not justifying the actions of SA, but just wondering here.

    • topz@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      How is that even relevant? Is it ok to kill a person and just brush it off only because that person wrote articles?