Its interesting that Iran shooting down one (or possibly two) US aircraft in its airspace is being treated as an 'escalation'.... Given Iran is clearly under attack from US/Israeli forces, defending its airspace is not so much an escalation as a perfectly reasonable defensive response (and certainly legal as far as international law is concerned).
But the narrative remains, whatever the media may think its doing, one that privileges the US's positioning on the 'war'!
The Mass Media Are Evil But They're Also Really Dumb, And Other Notes https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/the-mass-media-are-evil-but-theyre
@ChrisMayLA6 It’s the same as Russia/Ukraine & Israel/Palestine: ”How dare they defend themselves?!”
Authoritarian conservatism has become the dominant narrative of our time.
@ohir @gimulnautti @ChrisMayLA6
Trump has the rock solid support of conservatives in America.
This is not a coincidence.
@eestileib @gimulnautti @ChrisMayLA6
> support of conservatives
Reactionary "conservatives" support he has. He got to the power with broader conservatives support, yes, but the cabal behind the aimed at conservatives propaganda is neither conservative nor christian – at least for someone who remembers and knows the real definienda of either.
That said, for me and hopefully many others, the core of the contemporary _conservatism_ is not about calcification of the status quo but the careful consideration of changes that _must_ come. On that fundament, maga and trumpists hardly can fit even in the "reactionary" echelon – they are revolutionists. In practice, US conservatives were all conned by fasicst with their well researched firehose use of perverted words.
@ohir @gimulnautti @ChrisMayLA6
So you're in favor of criminalizing queerness? Racial segregation? Preservation of colonial status for places like Timor-Leste? State religion?
What traditional conservative policies do you support?
@eestileib @gimulnautti @ChrisMayLA6
> difference ... actual and historical reality of conservatism as an ideology?
How did you come to that conclusion I do not differentiate?
Because I pointed out that the meaning of the word had been distorted and perverted? I even stressed the discrepancy between the definition and the deeds of people calling themselves "conservatist".
How can we have a _political_ discourse if to the one side of the aisle the "conservatist" _word_ sounds exactly like to the other side "leftist" does?
We need to bring the "politics", politei, a civic matter back to the rails of some common understanding. And so for other perverted words. Call fascist fascist and aim at conservatives to let them see fascism as something that is against their stated values.
> So you're in favor of criminalizing queerness
P.S. I know in the UK "unnatural acts" were criminalized 1533-2011. But actually neither UK, nor US make for a whole world :) But here, PL Commonwealth, no "queerness" have ever been criminalized by secular laws as long as democracy was strong. Um, not even during the 1697-1775 decline.
@ohir @eestileib @gimulnautti @ChrisMayLA6 “the core of the contemporary _conservatism_ is not about calcification of the status quo but the careful consideration of changes that _must_ come”
this is such a deeply meaningless definition of conservatism. it’s basically true too, which is exactly why moderate republicans and hardcore white supremacists find themselves under the same tent. if your only value is “careful consideration” all it means is you think you’re smarter than the other guys.
@ChrisMayLA6 @ohir @gimulnautti
As the old saying goes, conservatism consists of exactly one proposition: that there should be an in-group whom the law protects but does not bind, and an out-group whom the law binds but does not protect. I suggest fascism is what happens when conservatives become confident enough to proceed without bothering to pretend there's still a meaningful rule of law.
@only_ohm @ChrisMayLA6 @gimulnautti
> old saying goes [...]
How old this saying is?
I specifically used "for me" qualifier, aware of the different meanings of the "conservative", especially considering how perverted this meaning became for the self-identified or purpoting to be conservatives' deeds of the past decades.
For me, the conservative thought is rooted in the Polish Constitution of year 1505:
"Whereas general laws and public acts pertain not to an individual but to the Nation at large, wherefore at this General Sejm held at Radom we have, together with all our kingdom's prelates, councils and land deputies, determined it to be fitting and just, and have so resolved, that henceforth for all time to come nothing new shall be resolved by us or our successors, without the common consent of the Senators and the Land Deputies, that shall be prejudicial or onerous to the our Republic or harmful and injurious to anyone, or that would tend to alter the general law and public liberty."...
The key phrases "without the common consent", "that shall be prejudicial or onerous to the our Republic or harmful and injurious to anyone".
Evolution, not revolution. Consensus, not Dictat. As our ancestors knew well that each revolution afflicts the state by awakening demons in those who fear the freedoms of others the most.
@ohir @only_ohm @ChrisMayLA6
"As our ancestors knew well that each revolution afflicts the state by awakening demons in those who fear the freedoms of others the most."
That's a pretty emotional and value-laden statement, bypassing any burdens of proof. Wouldn't hold up in any court I would attend or support.
@gimulnautti @only_ohm @ChrisMayLA6
> That's a pretty emotional and value-laden statement
May I ask for an example of a revolution that didn’t awaken reactionary demons?
And yes, Constitutions usually are value-laden.
@Pyrogenesis @only_ohm @ChrisMayLA6 @gimulnautti
> with what words are commonly understood to mean
I pointed out in my first reply, that the very "common understanding" has had been perverted, by __fascists__.
And now I am being "corrected" by some of my dear interlocutors, implying the very perversion I spot.
There is nothing "conservative" in mafia grab of states, nor in __sudden__ trampling on laws and freedoms, nor in anything fascist do. The only valid point is, that self-identified conservatives really are and were enablers for populists.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/conservative
@ohir @only_ohm @ChrisMayLA6 @gimulnautti Do you understand the difference between a colloquial use as given by a dictionary, and the actual and historical reality of conservatism as an ideology? It is the latter that is the issue here: that in practice, conservatives have always been, at best, fascist enablers.
And thanks for the dictionary link, real Reddit-level argumentation there. I can do you one better though. What you are engaging in here is called "special pleading".
The illegal thing is that the US and its rogue leader started this war…
Bypassing Congress and the UN…
War propagandists gonna war propagandize.
It is funny how statements like this are always followed up with comments deflecting and trying to shift the topic to some other 'enemy' of the US empire.
Western propaganda like it is 1991 again with "precision bombing" and the mysterious enemy with "weapons of mass destruction". WMD for which the bully USA appears to have a monopoly (Hiroshima, Nagasaki). I'll never forget 1991 lies.
A lot of Western mainstream media will very often self-censor, and obey to the Western status quo. Whether that status quo is not democractic or even full fascist does not matter. And since the decline of paper newspaper numbers being sold it is mouse clicks that have become very important for newspaper management. For example, two column writers in two different Dutch newspapers were laid off after more than forty years because of mouse clicks despite a lot of protest by people writing paper letter to the newspapers. The sad thing is that with readers reading paper newspaper there is no such thing as mouse-clicks that can be counted. People like Trump, Farage, Wilders, and others swinging towards far right, fascism are like gold for newspaper clicks. How else can one explain the daily photos of Trump and Trump's spaghetti sentences on the frontpages. Anyway, the big question right now is how do we get journalists back to doing their jobs ? Which includes to defend democracy rather than helping to be part of the erosion of it.
@ChrisMayLA6 it's a personal offence for Trump - how can they shoot things down if their missiles are "destroyed or mostly useless", didn't they read his official communications (aka Truth Social) /s
/cc @purplepadma
Why is Iran "bad"? After Operation Ajax, 1953, when two intelligence agencies, MI6 and the CIA, overthrew the popular, democratically elected Persian government, Iranians rejected the U.S.-backed Shah autocrat puppet & their plan to loot Persia’s oil wealth.
1953 & 2026, "We're taking your oil Deja Vu all over again."
Aug. 19, 1953: Operation Ajax - Priya Satia | Department of History https://share.google/I5iNpcpRiSf7nocI1
@ChrisMayLA6 Well, the US may contribute more revenue to just stay afloat as a media, let alone thrive.
And this metric may be the most difficult to overcome.
Remember that Prophet David (Peace be upon him) defeated Goliath with just one stone.
If US is shaping the narrative, they, the terrorists are the freedom fighters, while the actual defending freedom fighters all over the world are terrorists. It's simple, it's Orwellian, this is Trump's world, we're just visiting.
cauZation
Emeritus Prof Christopher May
Jonathan Schofield
🔏 Matthias Wiesmann
Martin Vermeer FCD
Easter Benny 🐇🥚
Toni Aittoniemi
ohir
eestileib (she/hers)
warning low flying owls
Moss Wizard
baconandcoconut
Stargeezer Smith
eyajpng
Colman Reilly
Dan Hatton
Alex P Roe 
xs4me2
Nini
Houba
Regendans
Heals 
Frank Frank
Danish Akhtar
Sweet Home Alaberta 🇨🇦 🇺🇦 🏳️🌈 🏳️⚧️ 🇲🇽
Eric Bono
MissPlaced
Dr. Eric J. Fielding, PhD
Simplicator