I would refute the logic in your argument but there simply isnt any to be found.
Oh nice. A weak attempt to save face while admitting to be wrong and having a position that supports colonialism (including genocides).
I cannot conceive the mental gymnastics required to turn repeated statements of “i do not support any authority, government or state, with no exceptions” into “supporting an empire”
You welcome the dismantlement of governments that oppose your empire, even if they fall before your empire. That means that your empire can further the subjugation of relevant people. This advances your leader’s interests.
That is what i said yes, and i mean it. You just fail to take it literally and keep adding slander to it.
You welcome the dismantlement of governments that oppose your empire
Its that continued addition that i somehow want one global power to win first that’s bothering me cause its not true at all. I want all of them to lose, preferably at the same time.
That is what i said yes, and i mean it. You just fail to take it literally and keep adding slander to it.
What it literally means is that you would welcome the governments that oppose your empire to fall, even if your empire does not.
If the only development of events that you would like is for all governments to magically be undone in one moment simultaneously, you do not have anything of merit to say.
Its that continued addition that i somehow want one global power to win first that’s bothering me cause its not true at all. I want all of them to lose, preferably at the same time.
They can’t lose at the same time, and supporting the dismantlement of your empire first would mean supporting the governments that oppose it. You have said that you do not support any governments.
Cheering for the destruction of states in the Global South while NATO exists - which is what you promote - is simply support for NATO.
Also, do you think that revolutions are not powered by violence and threat thereof in order to enforce one group’s will upon another, i.e. by being authoritarian?
And no, waiting for a few centuries and doing nothing to oppose your empire is not a serious approach to tackling colonialism.
Oh nice. A weak attempt to save face while admitting to be wrong and having a position that supports colonialism (including genocides).
You welcome the dismantlement of governments that oppose your empire, even if they fall before your empire. That means that your empire can further the subjugation of relevant people. This advances your leader’s interests.
Nope, not what i said or what i believe.
Also you:
That is what i said yes, and i mean it. You just fail to take it literally and keep adding slander to it.
Its that continued addition that i somehow want one global power to win first that’s bothering me cause its not true at all. I want all of them to lose, preferably at the same time.
What it literally means is that you would welcome the governments that oppose your empire to fall, even if your empire does not.
If the only development of events that you would like is for all governments to magically be undone in one moment simultaneously, you do not have anything of merit to say.
They can’t lose at the same time, and supporting the dismantlement of your empire first would mean supporting the governments that oppose it. You have said that you do not support any governments.
You do not need to support a state to oppose a state. Revolution is powered by people. Not authorites.
Cheering for the destruction of states in the Global South while NATO exists - which is what you promote - is simply support for NATO.
Also, do you think that revolutions are not powered by violence and threat thereof in order to enforce one group’s will upon another, i.e. by being authoritarian?
And no, waiting for a few centuries and doing nothing to oppose your empire is not a serious approach to tackling colonialism.