Comment by ydieb@lemm.ee on sex work is work

What I hate with this is that is defines that the army itself is good or bad. But in reality it is what it is used for. If its actually used for defence, then it’s very honorable. When it’s used as a tool to exploit resources to the rich, (aka generally being the aggressor), it’s not.

Lol can’t think of a single western country that’s had an “honorable” war post 1945. The US army is unequivocally bad

In general I think you are right, but I was also under the impression that the NATO intervention in Bosnia helped prevent ethnic cleansing, which if true is a honorable thing.

It was a general statement.

Hey, im not trying to be rude or anything I just wanna quickly say that honor is a fiction typically used by the rich and powerful to manipulate the young and well-meaning into becoming fucked up stormtroopers for capital.

In modern context, sure. In a wider anthropological historic context, no. My understanding of honor as a social concept, though I do not have proper academic sources to back this, is that it works in lieu of a central force of government enforcing laws and common rule. I.e. non centralized governance such as that of say the Norse people of old, had very strong etiquette of honor, the lack of which implied social status that would be worse to the one living than them dying. That meant weird things like a story of a man who robbed a house, realized they were doing something dishonorable (read illegal), went back and challenged the man who owned the house, killed them in combat and then stole their stuff. Just like laws it imposes rules on people, in this weird case murder in combat is better than theft, but still a rule. I would argue this notion of honor has existed across different societies for a long time, due to general absence of centralized governance, and has in modern times, relatively speaking on an anthropological timeline, been adopted and exploited by centralized powers to further control the populace, in the very real way you talk about.

The people rescued from concentration camps would probably disagree.

They’d probably disagree with giving the Americans any credit for it.

Well they’d be wrong. The other person even posted a source for that.

Point 2 on your source: American forces liberated concentration camps including Buchenwald, Dora-Mittelbau, Flossenbürg, Dachau, and Mauthausen.

They all helped. Your comment doesn’t invalidate mine.

In that case I might respectfully suggest looking into an introductory course to logic if you’re at all interested. http://intrologic.stanford.edu/chapters/chapter_01.html

Yeah peaceful militaries like Korea’s or China’s or Cuba’s are ok. Anyone joining the US military though if just in it for the war crimes.

peaceful militaries

Korea’s or China’s or Cuba’s

Not sure if joking or not

Calling them peaceful militaries obviously

OK I can see how you can twist reality to call China or the DPRK’s militaries nonpeaceful even though you’d be wrong, but Cuba’s? Really?

you’d be wrong

I bet. Especially if you don’t count saber rattling, threats and border skirmishes. If you don’t count those then I’m wrong and they’re very peaceful.

Cuba’s? Really?

Cuba got quite a reputation during the Cold War. It’s pretty interesting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_interventions_by_Cuba

I wouldn’t call North Korea firing missiles over other sovereign countries very peaceful. As well as China doing troop exercises that obviously prepare for the invasion of Taiwan. I’m sure there are more examples.

It literally is, it harms no one and acts as deterrent from the US having another imperialist adventure where they kill 20 percent of Koreans.

it harms no one

well, pollution, but libs aren’t ready for that conversation

So boot camp, as it is full of military exercises, would count as not peaceful?

No, obviously perfectly fine. They are literally doing exercises for a potential invasion to Taiwan though, which is a difference.

You can’t invade your own territory. By Chinese and Taiwanese law, internationally recognized by the UN (and even the US, as asserted by Blinken the last time he was in China to pretend to be sorry), Taiwan is Chinese territory.

Are you talking about that time they launched a missile over the least populated possible part of Japan as part of a test? What are they supposed to do, just not advance their tech? They’re surrounded, they’ve got to launch them over somebody and they did it the safest way they could.

The DPRK had literally never been to war outside its territory; it’s not a dove but at least it hasn’t invaded multiple sovereign countries like its southern cousin.

China does troop exercises like every single other country in the world.

I mean as long as you consider South Korea part of their territory, sure. There was though the Korean War, where North Korea invaded South Korea. Of course it’s not on the same level as South Korea, but I would imagine that’s more because they literally can’t, they have no resources for it, not because they’re amazingly peaceful people.

The north didn’t invade the south though, no Koreans agreed that the US supported parallel was a permanent division of the country, both North and South fully intended to create a united Korea. Tens of thousands of Koreans were already dead from purges and suppression of uprisings in the south when the operation started. It was literally an ongoing civil war that had momentarily frozen.

I’m not sure on what information you base this claim, but as far as I know the 38th parallel was agreed upon because both the udssr and the US wanted total occupation of Korea for themselves, but they both wanted to potentially avoid an armed conflict so tried a compromise.

Then the north korean part, supported by China and unofficially by the soviet union, invaded the south to establish total control.

Even simpler than that. People trying to slot sex work/army/any job into “good/bad” columns aren’t worth your attention.

Except for health insurance CEOs, those definitely bad.

Cops and troops are bad. You might even say All of them AB

joining the army in the Imperial core will always be bad and make the troop/vet complicit in the countless deaths and destruction

Wtf is the “imperial core”

It’s always the same map.

Can you explain why some of the nordic countries, i.e. Norway, Sweden, Denmark are part of the imperial core while Finland, Iceland, Greenland are not? I can put color on a white map too, doesn’t mean it portrays a real issue adequately. Also wtf, why is Portugal not part of the imperial core?

The map is a reference to the one you see whenever just about any international issue comes up and the same crew are all in agreement, I’m not actually positive what specific issue this map was taken from.

The website has a more serious explainer (with a couple versions of the map) but I’m with you, Iceland and Portugal and Finland are core countries probably. The real answer is that it’s fluid and historically contingent, not set in stone. It’s a question of how your economy develops and how it relates to ‘peripheral’ countries that are primarily extracted from, not a literal list pulled off an emoji.

I looked through that article and found it somewhat problematic. Especially the description of core countries as:

They have strong state institutions, a powerful military and powerful global political alliances.

For example, Iceland does not even have a military, but can still be part of capitalist neo-colonialism as part of the “imperial core”. Even so, one should also keep in mind that Iceland historically had been under Denmark’s dominion and it is wrong to say that it has been a primary benefactor of classic colonialism leading to the rise of western powers in modern history. On the other hand, Portugal has been a strong colonial power historically. Still, the development index of Iceland is way higher and I would argue there are lots of factors in play as to why, and one cannot say that there is a direct equivalence between development index and imperialism. Both Norway, Iceland and Finland gained independence in the 20th century, never had proper colonies and are part of the economic elite. Norway is still in large an economy based around export of natural resources, which is atypical for being an imperial core member. I often feel that many facts like these are overlooked in discussions of imperial cores in favor of simplistic ideas such as equivocating HDI and imperialism. Can we not have better discussions around the mechanics of modern imperialism than throwing around a map and calling out people for not being intimate with the idea of an imperial core, an idea whose simplicity makes itself highly flawed?

Unironically yes. The development in the imperial core came at the expense of the rest of the world, that’s what the term is referring to, the part of the world economy that is accumulating through imperialism the wealth and resources of the whole planet.

Nothing ironic about my post to begin with

You best start believing in Imperial cores… you’re in one!

Countries that are doing the marxist definition of imperialism basically.

Many would rate the USSR as an imperial core country, while I guess you and I maybe won’t. Stop assuming privilege of those you talk to and demean them with willful ignorance. There is always something more that may be learned about an issue and people should not be vilified if their attempts to learn more are genuine (and I think you can not determine it was not from this interaction, comrade).

This forum is for anarchists to circlejerk and share zesty memes

sex work is work(feddit.de)

Anarchist Memes

!completeanarchy@lemmy.ml

Community stats

Community moderators