In actual terms, you are correct. But let's not pretend like the narrative isn't treasting those standing against the Russians as if they're the scrappy underdog resisting the oppressive dictator, exactly the same as any other "rebel vs dictator" narrative.
But yes, it is government national forces. Government national forces filled with utterly disgusting people who have eagerly assaulted innocents that didn't want to lay down their lives for Zelensky, and have openly and clearly been fine with unironic NatSoc in the modern era until there was a modicum of actual focus upon them.
The Ukrainian Government are not good people. Russia being shitty doesn't change that reality. And it doesn't change the mountains of geopolitical history that lead up to this situation. Fuck every political actor in this entire conflict, it's that simple.
everyone I disagree with supports putin
You're beyond retarded. But please, tell us more about how this time the US supports that plucky rebel group to defeat some greater evil it will turn out fine, because it worked out so well in the past with Al-Qaeda and ISIS.
Being anti-war and recognising the evil of everyone participating isn't supporting the side you oppose, it's having a principle you don't understand.
Nothing is more racist than a leftist talking about non-left wing black people.
puberty blockers are completely reversible
puberty isn't reversible
These degenerates aren't even good with their lies. If puberty cannot be reversed, prevention of puberty cannot be reversed either. You cannot have it both ways.
But these people fear puberty because in the vast majority of cases (upwards of 90%) it completely eliminates any desire to transition. These freaks fear this truth, and they know it. They know they cannot convince adults to transition nearly as well, so they target the most vulnerable with the lie that they will feel better if they become pharma pay pigs while validating the decision they made and ultimately regret themselves.
It all comes back to affirming their decisions, because if they don't, they need to come to terms that they have caused serious permanent harm to themselves of their own volition, and that's a scary reality to face.
Here's a better idea: stop expecting people in the entertainment industry to be anything more than clowns. Their job is to entertain. They are rarely smart. They are rarely in-touch with reality. They are some of the dumbest motherfuckers out there (just look at how many are involved in Scientology for starters). And that's not even touching just how corrupt they are, both in a conventional manner as well as a spiritual one.
Break out of the mindset that these people should be anything more than a relatively minor service. I couldn't give a fuck if my plumber thinks Biden is a god so long as the plumber does a good job for a good price. There is no meaningful difference between being an e-celeb and a normal celeb, they're both people with zero qualification for their opinion on pretty much any given topic outside their very specific, very narrow profession. People rightfully dismiss e-celebs for being idiots, it's far, far beyond due that it's done to celebrities of all stripes.
And it should be said, that this extends to those you agree with. Yes, there are some decent celebrity opinions (I quite like Kurt Russell's opinion that celebs are jesters, seeing how I basically used it above), and you're allowed to like those opinions, but it needs to be understood that they are still ultimately worthless. Being right or wrong is entirely irrelevant, it's the fact that they're in the entertainment industry and their political opinions should hold no weight over anyone, regardless of the "team" they're backing.
>implying any parent would want that thing as a child
On the one hand, flaggot has been proposed for those types of "Patriotic" assholes that just blindly shill for the government (you know, the type that are pro-prosecuting "traitors" like Snowden and Assange).
But I gotta say, this type of shit is also top tier flaggotry.
Leftist policy survives off "gibs me free stuff", a concept that is neither feasible nor encourages outside urban shitholes. The very landscape encourages a greater degree of self-sufficiency which ultimately shifts mindsets away from the "I'm entitled to the fruits of everyone elses labour, and they should forcibly share with me" mentality that leftism is often predicated upon. Environment matters A LOT for the formation of ideologies, including how the environment ultimately forces or doesn't force certain actions. The more independent you need to be, the less likely you are to demand some entity force others to provide for you.
Ideologies require hospitable environments. There's a reason the rural is more right-wing and the urban is left-wing. Because those environments literally encourage the mentalities that are the cornerstone of the ideologies.
The urbanites fear the death of their leftist squalor. Without centralised hubs, they cannot hope to win advocacy of centralised planning.
Spreading thin and away from their inhospitable shit holes, policies are less effective at keeping them on life-support. Pushing them out of cities is a good thing.
So what's to stop a person who doesn't or barely drives from topping up a bunch and on selling for profit away from the passes?
My dude. You're actually advocating for the pro-establishment narrative and you're calling anyone else an NPC?
You're stuck in a black and white mentality and think anyone not explicitly a part of Us™ must be on a part of Them™, when it's not actually Us vs Them, at least not how you think it to be. I do not need to support Zelensky to condemn Putin, nor vice versa, and it's pathetic that you cannot comprehend such ideas.
Go back to Twitter.
I actually hope she is sued. Not because I think she's wrong or whatever, but because it would be the biggest wakeup call to these losers possible.
Learn what controlled opposition means.
Quote where I defended Putin. Instead of treating this like Twitter, try fighting back the brainworms and actually defending what you say.
So in other words, I was not at all defending Putin, you just want me to uncritically back the team you support? You sound vaccinated.
Here, let me quote myself again.
the bigger issue is that this is still ultimately being used to try and push the idea that certain circumstances are somehow a "normal occurrence"
Bolded for your convenience. If you cannot understand the concept of controlled opposition, nor the idea of creeping mentalities through entryist methodology, then you haven't been paying attention.
The worst part about all of this is that these methods aren't new, they've just gotten a little sloppy and the mask is slipping.
Prove it. Prove where Putin was defended by me. I'll wait.
Problem is that there are other ways to do extremely attention grabbing shit other than something that will get tied to being a retard.
So either they're retarded for not seeing the connection that makes them look retarded, or they're retarded because they actually believe oil paintings are mineral/crude oil. Either way, they're retards.
>being anti-zelensky means you're pro-putin
You are disturbingly susceptible to propaganda. Oh, and because you clearly need it spelt out for you, there is no honour in defending Putin or Zelensky. They're both authoritarian collectivist scum and deserve a bullet.
As per usual with stories like this, it's good to remember the stages of media normalisation.
Stages of Media Normalisation
-
Deny that an observable reality is happening. EG. Fact Check™, Debunk™, "conspiracy theory", "fringe", etc.
-
As evidence of claims counter to the agenda become overwhelming, acknowledge that it's happening dismissively. "It's not a big deal".
-
If remotely plausible, insist that the harmful reality is "good actually". EG. Tie the problem with an unintended positive "Rolling blackouts could lead to moments that might humble those used to modern luxuries". <--- *YOU ARE HERE*
-
Fully embrace that it's happening, but insist the people complaining about it are the real problem.
-
Return to ostracizing, demonizing, and persecuting the cohort that speaks the truth and asks the questions that may damage the agenda.
It's worth noting that while I think he's right about a lot of modern entitlement due to the abundance of luxuries in the modern age, the bigger issue is that this is still ultimately being used to try and push the idea that certain circumstances are somehow a "normal occurrence", even if that's not the argument he personally made. Media collusion is real, and the smaller articles still play a major role in it all.
It's either that or they just want attention. But if that were the case, there are any number of other ways to do something attention grabbing without making yourself look like a blithering retard, so if I had to put money on it, I'd bet they thought it was mineral/crude oil.
Nah, businesses across the board were willing to drop out instantly. Regardless of their stance, that much loss of business is a threat due to the potential to start competition and give them enough income to actually be viable. As it stands, Paypal has a captured market, and they don't want to abandon that.
Paypal backs down for now.
Bury your head all you want, but the enemy of your enemy is not your friend.