• Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    1 day ago

    The moment you say that “China isn’t imperialist to begin with” you lose all credibility and reading the rest is a waste of time.

    Read about the Belt and Road initiative, the militarisation of the South China Sea, the treatment of Xinjiang, Hong Kong, Tibet, or Taiwan, THEN come back and say with a straight face that “China isn’t imperialist to begin with”. :D

    • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Sure, the person who refuses to engage with any counter evidence and acts incredibly smug must be the credible one…

      • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        1 day ago

        I’m not going to engage in this discourse, just as much as I won’t engage in the discourse about whether or not the Earth is flat.

        • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          You are engaging. You’re just doing it in a way that makes you look like you don’t know what you’re talking about.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            Seriously, all they did was legitimize me rhetorically. Focusing on rhetoric is a trap that I try not to fall for, but I can’t really do anything if someone does their best to tank any opposing argument.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      So in other words, the moment you read anything that disagrees with you, you stop thinking immediately and reflexively shut off any and all engagement? Sounds like you’ve holed yourself up in an echo chamber of your own making. I already addressed all of these subjects either here or elsewhere, directly, such as Xinjiang here, Taiwan here, Hong Kong here, and Tibet here. I already explained the Belt and Road Initiative in the comment you claimed to stop reading at the first sentence.

      • ManixT@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        21 hours ago

        Why is china ramming Philippine boats in waters that aren’t their territory?

        • Riverside@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          13 hours ago

          Because Philippines has US military bases that threaten China’s sovereignty and control of its waters. Why are there US military ships around Chinese waters and not vice-versa?

          • ManixT@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            12 hours ago

            Would it be appropriate for US ships to ram Chinese ships in Chinese waters?

            There are no threats to Chinese territorial waters; this is happening in Philippine territory.

            • Riverside@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              12 hours ago

              There are no threats to Chinese territorial waters

              Then you surely agree there are no threats to Taiwan by China?

              • ManixT@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                11 hours ago

                If you can’t understand how the numerous Chinese military exercises like this are a specific threat to Taiwan, then I’m not sure you’re capable of reason

                Please provide similar evidence of threats to Chinese territory (besides the soviet union stealing their land).

      • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        1 day ago

        So in other words, the moment you read anyone that disagrees with you, you stop thinking immediately and reflexively shut off any and all engagement?

        No. The moment someone makes a claim that is utterly ridiculous in its disregard for facts, I disregard their reasoning.

        If you said “the Earth isn’t round to begin with”, you’d earn an identical reaction.

        Sounds like you’ve holed yourself up in an echo chamber of your own making

        Sounds like you’re projecting.

        • DudleyMason@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Then actually engage with the points they made and debunk them if they’re so ridiculous. All this is doing is making it obvious you don’t actually know enough about the subject to even have this argument.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          My claim isn’t ridiculous though, nor does it have a disregard for facts. In fact, I supported my claims overwhelmingly with western sources that are already biased against China. You would know that if you read my comment, but you won’t let yourself even look at information even from the west that runs counter to your fragile worldview. What makes me a part of an echo chamber, when you’re the one unwilling to even glance at western sources that disagree with you?