That’s also biased.

That’s not how the legitimacy of a state works. A state doesn’t become illegitimate because of war crimes.

Bias means being opinionated/having preconceptions on a topic. I never said it was disqualifying. I just pointed out that he had a lot of bias on a lot of these geopolitical issues in a humorous way.

Most (slightly knowledgeable) people are more nuanced than that, that’s why it stood out.

Well-said

Not at all. People love making assumptions here.

I believe reality is very nuanced.

I took a better look at it. I understand that the definition of fascism is an academic question that has been discussed about a lot. However, that also means you shouldn’t just trust one person that researched it. The text explicitly states that (paraphrasing) “it should be looked at from the left”, which is just a confession of the definition being pretty biased. Therefor, the claim in the text about (paraphrasing) “his definition becoming the new consensus” is pretty flawed. It is true the word is getting used more and more like this by leftists, but that doesn’t make it a consensus.

In one paragraph he says (paraphrasing) “the specific flavor is not important, the inherent ideology is ultranationalism with wanting to go back to a mythological past”.

I reject this. What he is describing is literally just ultranationalism/ethno-nationalism. That’s literally how he describes it himself. That’s just like me saying "yeah stalinism in today’s day and age is very impractical and you won’t see it like this today, so in order to be able to use the term, we need to look at it broader, and at it’s core, their ideology is ultra-socialist with the focus on rapid industrialization. Therefor, we should call social-democracts stalinists, because they share the same core ideology.

Wtf? If you read that with some critical thinking you’ll understand why his definition is not the concensus at all.

You can’t just pick and choose definitions of a word. When you use a word, the most common definition of it is how you will be understood (depending on context). Otherwise I could say that poop is worth a lot and then say that poop means gold.

Moreover, sadly, many people do not even have the slightest idea of what certain ideologies are called. They don’t get further than “fascism bad nazi bad communism bad” without being able to make a distinction. This allows for easy manipulation of the masses by defaming anything you don’t like as one of these things. That’s all it is.

If you use a word that you don’t entirely understand, research the word, and if necessary, explain how you understand the word. Allows for good-fath discussions. Do not misrepresent it.

I already mentioned multiple times that the assumption that I’m christian is presumptuous.

Bro said “give me all the bias”

you remember that if you don’t do what we say, you’re gonna be tortured even after death.

Not at all what it is portraying. I don’t even understand how you get to that conclusion.

It were the priests that didn’t believe Jesus was telling the truth that killed him. Humanity killed him. Not God.

Damn

Ran 480 km?

Well-said

Nice assumption of me being Christian.

The cross symbolizes the sacrifice. Nobody celebrates his death, it is only the fact that he saved humanity with his sacrifice that gets celebrated, and the cross symbolizes this sacrifice.

The cross is a constant reminder of what Jesus went through to save you. The only feeling it is meant to evoke is thankfulness to Jesus and a reminder of how much suffering he saved you from.

I’m just trying to explain what christians believe, because it is getting misrepresented here, causing distorted views on christianity.

Well… that’s what atheists made it about… When christians ‘celebrate’ his death, they don’t really celebrate his torture and death, but they celebrate the offer he made for the sins of humanity.

*reminiscent

I can see where you’re coming from, as I mentioned, Turkey isn’t the best example of a democracy, but even now Erdogan can still get removed by a majority of the population, which is not the case in a dictatorship. A dictator can only be removed by the military.

I disagree with the last sentence, the definition of fascism is pretty clear, it is an ideology with certain beliefs and opinions. Not a process, not a form of government, but a set of ideas. If the set of ideas is not complete, it is not that ideology. I already gave you the name of the ideology you were describing.

It is like describing something socialist as stalinist. Like yeah, stalinists are socialists but not every socialist is a stalinist.

Nice that you ignored about 90% of my comment.

I never said the jobs you mentioned are easy, that’s why you dont see me complaining about them earning too much.

You seem to think sport at such a high level is easy.

In a democracy you just require a (super)majority for everything necessary to be changed and done to achieve anything.

It is of course easier in a dictatorship to achieve ethnic cleansing, but doesn’t require one. Look at Turkey and how they treat the Kurds. Not saying they are the best example of a democracy, but it isn’t a dictatorship by definition.

Loving a bot will prevent people from experiencing real love.