T

[T @tanma31]

@NapoleonSMill @stanfordNYC On the off chance that you have better epistemology than the person you're replying to, you can read the article in question to learn that the plan of many arrested people was to hope that the administration isn't evil enough to arrest them while they were in the country legally

[T @tanma31]

@stanfordNYC "What I cannot understand is being *aggrieved*"

Because you didn't read the article, Bernard

[T @tanma31]

@stanfordNYC It's generally good practice to read an article before commenting on it. If you did, you'd know that people are being arrested despite filing timely applications and extensions that legally allow them to remain in the country after their original visa expired

[T @tanma31]

@Noahpinion The EIC wasn't even close to the most extreme or brutal colonial entity, so if you acknowledge that leftist tropes about it are correct, then you are very much validating their tropes about basically every act of colonization

[T @tanma31]

@Hungoverdaily_ @Skeleman71 @ProjectLiberal @esjesjesj Why would you give a shit about the potato famine but not Churchill? If you could explain why the GLF was different from the potato famine, why can't you do the same for th Bengal famine? And if you can't, then why are you hesitating to admit that Churchill was comparable to Mao?

[T @tanma31]

@Hungoverdaily_ @Skeleman71 @ProjectLiberal @esjesjesj As a general rule, if someone says "Person A was bad because they did xyz", then their willingness to condemn Person B for also doing xyz demonstrates whether this is really about xyz. You have no place harboring opinions, let alone contradicting mine, if this has to be explained

[T @tanma31]

@Hungoverdaily_ @Skeleman71 @ProjectLiberal @esjesjesj So anyone who truly believed that presiding over a man-made famine is a moral indictment of Mao would necessarily make the same claim about Churchill. But your unwillingness shows you don't really believe that and are criticizing Mao purely out of ethnic/ideological tribalism

[T @tanma31]

@vincentologist @cobsblog @emmma_camp_ And since we're neglecting intent and only considering how consoled the dead are, the US killing 175 Iranian schoolgirls is already much worse than anything China has done this century. Add all the civilian deaths from Iraq and Afghanistan, and it isn't even close

[T @tanma31]

@vincentologist @cobsblog @emmma_camp_ Systemic failures as opposed to deliberate killing means that it wasn't a genocide regardless of how consoling it is to the dead because genocide requires intent. That's the only point Evan made, and yours is entirely non-responsive to his

[T @tanma31]

@WHE_Reborn @RepEpstein @ExtremistLs We're pointing out that most of the deadliness was unintentional, which is simply a fact. There are certainly famines with far greater evidence of malicious intent that you could be mad about, but that might require some painful rethinking of your enjoyment of western hegemony

[T @tanma31]

@Hungoverdaily_ @Skeleman71 @ProjectLiberal @esjesjesj There's certainly far more reason to believe that Churchill actively wanted people to die than there is to believe that Mao did.

[T @tanma31]

@Hungoverdaily_ @Skeleman71 @ProjectLiberal @esjesjesj What does the fact that it occurred a 100 years before have to do with anything? In any case, the Bengal famine of 1943 took place around the same time and was man-made. Do you think that Winston Churchill is a mass murder?

[T @tanma31]

@LP_CLC @Dw20553949 @AGarretAnderson You should follow your own advice. Why are you letting your extreme levels of ethnic and cultural clannishness/tribalism stand in the way of applying heuristics you claim to believe ("presiding over a preventable famine is equivalent to Nazis") to people in your tribe

[T @tanma31]

@LP_CLC @Dw20553949 @AGarretAnderson Ok, so are you willing to state that Churchill and his Britian were equivalent to Nazis for causing a famine like the USSR supposedly was? If not, then what exactly is the moral difference between presiding over the Bengal famine and presiding over Holodomor?

[T @tanma31]

@LP_CLC @AGarretAnderson My money is on the latter, but I'm happy to be proven wrong!

[T @tanma31]

@LP_CLC @AGarretAnderson It's not a question of whether you will "argue in defense of it". Are you willing to equate Britain/Churchill to Nazis for the Bengal famine like you equated the USSR to Nazis for the Holodomor? Or are you just tribalistically working backwards from "westerners good, others bad"?

[T @tanma31]

@yuanyi_z If deaths from famines caused by bad policies are mass murder, then what's the argument against deeming Winston Churchill and the British empire mass murderers for the Bengal famine of 1943?

[T @tanma31]

@stanfordNYC @esjesjesj You should pause and ask yourself whether you really believe what you said, or if you're just throwing things at the wall to attack your ideological opponents. My money's on the latter because consistently applying what you said would indict the west at least as much as China

[T @tanma31]

@stanfordNYC @esjesjesj So do you think that Winston Churchill bears moral responsibility for the Bengal famine of 1943 in British India? What's the argument for viewing him and the British empire differently from Mao?