Politics in Media - The Good, the Bad, and the Preachy

There's no need for a conspiracy as the fact the Japanese were intending to surrender but were iffy about the unconditional part is documented historical record. The idea the nuclear weapons had to be used is Common Knowledge and wrong. Even so, it's also a point they hadn't surrendered and the US was already conducting mass attacks on civilians in hopes of bringing Japan low.

Its a question of scale not kind.

If by “documented historical record” you mean “vague and anecdotal” then sure.

Whether or not the bombs should have been used can be argued, but the position that it was outright wrong is leftist fantasy, pure and simple.

Edited by archonspeaks on Apr 19th 2019 at 1:52:38 AM

Morality is immaterial to the issue. Only fact is.

But here's an overview of both sides.

https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/debate-over-japanese-surrender

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Apr 19th 2019 at 2:09:21 AM

As that article points out, the revisionist position on the issue is significantly flawed. So yes, leftist fantasy.

I dispute that the fantasy is leftist, it’s a pacifist fantasy, but the left is far from purely pacifist.

That’s fair, I agree that’s probably more accurate. I will point out that it’s fairly unique to the left though, you don’t see those arguments even from non-interventionists on the right.

Eh, I've seen Right Libertarian demonizing the decision to join the war and drop the bombs. So it's not unique to some parts of the Left.

Pacifism on the right tends to only manifest as an excuse rather than a genuine belief, it gets used as an excuse for why we should let/enable people in the global south to die in conflicts we helped cause.

Genuine pacifism is basically a leftist thing, but many on the left don’t believe in it, it’s one of those ideological issues that shows the limit of a linear ideological scale (I keep meaning to draw up a cube at some point).

Seriously? I wonder what is their logic. I know the Leftist logic against the nukes AND the Japanese nationalist logic. But I've never hear the Liberatian one.

Edited by KazuyaProta on Apr 19th 2019 at 5:11:56 AM

Right Libertarians in my experience dislike it because they opposed the US entering the war in the first place, their opposition to the bombings are generally an extension of that.

Isolationism. Basically, they believe that the USA should have staid out of the war to begin with.

EDIT:

Edited by Kayeka on Apr 19th 2019 at 12:18:54 PM

Conservative Christian Pacifists are huge in number. Not all of them are slaves of the GOP Right.

Eh, supporting non-interventionism because of selfish isolationism is still a principle. It's a gross and shitty principle but that doesn't make it less genuine IMO. Just authentically awful.

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Apr 19th 2019 at 3:27:07 AM

Rightist pacifism exists to some degree, it's actually the angle most voluntaryist libertarians are coming from. Essentially, they believe the use of force is wrong, and that laissez faire capitalism is the system that best minimizes force in society.

It's also common for them to view wars as a waste of money or a threat to the free market.

I’m splitting isolationism from pacifism in my mind, isolationism is where one wants a government to stay out of global affairs (pretty common on the right), pacifism actually means there not being a use of force by anyone.

Plenty on the right want an end to government use of force, but they don’t want an end to use of force, they still want to maintain the ability to murder and abuse those they see as lesser than them.

Edited by Silasw on Apr 19th 2019 at 10:51:42 AM

Hmm, I don't know if I agree but that's certainly an understandable definition.

I’d agree that pacifism and isolationism are ideologically discrete. Isolationism doesn’t necessarily preclude massive military buildups, for example.

How that is even possible after Pearl Harbor?

I’d guess that they blame the US for Pear Harbour and think that the US should have stayed out of East Asia generally and thus Pearl Harbour wouldn’t have happened.

That makes me wonder exactly how much contact the US and East Asia had before WW 2?

In my experience Right Libertarians often endorse the conspiracy theory that Roosevelt knew about Pearl Harbor but let it happen anyway to get us into the war, thus neatly dodging the issue of their isolationism and the Japanese directly attacking us by just blaming the existing (Democratic) President.

Their argument is essentially that if we had been properly isolationist it would've never happened. The fact that means letting Imperial Japan rape their way through Asia is purely incidental.

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Apr 19th 2019 at 4:53:49 AM

The most that I have heard is that USA shouldn't have applied economical santions (dear God, just writing that phrase made me feel iffy, I hear it a lot) to Japan.

Of course, that is ignoring that USA did it because the sunk of the USS Panay in middle of a event known as the Nanjing Massacre.

Commodore Perry basically ended Japan's isolation. Thought USA was in a isolationist mood in those days.

In a bit of fairness, that is definitely not something that only Libertarians do. Wannabe Leftists do the same until they hear the feared F-word and then suddenly support the war.

Edited by KazuyaProta on Apr 19th 2019 at 7:02:35 AM

Another video of "This is why Conservatives sucks"?

I kinda want to see someone like Protagonist 506 for once, having a binary choice between Leftube channels and Alt-Righters is pretty annoying.

Yeah, centrism? I guess??? Dunno, mocking centrists stopped being funny on mid-2018.

Edited by KazuyaProta on Apr 19th 2019 at 7:13:15 AM

You want centrism, go to anything from CNN to MSNBC. Youtube is for people who wouldn't get shows in the mainstream system. Can you imagine Contra Points on PBS?

"The feared F word"? Do you mean fascism? Then yeah, I can see why people would suddenly be more interested in fighting if the enemy was fascism.

If you're looking for Centrists, I'm sure there are some floating around on You Tube somewhere. I don't know where they'd be, I'm not a Centrist and consuming their videos on politics sounds like a tedious time when I could just read their takes in the newspaper.

Edited by AzurePaladin on Apr 19th 2019 at 8:25:15 AM