Don’t forget pressing child soldiers into Zero Units - groups trained, armed, and directed by CIA and JSOC to torture, rape, and kill entire families and terrorize entire villages.

Not fully accurate. Race is a system of categorization that was invented. The systems of categorization that is used around the world under the term “race” today are all derived from a single system of categorization that traces its roots back to 14th century Portugal and a single author, Gomes de Zurara.

“which races are white”

This is really misleading. Races don’t exist out there. They are categories we invented. White is one of those categories. We don’t put races into racial categories. We don’t put some races in the white category. We put people in the racial categories. Race is ONLY the category. There’s no other reality to it other than the choice to categorize.

It’s not like before a.i. the US was held responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of children.

It’s not a hang up. It’s a tool. It was created in Portugal and adopted by the Catholic Church and spread across the colonies because it was an effective tool for dividing the poor and working class against itself by creating privilege for whites and harm for the non-whites. It got baked into every structure in colonial society over centuries.

It’s not a psychological problem. It’s a structural power problem. It will ultimately only end when the colonial states are dismantled by a rainbow coalition and new structures are built from healthier foundations.

Racial categorization (a.k.a. race) is defined by a system, so the answer to your question is always relative to the system you are referring to. In the USA today, there are exactly 5 racial categories: white, black, Asian, Native American/Alaskan Native, Pacific Islander/Hawaiian Native.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ethnicity_in_the_United_States

There was a time when there were three racial categories. Other systems have other categories.

In your example, under today’s rules in the USA and indeed under most systems of racial categorization, someone with Swedish and English parentage would be categorized under the white racial category and be of mixed ethnicity.

Most effective liberal reformer

Thanks for sharing your interpretation. The intent is not to justify current behavior, it’s to condemn selective outrage and selective enforcement.

When the police pull over more black people for taillights being out than white people, and send more black people to jail for the same crimes, and kill more black people for the same behaviors, we call that selective enforcement.

So when we have dubious claims of genocide in Xinjiang based on satellite analysis of a German Christian Nationalist who believes birth control is equivalent to murdering babies and should be banned, and then we see people say this is atrocious and no one should be entertaining trade with China, we COULD just take that at face value. But when we seat it in context, we see that they demand no such thing when we have open direct access to literal ongoing genocides we see no such calls for changes in behavior.

Why is that? Why should we embargo Cuba and kill their sick, elderly, and infants but it’s OK to support Israel? Obviously you don’t believe that we should support Israel, but I am asking about these think-tanks, government officials, parties, and other powerful parties who justify mass murder by referring to “crimes and evils” that are either tiny, specious, or both when compared to their own crimes and evils.

I propose we prioritize intervention into evils based on scale. We can get to Xinjiang when it comes up on the list ordered by the scale of the problem, urgency of irreparable harm, robustness of evidence, and structural relevancy to systemic evil.

And since embargos by the US and EU cause more deaths than literally all wars in the same period, the first priority would be stopping the genocide in Gaza, the second would be to declare all unilateral sanctions illegal and unenforceable and to enforce that ruling with a global military coalition, and the third would be shutting down the US military and limiting them to being only a defensive force of their mainland. Next priorities would be the decolonization of all European-held territories and the establishment of an international protection force for the indigenous peoples everywhere. Then we can send yet another contingent of international observers to Xinjiang to see if this time they can find evidence of a genocide, because the last dozen times no one has found evidence of a genocide and in fact the population in Uyghur population in Xinjiang increased.

Maybe what’ll stop him is another us president…

But no problem with the Tibetan monarchy torturing and enslaving the masses? No problem with the KMT running an openly fascist dictatorship for 40 years in Taiwan killing and torturing anyone who disagreed with them?

No problem with the US and UK protecting the KMT while they prosecuted the White Terror? No problem with the US training terrorists and airlifting them into Tibet to kill and maim and destroy?

No problem with the US program of terrorism that resulted in the high rate of terrorist attacks in Xinjiang? No consideration of the claims that China’s program that violated human rights have resulted in an incredible reduction of terrorist attacks in the Xinjiang, increased women’s autonomy, increased income, reduced economic precarity, and maintained cultural autonomy and vibrancy?

The idea that countries are appeasing China is a drop of water in an ocean of appeasement for the US and Western Europe.

Nope. Think of it like a trolley problem.

A very specific revolt, not general revolt. There were lots of revolts happening. The native inhabitants were revolting against the white European settlers. The black slaves were revolting against the white European settlers. Hell, the poor working class white European settlers were revolting against the slave-owning white European settlers.

The USA was founded in the revolt of the rich white landowning slave-owning European settlers against the British monarchy because the rich white landowning slave-owning European settlers believed the crown was violating their rights to commit genocide against the natives, steal their land, and make super profits.

The people who won had no problem crushing slave revolts, indian revolts, and working class revolts. By sheer numbers, the USA was built more on crushing revolt than on revolt itself.

They did, they just didn’t write it specifically in the foundational documents. It’s in their letters, Jefferson in particular. It’s in the Federalist Papers. It’s all over their literature.

86 year old AND 2 subsequent generations of his bloodline - his daughter and his granddaughter

Israel has been doing decapitation strikes as a core strategy for decades now. It’s not a Trump phenomenon

Hmm, airstrikes being reported by the AP. Oh wait, these aren’t about West Asia? Hmm.

The attack is the latest in a series of frequent and deadly aerial strikes targeting armed pro-democracy forces and ethnic armed groups in the country. The strikes often cause civilian casualties.

Oh, pro-democracy you say? Hmmmm.

https://www.stimson.org/2025/rethinking-us-myanmar-policy-in-a-second-trump-administration/

Ah, I see. The US is the good guy here. Right…

Uh. It includes Putin. Did you just miss it?

Absolute comedy gold

I’m not angry, Lu. I’m just disappointed

Oh hey, I got you mad enough to chase me around now, eh? Welcome! I like that your primary beef with me is that you think I can’t read but then you post this particular link. Very well done! Do continue, please.