I told them that what they called Western hegemony is different from the rules based order. They said the rules based order is Western hegemony. And I said I agreed. That is what I am saying. Real Western hegemony is a rules based order. And they said yes, that is what we are trying to get rid of. And I said no, but we don’t even have that right now. We need more Western hegemony. And everyone at the same time was like “nooo” we are socialists, we are against Western hegemony. Socialists oppose Western hegemony. And I said but not social democrats. Social democrats are the socialists who support NATO.
And I saw someone accuse my post of strawmanning.
Libs know exactly ONE thing about history - that Chamberlain tried to appease Hitler by letting him take the Sudetenland, and it didn’t stop him - and think it’s some universal truth that applies in every situation.
That exact analogy has been used by high ranking US officials to justify nearly every conflict since the WWII, including Korea, Vietnam, and the War on Terror.
It’s also not true at all, i.e not a fact. Chamberlain wanted to collaborate with Hitler, not appease him.
Of course this is only surprising to Liberals who can’t imagine why the leader of the British Empire would be a fascist 🤔💭◻️
