YSK: The US massacred hundreds & raped children as young as 12 in one day. Only one perpetrator was convicted and only received three years of house arrest
2mon 26d ago by pawb.social/u/bearboiblake in youshouldknow from en.wikipedia.org
At least 347 and up to 504 civilians, almost all women, children and elderly men, were murdered by U.S. Army soldiers. Some of the women were gang-raped and their bodies mutilated, and some soldiers mutilated and raped children as young as 12.
only Lieutenant William Calley Jr., the leader of 1st Platoon in C Company, was convicted. He was found guilty of murdering 22 villagers and originally given a life sentence, but served three-and-a-half years under house arrest after his sentence was commuted.
Research has highlighted that the My Lai Massacre was not an isolated war crime. Nick Turse places it within a larger pattern of American atrocities enabled by deliberate policies from commanders, such as "free-fire zones" and "body counts", as well as widespread racism amongst American military personnel. Many other atrocities were also covered up by commanders.
Why you should know about this: It is important to know about history so that we can learn from it, avoid the mistakes and atrocities of the past, and know which institutions have a history of performing atrocities, trying to cover them up, etc. and what that looks like.
it's sad when I don't even know which massacre is being discussed, or even which theater of war or era - there are just too many examples
And that is the very few we know of, the more you learn about these, the more clear it becomes they cover them up unless they definitively can't. What we know barely scratches the surface of American terrorism and atrocities.
Initial reports claimed "128 Viet Cong and 22 civilians" had been killed in the village during a "fierce fire fight". Westmoreland congratulated the unit on the "outstanding job". As relayed at the time by Stars and Stripes magazine, "U.S. infantrymen had killed 128 Communists in a bloody day-long battle."
Melvin Laird the Secretary of Defense discussed them with Henry Kissinger who was at the time National Security Advisor to President Richard Nixon. Laird was recorded as saying that while he would like "to sweep it under the rug", the photographs prevented it. "They're pretty terrible", he said. "There are so many kids just laying there; these pictures are authentic".
Inside the White House, officials privately discussed how to contain the scandal. On 21 November, Kissinger emphasized that the White House needed to develop a "game plan", to establish a "press policy", and maintain a "unified line" in its public response. The White House established a "My Lai Task Force" whose mission was to "figure out how best to control the problem", to make sure administration officials "all don't go in different directions" when discussing the incident, and to "engage in dirty tricks".
I have a rule of "the stuff we know is never as bad as the stuff we don't, and we'll never know most of the stuff we already don't" for things like this.
The military had a sex trafficking and drug trade during the Iraq war.
That sounds like something that We Should Know about.
Read The Fort Bragg Cartel if you want more info on this.
Why do I have that feeling that they’ll do it in Iran as well…
Is that what the Denzel Washington-Russel Crowe movie, American Gangster was based on?
Idk but the book was released in 2025 so if the movie is older than that then no
Sorry trying to find article. I think it was US contractors doing it. Either way.
Afghanistan too.
The only reason why my Lai is known today is because one helicopter pilot had a conscience and ordered his door gunner to open fire on their own troops if they were to approach another group of Vietnamese civilians that he decided to protect
Had he not, likely nobody would have known what happened
And only because this has gone public, they had to award Hugh Thompson Jr. with the Distinguished Flying Cross. Otherwise military court.
That's just one village.
"According to the Information Bureau of the Provisional Revolutionary Government of South Vietnam (PRG), a shadow government formed by North Vietnam in 1969, between April 1968 and the end of 1970 American ground troops killed about 6,500 civilians in the course of twenty-one operations either on their own or alongside their allies. "
"Tiger Force, a reconnaissance unit of the 101st Airborne Division, probably murdered hundreds of civilians during a 6-month period in 1967"
and from bombing:
"Estimates for the number of North Vietnamese civilian deaths resulting from U.S. bombing range from 30,000 to 65,000.[35][4] Higher estimates place the number of civilian deaths caused by American bombing of North Vietnam in Operation Rolling Thunder at 182,000.[36] American bombing in Cambodia is estimated to have killed between 30,000 and 150,000 civilians and combatants."
Edit: I haven't done extensive research and as was pointed out the actual numbers might be much higher, and my figures don't include deaths and damage from Agent Orange chemicals
The US murdered over a million civilians in Iraq.
Robert MacNamara stated that the US killed 3-4 million civilians during the Vietnam War. Since he was the Secretary of Defense during that time, he wouldn't have exactly benefited from exaggeration of the total.
Yeah, and those were "woke" wars according to the psychos in charge now.
US soldiers also raped thousands of French women during WW2.
I've read about this too, and the US blamed the problem on black soldiers. Maybe that's something that deserves its own post?
Did they harm your grandma?
after learning of the massacre, he wrote in his memoir that it was "the conscious massacre of defenseless babies, children, mothers, and old men in a kind of diabolical slow-motion nightmare that went on for the better part of a day, with a cold-blooded break for lunch".[
yo what the fuck
For context “he” here is General Westmoreland.
| Sentence | Life imprisonment; commuted to three years' house arrest by President Richard Nixon |
Fucking hell Nixon …
“Protect the children and women” Except from my murderous rapist soldiers apparently.
Interesting how this narrative keeps getting used to justify our colonialism. “These are backwards savages and we are agents of progress and feminism” and then, in the course of the conflict, women and girls are raped, killed, and bombed while women’s rights are stonewalled or even stripped away back home
The police protect women,
WHICH WOMEN!?
I’m a little confused did I say the police protect women? I don’t think I did. Fuck the police.
it's a quote from a song, sorry. i was in agreement with you
Nixon is dead, we will never know.
YSalsoK that Colin Powell was instrumental the attempt to cover up My Lai.
War. What is it good for. Absolutely nothing.
Other than fulfilling the desires of sociopaths under the guise of being a patriot
It is important to know this because when the military is turned on you, you should know they’ll obey. If you think there are enough that would so no, you’re wrong.
What no one ever considers is what is happening right now in real time. They are actively pushing out the troops that would object morally to bad orders. The administration doesn't care if they are left with inferior troops, as long as the ones they have left will follow orders blindly and without question.
As a former member of the US military, please go fuck yourself.
I’ll accept that.
But it’s all about the crowd and momentum. The crowd gets hyped the crowd is gonna do some shit an individual won’t.
That and it’s beat into you to do what you’re told.
you seriously think none of your fellow service members would listen to violent orders?
I never said that. There are plenty of stupid people in any crowd. But dismissing it as entirely full of people who would target US citizens is insulting. That would not stand.
Democrats and Republicans want to murder each other NOW, they're not even in the military. Why would GIs be any different?
In a civil war, all will be armed, the armed forces will split as they did before.
Shut up and follow orders.
I suppose many of the perpetrators who were there are still alive today. I wonder if they sleep soundly in bed at night.
Someone who lacks enough empathy to brutally gang rape women and children are rarely people who feel remorse for hurting others. They unfortunately probably laugh themselves to sleep at night knowing they committed some of the sickest shit imaginable and will never be punished.
Of course they do. People thank them for their service. These brave brave war heroes
Vietnam vets are not necessarily famed for coming back and having a great time.
For a long time, I assumed that veterans who didn't want to talk about their time served were doing so because they witnessed difficult things or felt shame about what they had to do in combat situations.
These days, I wonder if it's because anyone they talked to would see them for the monster they are.
Well, the US did more than that in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria, Libya, Vietnam, Somalia, Nigeria, and a lot of other countries!
The reality is the USA is the real example of a terrorist country.. spreading fear, killing innocent people and ruining their lives.
Don't forget Cuba, which is an actively ongoing event. Innocent people are being starved and deprived of medicine and other essentials, purely because the ruling class want to demonstrate how socialism is a failure. Such a failure that the US has needed to ruthlessly oppress and terrorize them for decades, and yet despite it all Cuba has still made incredible medical breakthroughs such as vaccines for alzheimers and lung cancer, which aren't even available under capitalism... I wonder how they did it if they didn't have innovation, such a mystery
What those in authority don't want to tell us is that this is exactly what they expect in war. They want our soldiers to be so horrific that the other side quits. That's the goal of EVERY leader who starts a war. Any hand-wringing or regret later is just theater.
The only sin is letting the Civilians hear about it.
It's historically the only effective way to fight an insurgency and every military since ancient times knows it. Basically anytime you hear a modern military is enacting a "counter insurgency" it's either code word for doing death squads, or it's a tacit admission that they are out of ideas and have found themselves in an unwinnable quagmire.
The only way to defeat an insurgency is to do massive amounts of crimes against humanity......or avoid creating one in the first place.
Valid.
And between the two options you presented, even when the latter is surprisingly easy to pull off, for “some reason” we just keep diving head-first into war-crime territory.
It’s the same mentality that got the DNC fighting their own guy who was turbo-winning in NYC. Anything is preferable to building a strong, sustainable, cooperative future as far as these kinds of people are concerned.
It's a tale as old as time, no one wants to fight for a future that doesn't advance their own personal positions.
How would a center right politician afford a vacation home in the hamptons if we actually regulated their corporate relationships? What good is a general if there isn't a forever war?
Yeah, you're right of course, this is why we should get rid of all rulers, now and forever, and ensure that they never return. We do not need a ruling class to order us around. We can build a new society where all are equal, and where decisions are made by consensus, rather than by diktat or decree.
them vets are the main foment vector for what we now know as the white supremacy movement. not that the sentiment wasn't prevalent, but it was disjointed groups, churches, cults, klan, militias, prison gangs, etc., each pushing their own thing with only limited local reach.
the influx of large swaths of radicalized and trained MAMs was the igniter. all those power squabbling groups started coming together under one banner and they had a new tool - computers.
early on, they realized you can reach a whole lotta more folks with the new tech than the usual zines and the like. so they formed armored truck robbing gangs, and used the proceeds to buy home computers for establishing a network of BBS all over the country, pushing their shit to previously unreachable corners. I mean, if that's not a michael mann movie, I don't know what is...
for more, kathleen belew - bring the war home, available at anne's site or wherever you pirate your shit.
"You should know: [totally horrible political sexual abuse thing with absolutely no kind of warning on it at all]"
...no, I really, really didn't need to know that, thanks
-- Frost
The warning is implied, don't you realize that? If what happened at My Lai and the subsequent legal outcome was justice, then that justice can be done to you as well.
War and rape go hand in hand; you can't dehumanize people and respect them simultaneously.
Not to mention that a lot of soldiers are amped up on drugs and/or alcohol. Many of them don't want to even be there.
Thank you for sharing, I had only heard of it tangentially until a Mr. Beat video on the Vietnam War. There's a lot of fictional media in that time frame that references atrocities like this in that conflict, beyond just Apocalypse Now.
Welcome to war
Its not a war, it's a raid.
These are the same words
We aren't the ones deciding to go to war and cause a generation of men to have their psychological well-being put through a wood chipper. We don't produce the propaganda that make men willing. We don't make poverty rampant so men get desperate enough to enlist.
It doesn't matter if we learn, plenty of us already know and it doesn't change anything. People like Trump, like Putin, like Netanyahoo, don't care about us or whoever ends up a victim of their ambitions. Putin and Netanyahoo know what their troops do and don't give a fuck, they might even use it to their advantage.
The problem isn't learning from the past, it's that psychopaths are good at gaining power. They know and simply don't care. If voters weren't such ignorant imbeciles, maybe they wouldn't vote for ppl like Trump, but they are, so here we are. If customers weren't such ignorant, weak willed cowards incapable of not buying the new toys, we wouldn't fund the people stealing all the property and making us poorer every generation. We are all victims of the decision-making prowess of the average voter, the average consumer.
I understand how you feel, but we actually do have the power to change our world. We need to first recognize that something needs to be done, build a popular consensus, network and build connections with like-minded people, and start a real movement for change.
Electoralism has not solved our problems in the past, and it won't do so in the future. At best, it is harm prevention, and at worst, it's a distraction from more effective efforts. I encourage people to vote for the candidates they feel best, but to be aware that it's not a real, long term solution. It's always just the best of two terrible candidates, both of whom ultimately serve the ruling class.
The problems we have did not start and will not end with Trump, they are in the fundamental roots of our society, and the road to change our society is a long and difficult one, but it is a journey we have to undertake. We are going to have to act if we want to live in a better world. Simply giving in to nihlism is not an option.
The people have never been roused to action simply because of a good idea, or a wise course of action. They are incapable of even identifying a good idea. Any individual that gains traction changing power structures is targetted and sometimes killed for it. We are all in a cage built by the wealthy and anything that's effective is demonized through propaganda or made illegal and dealt with violence. We are also now on precipice of the greatest surveillance and propaganda system humanity has ever endured and people still don't notice and stop supporting it. We are at the precipice of autonomous drone technology capable of killing that will be used for violence against the prisoners. All because the general population refuse to see the cage or the technologies that have built it, instead helping build their own system of subjugation. The average person is a threat and a traitor to their own interests.
Of course they have, all of human history is a story of ideas that have changed the world. Revolution is possible. You already see the problems, but you are so deep in the despair of the situation to see that a path out of it is possible. Don't give up, help me instead.
the American revolution didn't actually start until Lexington and Concord. it was then further fueled by vile acts of aggression against American colonists.
the threat of the spread of communism allowed the US to enter into the Korean war.
the threat of terror attacks on the American public allowed the US to invade Iraq and even overthrow the leader the CIA put into power.
People don't react to stories. people react to stimulus. fear, hunger, sex, pain, greed. these are the things that motivate us to take action. because, why would we risk what we have unless we're motivated to do so.
Stories make people feel things, like anger. Anger gives people lots of energy and motivation to act.
The LA riots for example were sparked by the lack of justice after the police's brutal assault on Rodney King.
stories are based on acts. nobody gives a shit how little jenny was raped. all they react to is the act of rape.
nobody gives a shit if Trump raped children because it's all a part of the story now.
you heard the story a hundred thousand times by now. you're sick of it, and don't want to hear about it anymore.
this is what mainstream media is used for.
stories are used to satiate the masses.
you heard the story a hundred thousand times by now. you’re sick of it, and don’t want to hear about it anymore.
Speak for yourself.
Look, you can disagree all you want, that's fine, but let's try to be a bit more constructive. What would you propose instead, to try and fight against the Epstein class?
capture actual footage of the culprits attempting to circumvent justice in a way that commoners can understand.
get video footage of Trump gloating about how stupid MAGA is and how he's just using them to build his kingdom of filth.
record backroom deals with CEOs that are killing people for greed.
and release them on multiple platforms for the general public to see and react.
it's not a story if it's plain as day that these people want you dead, it's just a fact.
Sounds good to me, good luck with all of that! Let me know if I can help or support you in your activist efforts.
No, I don't see a path out. History doesn't show any path out as far as I can tell. The power of change for the masses is in mass actions. It isn't coincidence that we are distracted all the time, that we lack strong community, that our attention is grabbed at every moment, that life is too expensive for free time. It's to prevent mass actions. If not by manufactured distraction then by criminalization or propaganda.
I watched the masses pay companies to put cameras in their homes, microphones in their pockets and tracker their devices. I watched them put all the details of their lives and their social connections on Facebook and Instagram and Twitter to be surveilled. I watched them click yes on every TOS without reading, agree to give up anonymity and privacy not just for themselves, but for everyone. Now we are watching people tell LLMs their thoughts, feelings, fears and inner most identities. All that information get collated, catalogued and analyzed. A dossier on every citizen. A prediction algorithm for every cohort. The greatest surveillance, social mapping, propaganda and behavior prediction system ever devised by human beings, all in the hands of genuine psychopaths who run the companies and run for office.
The only times things have gotten better for the masses is when circumstances, technology or calamity, destabilize the existing power structures and allow the oppressed to reclaim the space. That only lasts long enough for the ambitious to reconcentrate power again into the hands of the few. Whatever path you see is one built of faith alone, not evidence of how humans organize ourselves when the destabilizing force dissipates and life returns to a static state. We are living through that reconsolidation of power, watching our communities turned into fascism.
All because the masses can be bought with toys.
Yeah. So stop equating them with Germans. Please
Rule 2.
I've edited the post to contain an explanation for why learning about history is important.
You could have linked this this to what we can expect in Iran, but I guess that counts.
The issue here is humans. In large groups humans do terrible things. Usually in small group interactions they are pretty decent. It's very odd. But probably the result of evolution. Other branches of "human" that didn't act this way were probably wiped out by those that did.
Edit: This is not an attempt to excuse or justify their actions. All of the men (and maybe women now too) who have done these things, and the leaders who let it happen should be punished severely. I have my own ideas on that punishment, but don't want to start a debate on that.
While I understand what you're trying to get at - that humans in a group can do terrible things they wouldn't do alone - what you wrote is simply not true in and of itself - large groups of humans do not necessarily conduct massacres, it's far more of a function of the society and the conditioning of the people - these atrocities were conducted because those in the US military saw the Vietnamese as subhuman, and thus had no empathy for them. The reason they felt that way was because of societal conditioning.
You may be surprised to learn that humans are actually the most co-operative animals on the planet - the scope, scale, and variability of human cooperation greatly exceed that of other animals. Our species is the only one we know of which demonstrates an innate willingness to help others we have nothing in common with.
Some of the greatest accomplishments in human history have been achieved by humans working together to accomplish a larger goal. The ruling class divides and atomizes us to turn us against our best interests and our better natures so that we may be more readily exploited to their benefit.
So both are true. Humans are the most co-operative. But if you look at the achievements, most are done to better one group of humans over another. Rarely is something done for the good of all humans. I'm actually struggling to think of even one thing that was done for the good of all humans. There must be a few, but I just can't think of any.
Yeah, I get it. The most modern examples I can think of are probably things like Wikipedia and the Internet Archive. I guess you can make the argument that those ultimately benefit those in power too, which I would understand.
You are basically right that the problem we have is that we allow our society to elevate some people over others, which is why I am an anarchist. I believe that we should abolish all unjustifiable hierarchies, and make all humans equal, through a social revolution. If you've not encountered this philosophy before, I'd encourage you to check it out. I think it is a very comprehensive analysis of the problems we have, and the only ideology I've encountered which actually takes into account human nature to take advantage of any power they have to gain benefits over others.
I finally had a chance to take a look. But I didn't last long on the first link. Lots of fancy words, but it wasn't really coherent. At the same time as it talked about removing the hierarchy, and not necessarily listening to the experts, it was spending a lot of time name dropping and raising people up on a pedestal. They only real path forward is to stop idolizing individuals.
The second link was much better. I correctly identified that the issue isn't the hierarchies themselves, but the people drawn to them and such. And there in lies the rub. You can't just change the instincts of all humans on the planet. It would take hundreds or thousands of years, assuming there was any pressure to change. But their isn't. So right now, through luck of mutation, some people are born who don't want to idolize a powerful leader and such. But those people are at a disadvantage currently. So they are essentially selected against.
A change is needed, but I don't think we can make it happen. Something external would need to do that. In the mean time, I think we should simply try to ensure noone gets selected against. That way at least the pressure to be more authoritative is removed.
Overall, I support much of what anarchists support in general. But I don’t think tearing down the hierarchy is going to do anything but make room for a new hierarchy. And that will probably happen naturally anyway. It seems to have in the past, it probably will again. The quesion at hand is mainly about if we will cause our own extinction before it does.
it was spending a lot of time name dropping and raising people up on a pedestal. They only real path forward is to stop idolizing individuals.
I can understand that an Anarchist FAQ's writing style is aimed more at leftists than the general population and is kinda unapproachable, I totally get that. It's meant to be a reference work with cited references, a bit like an Anarchist Wikipedia I guess, the quotations and so on are from a very broad range of writers, building on their work, not idolizing anyone in particular.
You can’t just change the instincts of all humans on the planet.
This isn't something which is in our biology, this is a social issue. Human cultures very different from our own exist, we were raised in one culture and thus we have one set of cultural beliefs, but the existence of another culture doesn't mean those people are genetically different from us. Societies can and do change. It's not something we need mutations for, it's something that can change in the time span of a human life.
I was born in an extremely conservative area to conservative parents. I used to support the military, heck at one point I was borderline neo-nazi. Now, I am an avowed anti-fascist and anarchist. For your claim to be correct, I would have needed to somehow evolve, to change my innate instincts, while still living. Sorry, but on the face, it's an absurd claim. Obviously these are socially constructed beliefs and values which can change.
Overall, I support much of what anarchists support in general. But I don’t think tearing down the hierarchy is going to do anything but make room for a new hierarchy.
Again, you are fundamentally missing the point of a social revolution. The entire basis of it isn't to "tear down the hierarchy", it is to build a system from the ground up that makes hierarchies irrelevant, so that they just collapse under their own weight.
I feel like you might get more out of a more accessible format - there's a pretty fun video series called Q&Anarchy by Thought Slime, maybe check that out instead.
While there are plenty of cultures on the planet, they all seem to trend towards authoritative leaders. There are probably some very small cultures that are exceptions. But it seems to me if you get a group big enough, it goes that way.
As for you personally. I mentioned mutations. You had some differences that allowed you to escape the societal pressure to be a conservative. And likely without that pressure, you wouldn't have come so far to the other side. The issue is that not enough people are born able to do that. And often they end up persecuted for even trying. So the mutation doesn't propagate as much as those without it.
No, I'm sorry, but you are wrong about this.
It's not an issue of biology, it's an issue of society. Humans have constantly resisted and struggled against unjust rule. The drive for freedom is innate, and nearly impossible to fully quench.
The major issue is that the systems of oppression we are in are so complex that their true nature is hard to grasp, and it feels nearly impossible to fight against. That's the problem - not that humans somehow "evolved" over maybe a hundred generations to be subserviant - and it can be solved through education and by building an optimistic movement focused on growth and incremental achievable goals.
Humans did not evolve to form hierarchical societies, that's completely and absolutely ridiculous, I'm sorry. The structures of society we have now are very modern and would be completely unrecognizable (and much, much less free) to someone even a short thousand years ago. Evolution does not happen over that kind of a timespan.
Not to mention that evolutionary psychology is a bullshit quack discipline almost exclusively practiced by extremely racist people to justify their eugenics and race science.
You are very confident about things that are easy to prove wrong.
Hierarchical societies have been around a long time. A very large variety of animals today have hierarchical concepts in their socialization. So you can use your inflamatory statements to try and hide how little basis the things you say have in facts. But it doesn't make them any less false.
The more "I'm sorry"s, "ridiculous", "bullshit quack...", and association of the opposing view with racists and such you do. The more obvious you have no real logical arguments. Just like the people who talk louder to get noticed because they have nothing to say that people are interested in.
I have literally studied ancient human civilizations. Please, I am begging you, go educate yourself about early human societies, how they were structured, what the average daily life of someone living in those societies was like, what their relationship to authority, power and hierarchy were, and the history of nation states. I can't provide an education to you over the Internet, but you can at least learn for yourself instead of repeating whatever brainwashing has been instilled in you.
I'd recommend the book "A History of World Societies", it's kind of written as a textbook for students, but it's pretty engaging and I'm sure you'd learn a lot from it.
I can lead you to water, whether you drink or not is up to you.
Look back at your own comment history, then look at the comment with all the drama. It stands out a lot. Normally you are level and making logical points, but in the one with ridiculous and such, you aren't.
Can't seem to find that book available on libby, so will have to do some extra digging. My info comes from mainly articles, not books. So I will take a look, as sometimes articles can misrepresent the people they are quoting or the work those experts have done. But usually that is done to sensationalize things. Not much of that happening in the area of ancient societies.
Sorry for the slow reply, I've been meaning to get back to you for nearly two weeks now, but I wanted to wait to collect my thoughts and to be in the right kind of head space to address your comment.
At the end of the day, I'm a flawed human, I have all sorts of feelings and emotions. Sometimes, I get upset, or angry. I try to avoid engaging with people when I'm feeling that way, but again, I'm not always successful at the things I attempt. I can only try my best, and apologize when I'm not doing my best, so I'm sorry about that.
Now, to be fair, I'm sure you would agree that there are some things which are just absurdly wrong - for example, if someone was arguing that the earth is flat, for example, I might just dismiss that argument as ridiculous - not necessarily because I can't disprove it, but because it's not in my interests to engage with that argument in good faith - maybe because I'd see it as a waste of time, or because I know that it's a topic that I find personally distressing and want to avoid so that I don't get too worked up.
I agree that dismissing claims as absurd is very unconvincing, but sometimes people just believe different things from us, and that we can't always convince people to change their minds. That's just something that we all need to accept to remain sane in this world, especially if we're inclined towards arguing with others on the Internet.
The truth is, I was raised by someone who held extremely racist, white supremacist beliefs, and that person would regularly use evolutionary psychology and similar arguments to justify their beliefs. It was also a very abusive environment, as you can probably imagine. So this is a really tender area for me, which is why you saw the reaction you got.
I am not accusing you of believing in any of those things, I'm sure you don't, I'm sure you're a very kind person who cares about rationality and doing the right thing, so please don't misunderstand me - what I'm trying to explain is that the topic is kind of triggering for me, and that there are lots of people who use similar arguments for, what I'd consider to be, evil ends.
But usually that is done to sensationalize things. Not much of that happening in the area of ancient societies.
Actually, it happens all the time, that's one of the reasons I got a bit upset with you - I see it all the time and not only do I find it extremely frustrating as someone with a lot of knowledge of ancient human civilization but it's very often some far-right crank nonsense. The paleo diet is probably the best known example of this, but a lot of scientific racists use ancient human civilizations to justify their racism, western chauvinism, white supremacy, and so on. Heck, there's a reason fascists always seem so obsessed with the Roman Empire. Carl Benjamin calls himself Sargon of Akkad for a reason.
Anyways, with all of that said, I'd like to share a link to a section on an anarchist FAQ - Does revolutionary Spain show that libertarian socialism can work in practice? - I think it's pretty interesting and demonstrates a historical example of a functional anarchist society. For a functioning anarchist society today, you could look into the Zapatista movement in Mexico, too.
So a few ideas. Saying agree to disagree is an easy way out if a subject is triggering. They say a broken clock (analog lol) is right twice a day. Even a flat earther could say something that is true in their argument, or even have an interesting idea that might lead somewhere. So while dismissing themmis the easy way out, and it is okay to take the easy way sometimes, it still isn't the best way. And yes, we are all flawed, I have no shortage of flaws myself.
On the topic of justifying. I'm not trying to justify actions. I am trying to say we should expect them and not be surprised by them. We shouldn't assume the person is just completely evil, but that they are too weak to do better, to do what is right, and they have succumb to ancient instincts that are no longer needed, but still exist nonetheless. Humans are mostly driven by chemicals they can't control.
Ass for spain. I agree that if a group manages to hit critical mass, it can for a time operate as under anarchist ideals. But one of the ways it was accomplished in spain was that those who didn't share those ideals could leave. And many of such people were also the ones dieing in the civil war. So it is almost like selecting a group by eliminating those of a certain opinion, and allowing any left to leave if they want. In the end, those of that differing opinion are simply outnumbered. And humans are known to go with the flow. That is why too many put up with dictators they don't believe in. It can work in a small cut out of society. But to do it for the whole of society would require getting rid of a significant amount of the capitalist. Which is why I say, not enough of us have evolved past that drive for power and influence yet, for it to work. And I wish I knew how to speed it up. But progress will slow down when it happens. And thats okay. The overhead of communication and such is just much highed when organized by committee versus a single leader. Ifeally we find a way to elevate leaders who aren't in it for the power and influence. But that is very hard.
So while dismissing themmis the easy way out, and it is okay to take the easy way sometimes, it still isn’t the best way.
It's the best way for me. I'm guessing you don't have experience with PTSD, but if I get into an argument with someone about a topic which is triggering, for the next day or so, I won't be able to sleep, I'll have hallucinations of terrifying things which aren't there, panic attacks that come out of nowhere, cold sweats, flashbacks... I could go on. I don't care if someone might possibly have one good idea amongst all of their bad ones if that is the cost.
But one of the ways it was accomplished in spain was that those who didn’t share those ideals could leave.
Yes, of course, that is absolutely a foundation stone of anarchism: voluntary association. Everyone must always be free to associate, or not, as they see fit.
But to do it for the whole of society would require getting rid of a significant amount of the capitalist.
True capitalists who actually own capital are vanishingly few compared to the working class. They're a rounding error. We do not need to get them on side to succeed. They can go off and do their own thing if they want to, have a real Atlas Shrugged society in a mountain. In reality, they need us, so once there is a critical mass, they will either join our society, or learn to work for themselves, rather than by exploiting others.
If you're talking about self-serving behavior, I understand what you mean, but anarchism is actually completely compatible with self-serving behavior. In fact, one of the major traditions of anarchism, egoist anarchism is entirely centered around that concept.
Finally, the "drive for power and influence" isn't in our nature, but it is rather a response to environmental conditions. Do you see an elephant at the circus and assume that juggling balls must be in an elephant's nature? If we change the system of incentives which govern our society, human behaviors will change and adapt to match.
Ifeally we find a way to elevate leaders who aren’t in it for the power and influence.
This can never, ever work. Even if you find people who aren't in it for that, they will almost definitely always be corrupted. Power corrupts. That is one of the founding principles of anarchism.
I do understand your ptsd comment, though I have not experienced anything that severe.
I don’t think that a capitalist has to actually own capital to contribute to the problem. So I think there are a lot more people that will keep it going hoping to become someone who owns the capital. I believe the phrase is "power abhors a vacuum"
And I do agree that power corrupts. Maybe not 100% of the time, but a lot. The idea though is that is we elect people who are in it for the people, when they do get corrupted, it will be far more likely they can be removed. Kind of a checks and balances thing.
Overall, I do like the idea of enclaves. Give people a choice of how they want to live. But the problem is that the capitalist can't resist finding a way to exploit all the rest.
Please tell me you're not trying to excuse the rape of civilians as "it's just what humans do".
It has nothing to do with evolution. These were angry men, taking out their frustration and anger of being drafted, watching their friends die for nothing in a jungle, on the local population. Rather than the government that sent them there in the first place.
The source of their anger fueling their ruthlessness is not evolutionary. It's manufactured by the ones that sent them there in the first place.
Neither of which justifies rape or mutilation in any way. But it's why they were capable of doing what they did. Anger and hate.
I'm not excusing it in any way.
I wish I had a way to advance our evolution past this point so that we didn't have a significant portion of the population that are monsters.
Evolution. You keep using that word. But I don't think it means what you think it means. Because this has nothing to do with evolution. Why are you trying to make this into some kind of evolutionary instinct?
The answer to that is literally the last sentence of my first comment. I'm pretty sure you have a very narrow definition of what evolution means. But even the normal narrow one covers what I said above. It's practically a textbook case.
US soldiers in Vietnam raping and mutilating civilians is a textbook case of evolution? What textbooks are you reading?
You are so confidently wrong it's astonishing. You must know you have no idea what you're talking about.
Wow. Learn to read.
It's not a problem of me not knowing how to read. It's a problem of you writing bullshit that's just not true.
This is bad. What Japan did to China was worse.
You can always find something worse. Doesn't make it acceptable.
"I broke my arm! Well a full body burn is worse. Oh, ok, I feel better now."
Sure, you should make a thread about that.
ok are you a three letter operative bro
What Japan did to China was worse? Ok. So what? What relevance does that have?
Is that how your approach everything in life? Your mother is raped and mutilated, that's bad, but what Japan did to China was worse. So... stop complaining I guess? (Obvious sarcasm but I genuinely fear you won't catch that)
Your comment can be summarized in one word:
"Whataboutism"
Yes, good job! Proud of you.
"We're not as bad as the worst of the worst" isn't the gotcha you seem to think it is.
Then the US absorbed Japan as an imperial vassal, didn't mete out sufficient justice for the perpetrators, and went on to use Japan for logistics support during its attack on Vietnam. These two things are actually part of one greater whole, one that is still happening to this day.