Search Results
7/6/2025, 4:01:18 AM
>>17817958
>It is. But I do agree that more effort needs to be put into debunking people like you.
Well, I'm questioning it so not really. I thought ideas were the object of being debunked, are we debunking people now? That speaks volumes. I'm only concerned about truth, I'm not here to "cancel" anyone or to deplatform them.
>even if you did disprove these individual accounts of particular cruelty that would have little impact on the larger narrative.
I think it does, actually. Some people have biases toward believing certain things. The fact that so many of these stories were sold, in book form and even in some movies, really influences the perception of history itself. If it's false, why shouldn't it be ridiculed out of existence, as with other false narratives? I wouldn't want to see communist propaganda being spread here among people that I know because it too is false. I do not think historical revisionism, for ideological purposes, is just or sound practice. I myself am only interested in establishing what really happened. Any dishonesty or cutting corners with the truth will bite you, in the long run. It always does.
Also, just as there have been hoaxes about events that never really took place, there have been cover-ups of other atrocities. There are real atrocities that really haven't gotten enough attention. Such as, for example, what communism did to millions of people and what it still does today. How it betrays people, even today. And how it tries to gets you to believe that lies will take care of you, or somehow stand against the truth. It never works out for you.
>It is. But I do agree that more effort needs to be put into debunking people like you.
Well, I'm questioning it so not really. I thought ideas were the object of being debunked, are we debunking people now? That speaks volumes. I'm only concerned about truth, I'm not here to "cancel" anyone or to deplatform them.
>even if you did disprove these individual accounts of particular cruelty that would have little impact on the larger narrative.
I think it does, actually. Some people have biases toward believing certain things. The fact that so many of these stories were sold, in book form and even in some movies, really influences the perception of history itself. If it's false, why shouldn't it be ridiculed out of existence, as with other false narratives? I wouldn't want to see communist propaganda being spread here among people that I know because it too is false. I do not think historical revisionism, for ideological purposes, is just or sound practice. I myself am only interested in establishing what really happened. Any dishonesty or cutting corners with the truth will bite you, in the long run. It always does.
Also, just as there have been hoaxes about events that never really took place, there have been cover-ups of other atrocities. There are real atrocities that really haven't gotten enough attention. Such as, for example, what communism did to millions of people and what it still does today. How it betrays people, even today. And how it tries to gets you to believe that lies will take care of you, or somehow stand against the truth. It never works out for you.
Page 1