• kibiz0r@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    I’m not sure how to feel about the level of support shown for Bushnell, when previous self-immolators have been thoroughly ignored.

    Part of me is glad that his death is not in vain, and his friends and family can take some solace in that fact.

    But part of me is terrified that 20 more people are going to try similar stunts and achieve… less-than-nothing.

    There are already too many martyrs. We need agitators. You can’t agitate if you’re dead or otherwise removed.

    Please: If you’re considering Aaron Bushnell an inspiration, be inspired by the fact that he did something unusual, not that he did something self-destructive. Go throw some soup on a Van Gogh instead.

    • thecrotch@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      previous self-immolators have been thoroughly ignored

      Arguably a self imolator ended the war in Vietnam. He absolutely got the ball rolling.

      • masquenox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Arguably a self imolator ended the war in Vietnam.

        No, he fucking didn’t. The Vietnamese breaking the US military through the use of force ended the war in Vietnam.

          • masquenox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            I hate to be the one to break it to you… but the Vietnamese broke the US military. Swallow all the cope the propagandists have been spoon-feeding you about this since the 70s - it doesn’t change anything.

            • Anti_Iridium@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              What do you mean by “broke”? I’m quite literally in a class on the Vietnam War this semester, writing a paper about how ineffective our policy of bombing an agrarian society that only needed to supply its forces 50 tons of supplies a day.

              Please, elaborate.

              • masquenox@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                9 months ago

                ineffective our policy of bombing an agrarian society

                “Ineffective” at what? The indiscriminate carnage that the US visited on SE Asia from the air was possibly the most effective mass-slaughter campaign ever perpetrated by a colonialist power - it was even more effective than the colonialist slaughter Germany visited on eastern Europe and the Soviet Union during WW2.

                So no… as far as the tenets of colonialist warfare is concerned, it was perfectly effective.

                • Anti_Iridium@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  At stopping supplies and people from moving south?

                  So, our goal was genocide? I’m not saying we were the good guys, but clearly we weren’t comparable to the fucking Nazis eastern campaign.

                  You still didn’t answer what it meant to break the US military.

                  • masquenox@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    but clearly we weren’t comparable to the fucking Nazis

                    Actually, the US actions in SE Asia is very comparable to what Germany and it’s allies did in eastern Europe and Russia… not even the Nazis attempted to use chemical warfare to starve their victim population into submission - the US did.

                    What the Nazis did was nothing unique - it has been standard fare for colonialist powers long before WW2 happened, and it was stadard fare for the US both before and during the (so-called) “Cold War.” The only reason the Nazis became infamous for it was because they literally perpetrated it on the (so-called) “civilized” world’s doorstep on people that looked “white.”

                    You still didn’t answer what it meant to break the US military.

                    That’s because I won’t - there is no need. Col. Robert D. Heinl answered this all the way back in 1971.

                    TLDR - “Our Army that now remains in Vietnam is in a state approaching collapse, with individual units avoiding or having refused combat, murdering their officers, drug-ridden, and dispirited where not near-mutinous.”

    • Crikeste@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      And never stop, even if liberals are denouncing you. Stand up for what you believe. Never capitulate to them. Be strong. America is inherently violent. Maybe it’s time Americans experience the terror they’ve perpetuated overseas.

    • masquenox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      You are correct… Bushnell isn’t even the first USian to self-immolate as a form of protest this decade - the others barely made the news.

      While I can’t bring myself to criticise people like Bushnell (for obvious reasons), I also cannot endorse it. I don’t want to die for a cause - I want to make the fascists die for theirs.

      • Venia Silente@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        I don’t want to die for a cause - I want to make the fascists die for theirs.

        Honestly this is one of the best quotables I’ve found on the internet this year. Permission to steal?

        • ClanOfTheOcho@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          It’s a paraphrase from a Patton quote. I don’t have the exact quote readily available, but the gist is, “The objective of war isn’t to die for one’s country, but to make some other poor bastard die for his.”

    • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      I worry about this too. I don’t like self immolation as a form of protest. Normally I’d say it accomplishes nothing, but in this case it did draw a lot of attention – that by no means though should be an endorsement for others to do this. We can find better, equally effective ways to organize. There’s already enough senseless death going on.

      I appreciate his gesture, but I wish he hadn’t done it. I wish he was alive.

    • nyctre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Except for that last part. Don’t waste food. And don’t destroy unique stuff.(Yes, the van Gogh was protected by glass iirc, but most other paintings aren’t) Plenty of ways to get attention without doing irreversible damage to art.

      • Trebach@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        (Yes, the van Gogh was protected by glass iirc, but most other paintings aren’t)

        The van Gogh was chosen specifically because it was protected by glass.

        • Empricorn@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          You apparently have way too much faith in copycats and people without critical-thinking skills…