• FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    What’s wrong with this comment section is that most of the people chiming in have an opinion wholly formed by the nightly news program they watch and nothing else. I’d rather have universal health care than spend a trillion dollars every year policing ten other countries, personally.

      • hark@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        1 year ago

        Correction: The US spends more per-capita lining the pockets of health insurance execs than every other country.

      • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        What’s ‘tanky’ is arguing for your own impoverishment, which is what you’re doing when you try to defend our country spending a trillion a year on war in ten other countries.

        And then another 100+ billion on another country’s war, that we’re not even fighting in. That 100 billion could keep people cool in a heat wave, or fix a state’s broken power grid, or put clean water in Flint, Michigan. But no, you’d rather we neglect our own people instead.

        War spending is 100% why we don’t have universal health care in this country, and we are the only country dropping a trillion-plus a year.

        • artisanrox@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          1 year ago

          War spending is 100% why we don’t have universal health care in this country,

          Rurals that worship misogynist inheritor orange blobs that like Putin and Kim Jong Un are why we don’t have universal healthcare.

          I want my universal healthcare, AND, in this particular case, I want overseas Nazis blown to smithereens with nice expen$ive Patriot missles.

        • hark@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          It is kind of funny that people throw around the word “tankie” so meaninglessly when the US has the largest military spending in the world by far and is thus literally the most “tankie” i.e. enforcing their will with military might.

          • Big Miku@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            1 year ago

            Either you are willingly redefining a word, or you don’t even know what it means

            Tankie means a person who supports an authoratian communist state.

            The word comes from the Tianamen Square Massacre, where tanks were used to silence and kill protester, which some people think didn’t happen.

            • hark@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I know the original meaning, I’m simply pointing out the irony that people using the term for everyone who disagrees with them are more likely to support military action against people than the ones they’re calling “tankies”. The term has been so overused that it has lost all meaning. It’s basically the liberal version of conservatives calling everything “woke”. Notice how these stupid catch-all words always seem to be spammed toward the left of whoever is using the term?

              • Big Miku@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                11
                ·
                1 year ago

                But that wasn’t said in your original message, was it? In your original message you were implying that by the USA spending more money in their military to spread their influence, would make the US government a tankie(?), thus invalidating everyone who uses the word tankie.

                Also if your point was that the word tankie lost its meaning by usage in invalid contexts, why did you mention the USA? Wouldn’t it have been more appropriate to explain that it lost its meaning by the usage of it, and not by the actions of the US government, since the US is not the only nation who has people who use the word tankie?

                • hark@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Perhaps my original post was worded poorly, but my point is that people are throwing the term around meaninglessly at anyone who criticizes US foreign policy. I also noted that it is made funnier because the US enforces its will around the world with the highest military spending in the world by far. In effect, a global authoritarian government. Again, which people who throw the term “tankie” around meaningless are defending.

                  • Big Miku@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    But wouldn’t that invalidate the usage of that word in the circles that use it wrong, and not for those who use it properly.

                    Like if there was a hypothetical town where the word “good” was used to describe bad things, would that town invalidate the word “good” for every single town? Of course it wouldn’t, it would only invalidate the usage of that word by the ones who use the word in question wrong.