1150

Zelensky dismisses compromise with Putin, pointing to Prigozhin’s death (www.cnn.com)

submitted 9 months ago by deconstruct@lemm.ee to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml

458 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky has said the death of Yevgeny Prigozhin – the Russian mercenary leader whose plane crashed weeks after he led a mutiny against Moscow’s military leadership – shows what happens when people make deals with Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

As Ukraine’s counteroffensive moves into a fourth month, with only modest gains to show so far, Zelensky told CNN’s Fareed Zakaria he rejected suggestions it was time to negotiate peace with the Kremlin.

“When you want to have a compromise or a dialogue with somebody, you cannot do it with a liar,” Volodymyr Zelensky said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] zephyreks@programming.dev -5 points 9 months ago

There's a reason Western Europe focuses on the Nazis in the context of the Holocaust: the Nazis never saw the Western Europeans as a stain on the Earth like they did the Jews and the Slavs. Russians don't need to point to Jews to claim Nazism: they can point directly to the treatment of ethnically Russian Slavs during WW2 and the plans that Nazi Germany had for the eradication of Slavs.

Russia doesn't need to point at how Ukraine treats Jews because to Russia, the Holocaust is dwarfed in societal impact by the issues that motivated Operation Barbarossa. The Russians lost 19 million Russian civilians in the war, why would they care about the Jews?

Nevermind that minorities in China get so many advantages it's actually silly how much affirmative action goes on. Provinces dominated by minorities get significantly more funding per capita and even get loss-leading infrastructure projects like the Tibet and Xinjiang railways. Students from minorities get additional bonuses on gaokao (basically SAT, but imagine if schools didn't look at anything else). Minorities are exempt from family planning policies and get massive interest-free loans for starting businesses. They get proportional representation in government. Hell, there are 55 minority groups in China making up 8% of the population.

In the army? The prevalence of rural populations in the army has been observed AROUND THE WORLD. It's a function of rural communities being rather poor and underserved by governments in general, as well as the lack of economic opportunities that living on a farm provides. In fact, the entire notion of the underserved countryside is what allowed communism to rise in Russia and China.

[-] TheLurker@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago

Oh yeah CCP is all about diversity and minorities right?

I mean just ask the people of Tibet, or the Uyghurs right? They will tell you how much the Chinese government supports their minority culture.

Filthy fucking genocidal cunts. That's what the Chinese Communist Party is. And your attempt to create a positive spin of them is not as subtle as you think.

Tankie scum!

[-] zephyreks@lemmy.ca -2 points 9 months ago

Have you ever been to China? Ever talked to a person from a Chinese minority? Clearly not.

By and large their complaints are about a lack of economic opportunity (because, y'know, Inner Mongolia isn't exactly the most hospitable climate) and that the government affirmative action isn't enough to address the gap in resources. That's what you'll hear on the ground... And that's an absolutely fair concern.

[-] krakenmat@sh.itjust.works 8 points 9 months ago

I have. I've known Tibetans personally and I can assure you that they wish China had never invaded their country and taken it over.

[-] zephyreks@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Ah yes, because Tibet before the CCP was a bastion of human rights protection. Who do you think you're convincing?

Still, clearly never been to China 🤷‍♀️

[-] krakenmat@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 months ago

Well it's sure as shit not a bastion of human rights after the CCP invasion.

You've clearly never met a Tibettan refugee.

[-] zephyreks@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 months ago

Do you understand Tibetan history up to that point? At least it's no longer a serfdom system (which Tibetan advocates will say was equal because of the one-in-a-million chance that one of the peasants can become the Dalai Lama and that everyone was totally happy because everyone was working towards bettering Buddhism). How many Tibetan refugees do you know who experienced serfdom?

[-] krakenmat@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 months ago

The Tibetans should get to chose their government, not a communist dictatorship of a foreign country who undertook a military invasion and then practiced cultural and ethnic eradication in Tibet. If the Mao had not lied to the leadership of Tibet, and the chinese communists had not invaded, Tibet would most likely be a peaceful democracy now, as is the democratically elected government in exile. How's China going? Hold up a poster of Winnie the Poo in Beijing and let me know how you go.