Do you have historical examples of your strategy being viable? Because to me what’s going to change things is public perception.
And once it does the same people for genocide will suddenly be against genocide. I can think of countless examples in American history. Like gay marriage.
History shows us that no regime has just ‘decided’ to give up on genocide once it has a taste for it. The democrats were never going to stop on their own - they had to be stopped - like every other genocidal regime. Locking them out of power until they renounce genocide is the only historically viable approach.
There has never been an example of a genocidal regime deciding to stop. They have all had to BE STOPPED. That’s my example - every single case in history.
Do you have historical examples of your strategy being viable? Because to me what’s going to change things is public perception.
And once it does the same people for genocide will suddenly be against genocide. I can think of countless examples in American history. Like gay marriage.
History shows us that no regime has just ‘decided’ to give up on genocide once it has a taste for it. The democrats were never going to stop on their own - they had to be stopped - like every other genocidal regime. Locking them out of power until they renounce genocide is the only historically viable approach.
Just point to an example of your strategy working in history. Otherwise you’re trying to convince me with wishful thinking.
There has never been an example of a genocidal regime deciding to stop. They have all had to BE STOPPED. That’s my example - every single case in history.