This is nothing new. Liberals have always done this throughout history. They put all the blame on individuals to cover up the root cause of these constantly reoccuring wars and genocides.
Netanyahu isn’t the problem.
Israel is. The West is. Imperialism is. Capitalism is.
By: @commie______central
This is such a broad definition that it becomes meaningless.
How so?
You’re probably familiar with the US Civil War, yes?
The Confederacy declared independence and established itself as a new nation, the Union took exception to that and fought them.
Was that imperialism?
I see where you’re going with this. It’s interesting to think about.
I think the crux of this argument isn’t the definition of imperialism, but of nation. Which if given the same scrutiny, could also be considered to be too vague a definition to be useful.
Asking a confederate, they probably would have said yes. Asking anyone else? Well, not a single other nation on earth recognized the confederacy, so probably no.
But I think the objective ambiguity you’re pointing at doesn’t make a word useless. A policeman shoots and kills someone. One side says murder, the other doesn’t. That’s the same fundamental ambiguity, but it’s resolved when we apply objectivity to it. Murder as a word isn’t useless, the same as imperialism.