These nations comprise more than 100 million people. Even if the Epstein class personally impregnated 100 million children to deliver the population, the countries would still have basic legitimacy, because they contain these people.
If you’re about to hit me with your definition of these countries just being the respective governments, not the people within, then you are using a definition outside the norm and should not be surprised that you piss people off, no matter what propaganda you want to believe in.
Names of countries and borders around people change all the time. They are in perpetual flux.
The countries change, yet the people within them are the same, across that change.
If you think states or nations are inextricably linked to their people, your definitional “norm” is probably some form of propaganda, and has little to do with historical reality. Or, maybe you are a goldfish.
Regardless, no, your own inability to comprehend the distinction between a population and a state is not a failure that most other people share. It’s actually easy and commonplace for human beings to recognize that they are not in fact identical to the entity that governs them. I’m sure even you are actually capable of it too, since even the most diehard fanatical nationalist doesn’t unquestioningly agree with everything their state does or mistake themselves for their government when they look in a mirror, or mistake their state for themselves when they see a flag in a meme.
Sure some people identify with their state, but none of them identify as their state, the way you’re trying to make out as if they do with your weird impregnation analogy.
But I get it, it’s rhetorically handy to be able to preemptively discredit the most obvious counter to your argument by stating a falsehood about it and then pretending what you said is “the norm.” That way you don’t have to account for that pesky reality getting in the way of the point you’re trying to make.
The absurdity of your claim also becomes apparent as soon as it’s pointed out that there are significant numbers of people within each of those countries (excepting maybe “Israel”) who would fullheartedly agree with the OP image and affirm the illegitimacy of the state that rules over them.
I believe, jankforlife just believes in pissing off as many people as possible…
it’ll only piss you off if you believe in the epstein class’ propaganda.
These nations comprise more than 100 million people. Even if the Epstein class personally impregnated 100 million children to deliver the population, the countries would still have basic legitimacy, because they contain these people.
If you’re about to hit me with your definition of these countries just being the respective governments, not the people within, then you are using a definition outside the norm and should not be surprised that you piss people off, no matter what propaganda you want to believe in.
it’s about who controls them right now.
without the united states empire taiwan, south korea, and isreal would not exist as countries and ukraine wouldn’t be controlled by fascists.
Names of countries and borders around people change all the time. They are in perpetual flux.
The countries change, yet the people within them are the same, across that change.
If you think states or nations are inextricably linked to their people, your definitional “norm” is probably some form of propaganda, and has little to do with historical reality. Or, maybe you are a goldfish.
Excellent illustration of my point. Thanks!
Is your point that you’re immune to reason?
Regardless, no, your own inability to comprehend the distinction between a population and a state is not a failure that most other people share. It’s actually easy and commonplace for human beings to recognize that they are not in fact identical to the entity that governs them. I’m sure even you are actually capable of it too, since even the most diehard fanatical nationalist doesn’t unquestioningly agree with everything their state does or mistake themselves for their government when they look in a mirror, or mistake their state for themselves when they see a flag in a meme.
Sure some people identify with their state, but none of them identify as their state, the way you’re trying to make out as if they do with your weird impregnation analogy.
But I get it, it’s rhetorically handy to be able to preemptively discredit the most obvious counter to your argument by stating a falsehood about it and then pretending what you said is “the norm.” That way you don’t have to account for that pesky reality getting in the way of the point you’re trying to make.
The absurdity of your claim also becomes apparent as soon as it’s pointed out that there are significant numbers of people within each of those countries (excepting maybe “Israel”) who would fullheartedly agree with the OP image and affirm the illegitimacy of the state that rules over them.
No, my point is that you lot piss me off.