this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2024

664 points (94.4% liked)

196

16747 readers

1947 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

greembow@lemmy.blahaj.zone

moss@lemmy.blahaj.zone

moss@lemmy.world

queue@beehaw.org

funky_rodent@lemmy.blahaj.zone

PeachyMcPeachface@lemmy.blahaj.zone

threegnomes@lemmy.blahaj.zone

greembow@lemmy.world

remotelove@lemmy.ca

Roflmasterbigpimp@feddit.de

qaz@lemmy.world

A_Very_Big_Fan@lemm.ee

qaz@lemmy.blahaj.zone

A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world

qaz@lemmy.dbzer0.com

qaz@sh.itjust.works

qaz@lemmy.sdf.org

664

Imperial rule (lemmy.blahaj.zone)

submitted 1 month ago by hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone

192 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

if one major power loses influence, another will benefit from the vacuum.

Multipolarism is not a vacuum. Hypocritical "Rules based world order" delusion backed by sycophantic colonies to tyranical CIA is a propaganda tool that deludes an empire into over reaching and collapse and "the vacuum".

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 17 points 1 month ago

I think you may have misunderstood me. I'm not saying that imperialism is justified because of the possibility of a vacuum, I'm saying that the possibility of a vacuum is an acceptable risk for the sake of opposing imperialism.