Like was it a meaningful debate or a flat out flame war? And what was the main theme you were arguing over?

  • 秦始皇帝@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    Now you’re retreating to Russell’s teapot. “There’s no proof that meets any sort of evidentiary standard (Hence why reports from first-hand delegations to Xinjiang from Egypt, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Thailand, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, the World Bank, and even the fucking UN say it’s not a genocide) but you just have to believe it”. Nonsense.

    • SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      I’ve provided a lot of evidence that a lot of other people, countries and organizations back up.

      My sources will never be good enough for you because you are a genocide denier.

      • 秦始皇帝@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 days ago

        And we’re again back to a source that itself doesn’t even claim genocide that sites such amazing people as Guantanamo bay torturer and Amerikan intelligence asset Rushan Abbas and a fee more than all site German evangelical on a self proclaimed “mission from god to destroy China” Adrian Zenz. And honestly I’m just more willing to take the OIC, UN and the first hand delegations at their word that there isn’t a genocide than you (especially considering you yourself are a genocide denier).

          • 秦始皇帝@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 days ago

            The genocide of Russians by Ukrainians. You also keep dodging White genocide in South Africa and the genocide of white people across America and Europe. All of these have been called genocide so to call any of these into question is by your logic to be a genocide denier.

              • 秦始皇帝@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 days ago

                It’s not though? Either it’s ok to question all claims without conclusive evidence or you must accept them all.

                  • 秦始皇帝@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    6 days ago

                    No it’s called being consistent. I understand you prefer being a hypocrite but personally I prefer holding consistent values. If something lacks conclusive evidence it is perfectly reasonable to be sceptical and question it.