Figure he inflated numbers cuz he’s super capitalist? Citations could make sense if he’s the expert, saw he lived in China, but anyway curious your idea of his angle (ideology or money)
Dude’s a feather ruffler!:
Zenz has been the target of a pro-Beijing disinformation campaign, according to U.S.-based cybersecurity firm Mandiant.
As a result of his work on Xinjiang, Zenz has become a target for coordinated disinformation attacks from pro-Beijing and Chinese state-run media as well as other state-affiliated entities.
-Wiki (he wasn’t linked on the foundation page, nor mentioned, he founded or is director or both?)
Point 2: I get ya. Had me confused. Took me a sec.
Was drawing historical parallel. Note word “unpopular” in particular.
Kinda “don’t forget Hitler had supporters”, ya? If I hadn’t clicked that paraphrase woulda left me with opposite impression, would note when paraphrasing pls
Also IDK if credible cuz read one Wiki page (JK read 15% of it)
Too bad it was on Twitter, I’d ask him for clarification, but we don’t do Twitter do we :)
PS: off topic - realize how careful I have to be when being irreverent and post stuff bitingly bitter (no /s, gets upvoted, and is hardcore sarcasm), so thank ya. Maybe I should try /s to protect my little reputation given ease, least for Palantir, of tying accounts to IRL
The way I understand it is, “Hitler had supporters because his methods (however unconscionable) reduced crime”. My problem with this statement is that it implies that he actually reduced crime. As in there was a tangible reduction in crime during Hitler’s reign that can be attributed to his Gestapo methods.
Figure he inflated numbers cuz he’s super capitalist? Citations could make sense if he’s the expert, saw he lived in China, but anyway curious your idea of his angle (ideology or money)
Dude’s a feather ruffler!:
-Wiki (he wasn’t linked on the foundation page, nor mentioned, he founded or is director or both?)
Adrien Zenz has never set one foot in China and doesn’t speak an iota of the language.
This guy seem credible to you? https://books.google.de/books/about/Worthy_to_Escape.html?id=lRtSQB3HHJcC&redir_esc=y
https://archive.vn/AVs6t
Fundamentalist is he?
Point 2: I get ya. Had me confused. Took me a sec.
Was drawing historical parallel. Note word “unpopular” in particular.
Kinda “don’t forget Hitler had supporters”, ya? If I hadn’t clicked that paraphrase woulda left me with opposite impression, would note when paraphrasing pls
Also IDK if credible cuz read one Wiki page (JK read 15% of it)
He literally claims that Hitler succesfully reduced crime though. As in “he had supporters because his programs had a crime reducing effect.”
Interesting read from people who hate him and say he is a piece of shit, from five years ago
Also see my initial interpretation of it
https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/jnntj5/adrian_zenz_is_a_nazi_apologist_this_is_furtherToo bad it was on Twitter, I’d ask him for clarification, but we don’t do Twitter do we :)
PS: off topic - realize how careful I have to be when being irreverent and post stuff bitingly bitter (no /s, gets upvoted, and is hardcore sarcasm), so thank ya. Maybe I should try /s to protect my little reputation given ease, least for Palantir, of tying accounts to IRL
The way I understand it is, “Hitler had supporters because his methods (however unconscionable) reduced crime”. My problem with this statement is that it implies that he actually reduced crime. As in there was a tangible reduction in crime during Hitler’s reign that can be attributed to his Gestapo methods.