the_dunk_tank

https://twitter.com/War_Takes/status/1546579298508750852?cxt=HHwWiICyibHrxvYqAAAA

The Rhodesia episode itself was good, but then I went through his tweets. of course he omits the NATO proxy war when discussing ukraine (framing it purely as a russian invasion that happened for no reason) in addition he had this lovely drivel where he responded to Luna Oi, saying she's "Denying the agency" of people in countries like Vietnam (her home) for noticing how often the US backs color revolutions. He's also quote tweeting himself while claiming "tankies" called him a "cuck" and presenting no evidence anyone said any of those things.

After this guy, and AdamSomething, I'm waiting for them to bring Vaush on and start complaining about "tankies" every episode. I'm starting to think the entire "Nate Bethea" produced podcast circuit: WTYP, Trash Future, Lions Led By Donkeys, 10K Losses, etc. is just social imperialist drivel. Nate Bethea and Joe Kasabian are both vets of the US invasion of Afghanistan (not conscripts, but actual fucking volunteers who fell for imperialist propaganda and now feel or pretend to feel some guilt about it) , and wouldn't you know it, every podcast Nate Bethea produces tows a tepid "both sides are always equally bad" line with regards to US imperialism. Joe Kasabian in particularly loves to play up Soviet atrocities with western sources like Montefiore and Snyder. Weird. Getting very disappointed in this shit. Chapo-adjacent pods, for all their faults, aren't nearly this bad when it comes to US imperialism.

Getting real tired of this line I see increasingly in media: Pointing out US hegemonic involvement is "denial of the people's agency". If you point out the US's specific involvement in this or that coup, this or that color revolution, this or that forced loan, this or that diplomatic pressure, no matter how specific you get, or how well-documented your sources, you get accused by liberals of "believing everything ever is the USA's fault." They apply a false broadness of scope to the specific historical point to discredit it.