• wurzelgummidge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    3 months ago

    Yes, because no population on this planet ever acts against their dictators without the U.S. funding them

    FTFY

    • Gsus4@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      That explains the Chinese revolution, the Mexican revolution, hell the French revolution too :)

    • Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Plenty of revolutions have happened, before, during, and after the Cold War without U.S. support, the U.S. actively opposed the breakup of the Soviet Union for example, and yet it happened, and several democracies were created from it’s downfall, with little influence from the U.S.

      dictators without the U.S. funding them FTFY

      Even if the U.S. government did regularly fund protests/resistance against dictatorships, why would that be a bad thing? As long as it’s not singlehandedly deciding on regime change like in Iraq, I don’t see anything morally wrong with supporting pro-democracy causes within dictatorships.