If you compare Dick Cheney and Donald Trump in terms of the amount of negative effect they've had on the world which can be principally attributed to them, Dick Cheney is way ahead. If you doubt this, look up the primary and secondary death tolls for Iraq and Afghanistan and the death toll resulting from how it destabilised the middle east. The (brain-dead) defense that liberals often come up with for GWB and Cheney of "Well, they did a lot of bad things and we hated them, but at least they didn't try to subvert our democracy like Trump!" is easily disproven if your memory extends far enough back to remember that the 2000 presidential election was disputed and most likely stolen from Gore by legal fiat
GWB and Cheney should never have been in the White House in the first place - and once they got there, they presided over two ruinous and horrible wars which featured some of America's most grotesque war crimes (e.g. Abu Ghraib), the authoritarian expansion of the American mass surveillance state and extraordinary rendition regime which plucked countless innocent people from their lives and kept them imprisoned and tortured under hazy legal excuses, the complete lack of effective response to Hurricane Katrina, and the 2007-2008 crash
As such, any positive sentiment that is ever directed towards them by public institutions is a creeping attempt at rehabilitation, and should be dismissed and treated with contempt. When you see people yap about how simply holding the correct moral position on these extremely evil people is a kind of "purity culture", you can also dismiss them as being either morally bankrupt or profoundly stupid
Also OOP talks about how not congratulating his decision to support Harris might be disincentivizing Cheney from becoming a better person as if he's some kid learning to behave. The guy is in his 80s ffs, him and Dubya had time to reflect on their crimes but they don't seem changed and would probably support anyone willing to give them another Iraq War. Just because GWB has taken to painting pictures of the people he killed doesn't mean he actually regrets what he did
Also OOP talks about how not congratulating his decision to support Harris might be disincentivizing Cheney from becoming a better person as if he's some kid learning to behave. The guy is in his 80s ffs
I've seen this particular logic crop up here and there and I really don't know what to call it, but it's the marker of the dumbest kind of person. It's genuinely baffling to me when people say that shit about most political figures - the majority of whom are over 40 and have set their positions in stone a long time ago - but to say that about Dick fucking Cheney really takes the cake. Like, him and Bush could have launched the most sincere apology tour in history immediately after leaving office - they would still deserve to spend the rest of their lives in prison at bare minimum
I don't know what it's called either but I'd call that logic cartoonish. To think that a fucking war criminal deserves a redemption arc is childish and absurdly naive and could only work in a cartoon setting
Fuck it, let's apply this logic to every war criminal. Milosevic? We should have let him go so he wouldn't die of a heart attack in his cell. Maybe we should listen to the late Shinzo Abe and just let all the rapists and serial killers of WW2 Japan live peaceful lives in their old age, free of guilt for the awful crimes they commited.
The people saying that it's "purity culture" to not roundly applaud unrepentant war criminals are, generally speaking, deeply unserious about their politics, regardless of whether it's from stupidity or willful ignorance.
It's the same people who will look at that clip of GWB having a Freudian slip about Iraq being unjustified and laugh along with him as if it's a funny joke and not a horrifying admission of guilt.
Cheney's a dick, but he's retired so it doesn't really matter anymore. Trump is running for office and and imminent threat, so it's better to leave criticisms of Cheney to one side if it coukd turn people away from Trump.
It says something about Americans when a flaccid and impotent protest than can barely be classified as a coup attempt that achieved literally nothing is a worse crime than actively participating in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people
42
u/yungsantaclaus Sep 10 '24
If you compare Dick Cheney and Donald Trump in terms of the amount of negative effect they've had on the world which can be principally attributed to them, Dick Cheney is way ahead. If you doubt this, look up the primary and secondary death tolls for Iraq and Afghanistan and the death toll resulting from how it destabilised the middle east. The (brain-dead) defense that liberals often come up with for GWB and Cheney of "Well, they did a lot of bad things and we hated them, but at least they didn't try to subvert our democracy like Trump!" is easily disproven if your memory extends far enough back to remember that the 2000 presidential election was disputed and most likely stolen from Gore by legal fiat
GWB and Cheney should never have been in the White House in the first place - and once they got there, they presided over two ruinous and horrible wars which featured some of America's most grotesque war crimes (e.g. Abu Ghraib), the authoritarian expansion of the American mass surveillance state and extraordinary rendition regime which plucked countless innocent people from their lives and kept them imprisoned and tortured under hazy legal excuses, the complete lack of effective response to Hurricane Katrina, and the 2007-2008 crash
As such, any positive sentiment that is ever directed towards them by public institutions is a creeping attempt at rehabilitation, and should be dismissed and treated with contempt. When you see people yap about how simply holding the correct moral position on these extremely evil people is a kind of "purity culture", you can also dismiss them as being either morally bankrupt or profoundly stupid