Quote from: paxmao on August 09, 2022, 08:38:58 AM

Quote from: DaRude on August 08, 2022, 10:41:40 PM

...

Quote from: paxmao on August 07, 2022, 11:14:02 PM

Quote from: suchmoon on August 06, 2022, 04:32:33 AM

Quote from: DaRude on August 06, 2022, 01:00:49 AM

Ah whataboutism, there's no hypocrisy or double standard that it cannot justify. Weren't you taught that whataboutism cannot apply when creating laws? And is actually called discrimination in law. But i must agree it's a convenient tool to prevent population from questioning any and all laws.

When one country invades and the other says "we don't want your books anymore" it's absurd to claim "discrimination". Come on, master of whataboutism, find us some historic analogy. Like Russian imports of German books during WWII.

Quote from: DaRude on August 06, 2022, 01:00:49 AM

If your logic leads you to the following conclusion, think it's safe to say that you're on the wrong side of the argument:
Masha and the Bear = brainwashing children, needs to be censored, require exceptions to import
Mein kampf = totally fine for unlimited circulation without age restriction

That's your conclusion, not sure why you're ascribing that to me. I'm sure there are many bad books issued in countries that Ukraine has good relationships with. I never argued otherwise. It's a tangent that doesn't mean anything in the context of restricting book imports from a country they're at war with.

Certainly the whole argument is ridiculous. Is like asking Israel to make Mein Kampf compulsory reading at school or making Carl Marx a compulsory reading at Texans schools. They somehow keep on insisting that Ukraine should actually be praising and chanting about the main language of the state that is trying to annihilate them. Senseless at all point.

Not censoring all books based on a language != compulsory reading of a specific book, or that anyone needs to praise and chant anything.
Such a stretch, c'mon, you know better than this

Sure, let's make a chapter called "Stalin, the friend of Ukrainians" mandatory reading in Ukrainian schools. We do not want to censor anything do we?

Where's suchmoon yelling, false dilemma fallacy, when you need him/her?
You know there are options between compulsory reading of a specific book and censoring import of books based simply on the language. Would the book "Stalin, the friend of Ukrainians" be any better if it was written in English or Moldovan or Polish? Ban the propaganda, why touch scientific journals, kids books, and soap operas for grandmas? But think we all know the answer to that...

Quote from: TwitchySeal on August 09, 2022, 09:29:27 AM

...

You know Russia invaded Ukraine right? They're handing out passports in the areas they occupy and bombing the areas they don't. Putin literally said Ukraine isn't a real country. The book ban you're talking about happened after the war started, not before. It was a response to Russia trying to destroy Ukraine literally, and you're trying to make Russia out as the victim because they banned Russian books....in the middle of the war...Such a stretch, c'mon you know better than this. You can't invade a country and then criticize them because after you invaded they banned your books.

Censoring of Russian language in Ukraine started after 2014 coup/revolution, so if we take that as the start of the war, then you are correct. Are there any other examples in the world where a country censors books based on the language they're written in? If you have to censor import of 60% of books already in circulation, then the war is clearly ideological and inside the population.

Quote from: johhnyUA on August 09, 2022, 12:33:18 PM

...Blah blah blah ...
This is called "protectionism of your own culture". If you want, you can listen russian content on russian resources.
...Blah blah blah ...
Bigger amount of Himars - faster we will get to the point where orcs will be left without artillery. And this is really not good why americans don't want to provide a bigger amount of Himars to us.

Might want to dial down on "cultural protectionism" when totally dependent on USA and EU.

What makes you think that USA goals are completely aligned with UA? Have you even considered that the goal of Americans might not be for UA to win, but just to administer the maximum amount of losses on the RU side (and consequently UA)? Will you concede that the losses will be senseless if/when RU takes Kharkiv/Odesa/Zaporizhzhia/Dnipro or any and all UA losses can be justified by claiming that they were actually protecting Poland from Russian orcs?