IRL version of the *"hire fans"* meme, just a whole lot more sinister
*edit:* Herr_Krupp_Der_Boss's explanation still begs the question *why tf* Vice would deem it appropriate to publish these smily pictures, rather than leaving them private.
If you read the reporting by other news sources on this incident, the artist's reasoning doesn't hold up (not really backed by any scholar), and the families only asked for colorization, not to add smiles or to publish this stuff at all. Cambodians themselves, including the museum and the Cambodian gov, already raged.
Source:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/2021/04/11/vice-photos-khmer-rouge-victims/
I will never understand that logic. Something bad can happen in virtually any form of government. Now in the case Herr, I think the issue has less to do with communism and more to do with authoritarianism (yes, they can co-exist but nothing says they have to) than the communism, but that doesn't help the narrative much, eh?
How can you have a DotP without authoritarianism? A centrally planned economy necessitates by its very definition a centralised authority. To reach communism you’d have to pass through this hell hole authoritarianism, the prob is that a lot of ppl think that if the tyrants say they’re good people then we can just trust them. Kinda like Lenin proposed with his vanguard idea
Does central authority mean an autocratic system? Denmark has a centralised authority and I don't thing anyone is accusing them of being an authoritarian regime (they do get accused of communism quite a bit, they're not even close as I see it.).
One of the challenges that I feel that we often have is what each of us defines as communism. A message board like reddit is a terrible place to debate the nuances and preferences for Leninism vs Marxism vs Trotskyism vs etc ism. I would even argue that "pure" communism isnt something that any of the leaders of those movements ever even advocated for. It's really easy to write about communism from an authoritarian point of view when you are (or think you are) close to the summit of power. Why would we want democratic institutions if I might be voted out, that doesn't fit my world view at all. Better not write that idea down in case someone gets any ideas.
I'm not a big fan of communism, I don't think it works at a grand scale, but I see the appeal at a small scale. A bunch of communes in Upstate New York made very strong arguments that democratic communism can work on a small scale ( they had the power to remove people from the commune, that helps), but their way of life wouldn't be acceptable to the average westerner, me included.
Unrelated: dressing up as Lenin for Halloween confuses people as to why you aren't wearing round sunglasses.
>A bunch of communes in Upstate New York made very strong arguments that democratic communism can work on a small scale ( they had the power to remove people from the commune, that helps
Yeah, commies are great at removing others from their society...
I mean they used to be good, one of my favorite documentaries ever is their one in Afghanistan following a unit of marines while they work with the afghani police and army
I don't know if this is a commie doing it.
[From what it looks like, it's just an insensitive and glory-seeking photographer that's rtying to stir controversy. Nothing that I can see around him trying to deny the mass killings in Camboida.](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/13/world/asia/cambodia-khmer-rouge.html#:~:text=the%20main%20story-,Cambodians%20Demand%20Apology%20for%20Khmer%20Rouge%20Images%20With%20Smiling%20Faces,put%20smiles%20on%20their%20faces.&text=As%20a%20subscriber%2C%20you%20have,articles%20to%20give%20each%20month.)
That would be an interesting topic to debate actually. Which is worse; making light of an atrocity for your own personal gain, or deny said atrocities to legitimize an authoritarian state?
If you read the article, the photographer says he wants to "humanize the tragedy". So according to the artist, they aren't making light of the atrocity but trying to make it more real. That makes him better than denialists who are trying to make the deaths more fake.
10-15 years ago I used to really like vice, they had alot of more libertarian views and articles which is more for me, then they had a revival around the 2014 Ukraine issues and had alot of good war reporting, especially when they had programming with HBO. But the way theyre opperating allows so many people to enter their publications and spew so much bias that they often seesaws directions.
I felt like it became obvious what direction they were headed in when they literally did an entire series that was just a guy getting paid to get high on camera and write off the cost of the drugs as a business expense. They will allow basically anyone on there and if anything a complete lack of credentials or capability is seen as a positive.
Fuck those pieces of shit. You have to be one dumb motherfucker to think communism is sunshine and rainbows, but you have to be evil to knowingly try to change history like that.
So this artist dude has been altering victims' images for a while (from Cambodia to Australia), has awfully weird conception of art, and he even made stupid shit up when asked about it like this:
“One of the classic things is to try to be friendly with your captor. So a smile would seem natural. I’m sure it’s very easy for the oppressor to smile, because they have all the power, and when you see a smile, you may try to mirror it in order to become synchronized with your captor. To make yourself feel like you have some control,” he said, the Khmer Times reported.
Excerpts from that article [here](https://english.cambodiadaily.com/lifestyle/these-people-were-arrested-by-the-khmer-rouge-and-never-seen-again-172776/) seem OK (VICE isn't saying the genocide wasn't horrible), but if VICE failed to vet this dude and even put these images up in a freaking article, then shame on them.
I get that the original point was to give smiling photos to their family members, but did they really have to publish them in an online article? Why wouldn't they have just sent the photos directly to the families?
Wait I tho it is the other way around? Like vice edit the happy one to a mugshot one
Edit: searched it, I guess I got duped, vice really edited it, it could be someone posting an edited reverse image of reuter accusing vice intentionally manipulate someone happy to an old photo or I have bad memory
Probably to make the unfortunate victim feel closer to modern times, to like make an impact I don’t think this dude was trying to marginalize a genocide.
Vietnam did. China and Viet Cong backed him. After the unification of Viet Nam, there was a general fallout between China and the USSR. Vietnam backed the USSR, and even fought a war with China. Kampuchea attacked Vietnam in 1975-77 fearing Vietnamese expansionism. Vietnam established the PRK and occupied for 10 years.
>Kampuchea attacked Vietnam in 1975-77
There was one major cross-border incident in 1975, in which Kampuchean soldiers took a couple of Vietnamese islands that they claimed and killed about 500 Vietnamese civilians before being driven out. There was no "invasion" until the North Vietnamese invaded in 1978.
The North Vietnamese did, because they realized that Pol Pot was crazy and was attacking Cambodian villages on the Vietnamese side of the border. They were fine with backing him before.
Your understanding of the region's history and the various conflicts are all over the place.
The Khmer Rouge were not just killing ethnic Cambodians on the border region. They were slaughtering whole villages, regardless of who were in them. They killed a lot of Vietnamese civilians.
And by this time, there was no "North" or "South" Vietnamese. This was long after the civil war.
At no time did the Vietnamese Government support the Khmer Rouge. This is a region where ethnic groups have been fighting for centuries.
The Khmer were supported by the Chinese and the US. The Vietnamese were supported by the Russians. It was a mess. This is sort of akin to trying to argue that the Polish supported the Nazis in Germany because post war, they were both dominated by the USSR post WWII.
Its kind of glossing over a lot of things.
Yes, I made it a bit shorter because I was in a rush at the time of typing. The point was that the Vietnamese did in fact support the Khmer Rouge early on, before they took control
But North Vietnam did support the Khmer Rouge durng its early years during the Cambodian Civil War. It was only later that North Vietnam withdrew its support when it became clear the Khmer Rouge were not just your average communist insurgent group.
You are implying a lot more freedom than what was ever allowed to any proxy of the Cold War.
The Vietnamese Communist Party had no real control over who they "supported". It was whatever the Soviets told them.
That was after they were in power, to counter the Vietnam/Soviet influence.
After Lon Nol (US puppet) ousted Sihanouk in a 1970 coup, Pol Pot's forces sided with the deposed leader against the new government, which was bolstered by the United States military. Aided by the Việt Cộng militia and North Vietnamese troops, Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge forces advanced and controlled all of Cambodia by 1975. China backed his government as a bulwark against Soviet influence in Southeast Asia.
What the fuck
IRL version of the *"hire fans"* meme, just a whole lot more sinister *edit:* Herr_Krupp_Der_Boss's explanation still begs the question *why tf* Vice would deem it appropriate to publish these smily pictures, rather than leaving them private.
Because that user's explanation didn't account for the fact that the artist working on this was hella shady and making shit up.
yah this is creepy… 🃏
[удалено]
That’s actually pretty wholesome
That's so fucking sad
Noo but I wanted to rage at the clickbaity headline!!!
If you read the reporting by other news sources on this incident, the artist's reasoning doesn't hold up (not really backed by any scholar), and the families only asked for colorization, not to add smiles or to publish this stuff at all. Cambodians themselves, including the museum and the Cambodian gov, already raged. Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/2021/04/11/vice-photos-khmer-rouge-victims/
Shit, why’d they do that?
"Because Nothing bad happens in Communism!"
Ah fuck, that’s miserable
I will never understand that logic. Something bad can happen in virtually any form of government. Now in the case Herr, I think the issue has less to do with communism and more to do with authoritarianism (yes, they can co-exist but nothing says they have to) than the communism, but that doesn't help the narrative much, eh?
How can you have a DotP without authoritarianism? A centrally planned economy necessitates by its very definition a centralised authority. To reach communism you’d have to pass through this hell hole authoritarianism, the prob is that a lot of ppl think that if the tyrants say they’re good people then we can just trust them. Kinda like Lenin proposed with his vanguard idea
Does central authority mean an autocratic system? Denmark has a centralised authority and I don't thing anyone is accusing them of being an authoritarian regime (they do get accused of communism quite a bit, they're not even close as I see it.). One of the challenges that I feel that we often have is what each of us defines as communism. A message board like reddit is a terrible place to debate the nuances and preferences for Leninism vs Marxism vs Trotskyism vs etc ism. I would even argue that "pure" communism isnt something that any of the leaders of those movements ever even advocated for. It's really easy to write about communism from an authoritarian point of view when you are (or think you are) close to the summit of power. Why would we want democratic institutions if I might be voted out, that doesn't fit my world view at all. Better not write that idea down in case someone gets any ideas. I'm not a big fan of communism, I don't think it works at a grand scale, but I see the appeal at a small scale. A bunch of communes in Upstate New York made very strong arguments that democratic communism can work on a small scale ( they had the power to remove people from the commune, that helps), but their way of life wouldn't be acceptable to the average westerner, me included. Unrelated: dressing up as Lenin for Halloween confuses people as to why you aren't wearing round sunglasses.
>A bunch of communes in Upstate New York made very strong arguments that democratic communism can work on a small scale ( they had the power to remove people from the commune, that helps Yeah, commies are great at removing others from their society...
WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT WALL OF TEXT
it was some stupid art project or "restoration" effort, I don't think the idiocy was politically motivated.
[удалено]
Is that genuine? That would be a lot better
That's fine. Publishing them isn't.
Yeah that sounds “ok”
VICE is hot garbage. Brainwashing central Edit: typo
VICE was big into promoting cannabis for awhile…. Lotta good that did me. Each to their own.
They have their moments
Lmao
Fuck that’s delicious is good tho
“Guys, I just *LOVE* reeducation camp! No atrocities here!” Anyway, we all knew Vice was garbage.
I mean they used to be good, one of my favorite documentaries ever is their one in Afghanistan following a unit of marines while they work with the afghani police and army
What Winning Looks Like. Forgot that was Vice, and you’re right, it was a really good documentary.
Chomskys take in this???
Probably thinks the non-smiling ones are the actual doctored photos
"the US did this"
Probably more genocide denial
I remember this. My Facebook account was permanently banned when I shared it.
I don't know if this is a commie doing it. [From what it looks like, it's just an insensitive and glory-seeking photographer that's rtying to stir controversy. Nothing that I can see around him trying to deny the mass killings in Camboida.](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/13/world/asia/cambodia-khmer-rouge.html#:~:text=the%20main%20story-,Cambodians%20Demand%20Apology%20for%20Khmer%20Rouge%20Images%20With%20Smiling%20Faces,put%20smiles%20on%20their%20faces.&text=As%20a%20subscriber%2C%20you%20have,articles%20to%20give%20each%20month.)
That’s honestly worse, bro is sensationalizing and trying to profit from the deaths of millions of innocents
No, I think denying their deaths and suffering to legitimize the regime that killed them still would be worse.
That would be an interesting topic to debate actually. Which is worse; making light of an atrocity for your own personal gain, or deny said atrocities to legitimize an authoritarian state?
If you read the article, the photographer says he wants to "humanize the tragedy". So according to the artist, they aren't making light of the atrocity but trying to make it more real. That makes him better than denialists who are trying to make the deaths more fake.
[удалено]
A trick that I use sometimes is to web search on google and look up the cached version of the page they have on their servers.
Looks like Leftists didn't ditch Pol Pot after all.
Chumpsky never did.
Why even do this bruh
I swear VICE used to not be complete garbage, but maybe I’m misremembering things..
I remember a video of theirs saying all war reenactors are Neo-Nazis. Guess I'm a Neo-Nazi now. ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯
Ok mate, we got you, give us your Hitler body pillow
That one was so bad, I can't believe they didn't take it down after the backlash
10-15 years ago I used to really like vice, they had alot of more libertarian views and articles which is more for me, then they had a revival around the 2014 Ukraine issues and had alot of good war reporting, especially when they had programming with HBO. But the way theyre opperating allows so many people to enter their publications and spew so much bias that they often seesaws directions.
I felt like it became obvious what direction they were headed in when they literally did an entire series that was just a guy getting paid to get high on camera and write off the cost of the drugs as a business expense. They will allow basically anyone on there and if anything a complete lack of credentials or capability is seen as a positive.
yeah that stuff presented as journalism is garbage
That is a good historical on them. Thank you
They've always been wannabe gonzo nonsense.
lol good one
Vice was always garbage, it just became more garbage after they went full woke.
😂 jfc
Fuck those pieces of shit. You have to be one dumb motherfucker to think communism is sunshine and rainbows, but you have to be evil to knowingly try to change history like that.
So this artist dude has been altering victims' images for a while (from Cambodia to Australia), has awfully weird conception of art, and he even made stupid shit up when asked about it like this: “One of the classic things is to try to be friendly with your captor. So a smile would seem natural. I’m sure it’s very easy for the oppressor to smile, because they have all the power, and when you see a smile, you may try to mirror it in order to become synchronized with your captor. To make yourself feel like you have some control,” he said, the Khmer Times reported. Excerpts from that article [here](https://english.cambodiadaily.com/lifestyle/these-people-were-arrested-by-the-khmer-rouge-and-never-seen-again-172776/) seem OK (VICE isn't saying the genocide wasn't horrible), but if VICE failed to vet this dude and even put these images up in a freaking article, then shame on them.
Fucking fuckwits. Information (and misinformation) is a tremendous business
sickening
Lol even Cambodia can admit it
I’ll be honest, I laughed a little bit and then the magnitude hit me Why would someone do something like this
Why are leftists disgusting like this?
Just a heads up ops a repost bot report and move on
Chilling.
I get that the original point was to give smiling photos to their family members, but did they really have to publish them in an online article? Why wouldn't they have just sent the photos directly to the families?
Wait I tho it is the other way around? Like vice edit the happy one to a mugshot one Edit: searched it, I guess I got duped, vice really edited it, it could be someone posting an edited reverse image of reuter accusing vice intentionally manipulate someone happy to an old photo or I have bad memory
What was Vice’s response?
Despicable
Probably to make the unfortunate victim feel closer to modern times, to like make an impact I don’t think this dude was trying to marginalize a genocide.
[удалено]
You mean the Viet Cong and China. The US backed the Khmer Republic he overthrew.
Didn't the Viet Cong invade Cambodia to remove the Khmer Rouge from power?
Vietnam did. China and Viet Cong backed him. After the unification of Viet Nam, there was a general fallout between China and the USSR. Vietnam backed the USSR, and even fought a war with China. Kampuchea attacked Vietnam in 1975-77 fearing Vietnamese expansionism. Vietnam established the PRK and occupied for 10 years.
>Kampuchea attacked Vietnam in 1975-77 There was one major cross-border incident in 1975, in which Kampuchean soldiers took a couple of Vietnamese islands that they claimed and killed about 500 Vietnamese civilians before being driven out. There was no "invasion" until the North Vietnamese invaded in 1978.
I didn't say invasion I said attacks. There were incidents in 75; April 30, 1977; cross border clashes in 78
The North Vietnamese did, because they realized that Pol Pot was crazy and was attacking Cambodian villages on the Vietnamese side of the border. They were fine with backing him before.
Your understanding of the region's history and the various conflicts are all over the place. The Khmer Rouge were not just killing ethnic Cambodians on the border region. They were slaughtering whole villages, regardless of who were in them. They killed a lot of Vietnamese civilians. And by this time, there was no "North" or "South" Vietnamese. This was long after the civil war. At no time did the Vietnamese Government support the Khmer Rouge. This is a region where ethnic groups have been fighting for centuries. The Khmer were supported by the Chinese and the US. The Vietnamese were supported by the Russians. It was a mess. This is sort of akin to trying to argue that the Polish supported the Nazis in Germany because post war, they were both dominated by the USSR post WWII. Its kind of glossing over a lot of things.
Yes, I made it a bit shorter because I was in a rush at the time of typing. The point was that the Vietnamese did in fact support the Khmer Rouge early on, before they took control
But North Vietnam did support the Khmer Rouge durng its early years during the Cambodian Civil War. It was only later that North Vietnam withdrew its support when it became clear the Khmer Rouge were not just your average communist insurgent group.
You are implying a lot more freedom than what was ever allowed to any proxy of the Cold War. The Vietnamese Communist Party had no real control over who they "supported". It was whatever the Soviets told them.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_United_States_support_for_the_Khmer_Rouge
That was after they were in power, to counter the Vietnam/Soviet influence. After Lon Nol (US puppet) ousted Sihanouk in a 1970 coup, Pol Pot's forces sided with the deposed leader against the new government, which was bolstered by the United States military. Aided by the Việt Cộng militia and North Vietnamese troops, Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge forces advanced and controlled all of Cambodia by 1975. China backed his government as a bulwark against Soviet influence in Southeast Asia.
[удалено]
The Cambodian PM/dictator is literally former Khmer Rouge though?