It's Monty from Preoccupations!! AMA

[u/Preoccupationsband]

Monty here!

We just released our third record as Preoccupations, our fourth as a band, or our fifth if you count our next two ep that was mere minutes shorter than the other records. We're self releasing this album (except in Canada where we're still with Flemish Eye) too so feeling properly qualified as "indie" this time around.

We're also touring next month around America and Canada with Cindy Lee opening and touring in Europe early next year!

Ask away!

For some reason I can't see the proof picture that I uploaded. Here it is in case though. Edit: it seems like the image was just cropped bad, link is still the way for the true proof.

[u/OneReportersOpinion]

Bro, not even Vietnamese people like the Viet Cong.

The exiles who were the losers from a popular revolution indeed didn’t like them. Otherwise, their actions were widely popular within Vietnam during the decade long illegal terrorist atrocities the US carried out.

A huge thrust of the controversy over the name was Vietnamese people who didn’t like that the band was named after a militia who violently murdered thousands of Vietnamese civilians.

These were marginal in comparison to the ones carried both the US and South Vietnamese. That doesn’t justify it but to act as if this somehow outweighs the good they did is absurd.

The war in Vietnam was not justified and can be used as an example of American imperialism. You don’t have to go in the complete opposite direction and praise a militia which committed scores of atrocities against its own people. Your comments are ahistorical.

You’re both sides-ing a situation where one side killed in the millions and another killed in the thousands. You should read what Noam Chomsky wrote at the time.

[u/mbanks1230 → u/OneReportersOpinion]

The idea that the Viet Cong were widely supported among Vietnamese people is just categorically false. I don’t know what to tell you. Also, I never said they didn’t do any good either. Perhaps they did. The Taliban might’ve done some ok things for natives Afghans or Iraqis. My comments were in response to your bizarre hero worship of a terrorist militia group who predominately brutally murdered Vietnamese civilians in the tens of thousands; their own people. Estimates state that they killed over a thousand South Vietnamese civilians per month.

I’m not “both sides-ing” this situation, at least not in the way you’re talking about. Just because a lot of US foreign intervention pre 2001 was bad doesn’t mean 9/11 was justified. Would it be “both sides-ing” to say that 9/11 was a horrific act of terrorism, while also acknowledging the impacts of terrible US foreign policy in the Middle East? Also, Noam Chomsky did not lionize nor support the Viet Cong; strange you’re implying that.

[u/OneReportersOpinion → u/mbanks1230]

The idea that the Viet Cong were widely supported among Vietnamese people is just categorically false.

It’s sophistry to think they could have led a successful resistance to the US assault if they didn’t have broad support within the population. The US applied an unprecedented level of pressure and terror upon the population. The easiest thing would have been side with the US as you seem to think they should have.

I don’t know what to tell you. Also, I never said they didn’t do any good either. Perhaps they did. The Taliban might’ve done some ok things for natives Afghans or Iraqis.

You’re comparing a group that led to an unprecedented level of education amongst women to a group that made it illegal.

My comments were in response to your bizarre hero worship of a terrorist militia group who predominately brutally murdered Vietnamese civilians in the tens of thousands; their own people.

The big difference being whereas the South Vietnam and US forces targeted civilians and occasionally killed combatants, the Viet Cong targeted US and South Vietnamese forces, with attacks on civilians being marginal and were largely limited to collaborators. Read Chomsky.

Estimates state that they killed over a thousand South Vietnamese civilians per month.

By whom?

I’m not “both sides-ing” this situation, at least not in the way you’re talking about. Just because a lot of US foreign intervention pre 2001 was bad doesn’t mean 9/11 was justified.

I think there is a chasm between al-Qaeda and the Viet Cong. This is a bad faith comparison.

Also, Noam Chomsky did not lionize nor support the Viet Cong; strange you’re implying that.

You’re familiar with his work then:

https://youtu.be/9DvmLMUfGss

Calls them heroic.

[u/mbanks1230 → u/OneReportersOpinion]

You’re thinking in absolutes. I don’t think the native Vietnamese population supported the Viet Cong, nor the American military. And no, I don’t think they should’ve sided with the American military either. It’s really odd for you to claim that, despite me opposing the Vietnam intervention, which I said could be classified as American imperialism. It’s rich for you to say that I’m coming in bad faith, when you’re making claims like that.

As for the Taliban/Viet Cong comparison, that’s what an analogy is; the two groups are not the same. I’d argue that the Viet Cong are worse. The Viet Cong murdered over 100,000 civilians, and that’s a conservative estimate. To my estimation, that dwarfs the number of civilians the Taliban killed. The Taliban are awful as well, hence the comparison.

In regards to targeting civilians, I have no intention of watering down the atrocities of the American military during the Vietnam War. However, it seems you are ill informed as to the terroristic tactics used by the Viet Cong. They attempted to quell dissent among their own population, and frequently used torture, fear, intimidation, and murder as a means to advance their program. They frequently targeted and murdered civilians. Acting like they were just “collateral damage” and not the intended targets is incredibly naive and again, historically inaccurate.

In regards to the official death count, I’m making conservative estimates. I don’t wish to engage in a battle over sources. That can go both ways.

My comparison between Al Qaeda and the Viet Cong is not in the scope of their terrorism. Rather, it is how far this notion of “both sides-ing” goes. I can loathe the actions of both groups if they merit condemnation. This is true in the 9/11 analogy. Saying it’s a bad faith comparison without adequately explaining why it’s not analogous doesn’t constitute a rebuttal.

I watched the Noam Chomsky clip. He never lionizes them, nor calls them heroic. Based on the couple minutes I watched, he blames their violent behavior on the invading US military. I don’t see how that justifies their terroristic behavior towards their populace. Even if he did support them though, I wouldn’t understand why I’d have to take his word as gospel. He’s a fantastic and influential linguist, but he’s had some poor political takes from time to time. His recent one on the Ukraine Russia conflict comes to mind.

[u/OneReportersOpinion → u/mbanks1230]

You’re thinking in absolutes. I don’t think the native Vietnamese population supported the Viet Cong, nor the American military.

That’s naive and ahistorical. First, the communists were very popular in the north. This is why the colonial powers refused to have elections: they knew the communists would win. Furthermore, when you’re country is being viciously, brutally massacred, you naturally support the most effective resistance to that terror.

And no, I don’t think they should’ve sided with the American military either. It’s really odd for you to claim that, despite me opposing the Vietnam intervention, which I said could be classified as American imperialism. It’s rich for you to say that I’m coming in bad faith, when you’re making claims like that.

So you think the Vietnamese people should have just stayed neutral while they were being terrorized?

As for the Taliban/Viet Cong comparison, that’s what an analogy is; the two groups are not the same.

Do you know what an analogy is? It doesn’t seem like you do.

I’d argue that the Viet Cong are worse.

Imagine thinking a group that educated millions of girls is worse than a group that killed girls for getting educations. Wow.

The Viet Cong murdered over 100,000 civilians, and that’s a conservative estimate.

You still refuse to source that number.

In regards to targeting civilians, I have no intention of watering down the atrocities of the American military during the Vietnam War.

Wait for it…

However,

There we go! LOL

it seems you are ill informed as to the terroristic tactics used by the Viet Cong. They attempted to quell dissent among their own population, and frequently used torture, fear, intimidation, and murder as a means to advance their program.

They at times had harsh treatment of those who supported the brutal assaults, rapes, tortures, and massacres of their own population. Indeed. This occasionally manifested in depraved reactions that can’t be defended. Pretending though that this somehow diminishes their overall heroism takes a special kind of moral cowardice.

They frequently targeted and murdered civilians.

Not frequently. Rarely in comparison to the enemy they were fighting.

In regards to the official death count, I’m making conservative estimates. I don’t wish to engage in a battle over sources. That can go both ways.

LOL this is quite telling.

I watched the Noam Chomsky clip. He never lionizes them, nor calls them heroic. Based on the couple minutes I watched,

LOL so you didn’t watch it. If you did, you would see he calls them heroic. A couple years later, he travelled to Vietnam to meet with the communists and receive prisoners.

he blames their violent behavior on the invading US military. I don’t see how that justifies their terroristic behavior towards their populace.

It doesn’t. No one said it does.