Geneva is a big fan of Bad Empanada, so I doubt it’s deliberate. I think Geneva genuinely believes it. Geneva has good political instincts, but instincts can only take you so far and eventually you run into shit like this.

No problem, glad it helped!

The strait is open to China and Russia, not to the US. Iran made that clear. Geneva once again rushing to conclusions to type “Chinabad.”

The Vietnamese textbook is phenomenal! It doesn’t touch the areas my list goes into though, and just focuses on dialectical materialism, historical materialism, and political economy.

Cool, my latest effort to do so takes around 5-10 minutes to read, but I feel that I’m missing a lot of important factors.

Pick any of the core parts then, and try to accurately break it down into a small enough chunk. Explain dialectical materialism (not even historical materialism) in 5 minutes.

I’m asking how you can fit the sheer quantity of raw information, effectively, into an hour. I’m entirely unconvinced that you could do so.

Theory is written with a purpose. Neoliberalism is wrong, but useful for maintaining capitalist hegemony. Correct theory is very useful.

Haha, no worries! Really, it’s about materialism in outlook, dialectics in method. The rest follows from there!

We’ve already been over this, I disagree with your rejection and stated why before. We don’t need to go through this again.

One could say the same of surgery, that you can learn by doing, but like surgery, without studying what has already been discovered, you’ll be hurting a lot of people unnecessarily to get there, taking a lot longer too. We need to do both.

Nah, the fact that you cape for racists and conspiracy theorists speaks to your character.

I wrote a basic guide on dialectical materialism. It’s missing a ton, but should be enough to hopefully make it make sense to start off with.

Elaborate, how do you explain all of them in under an hour, even without fluff?

They aren’t baseless, Rimu and many PieFed users are deeply reactionary. Contextualization is important because it’s necessary for correct analysis.

How so? How can you simplify them to take less than an hour?

Can you answer why you’re insistent on analyzing processes outside of the context they exist in? If you’re not going to respond to my criticisms of your metaphysical outlook from last time, then defend it, otherwise all I can do is continue to point out that you keep trying to slice away context and view processes in a vacuum that doesn’t exist and doesn’t represent reality accurately as a consequence.

I don’t think that’s accurate, though. How do you explain dialectical materialism, historical materialism, imperialism, why capitalism is fundamentally unsustainable, revolutionary strategy, and more in under an hour?

It’s incredibly obvious that they are talking about right-wing views in general, and you’re laser-focusing on the German Nazi Party. That’s why discussion with you never gets anywhere.

Can you answer why you’re insistent on analyzing processes outside of the context they exist in? If you’re not going to respond to my criticisms of your metaphysical outlook from last time, then defend it, otherwise all I can do is continue to point out that you keep trying to slice away context and view processes in a vacuum that doesn’t exist and doesn’t represent reality accurately as a consequence.