‘too much’

all the way back in 2014 in fact when the US couped their elected government

They are a Dutch publication, not Russian, and have a long-standing, openly critical stance toward Russia. The question of whether they are “good guys” is irrelevant. If you believe their reporting is unreliable, provide specific sources that contradict their facts. Attacking their character is not a valid rebuttal.

Because Europe is materially incapable of filling in America’s shoes.

fedposting from feddit.org, checks out

^ when you definitely understand what memes are

My favorite part is how dems judiciously avoid discussing the elephant in the room which is that it is their own policies that disenfranchise the public.

Yeah, you kind of have to play it by ear. I find a big red flag is when somebody just starts regurgitating well known tropes that have been discussed to death. That’s usually a clear sign they’re just here to stir shit up.

You’re right that mockery is a terrible way to convert anyone. I think the real issue is that you’re not going to reach everyone, and that means we have to be strategic about where we put our energy. When someone is genuinely asking questions or wrestling with ideas in good faith, that’s where patient, respectful dialogue is essential.

But a huge amount of online discourse isn’t that. It’s just bad faith concern trolling, sealioning, or just repeating liberal pieties. Engaging with that on its own terms is a trap because it wastes time and gives legitimacy to arguments designed to waste our time.

A sharp dismissal or ridicule draws a clear line, shows others they don’t have to entertain every bad argument, and prevents the conversation from being derailed. The target is the audience, not the provocateur. So while it’s useless for persuasion, I’d argue that it has a role in defining the boundaries of the discussion.

what level of brain rot is this, oh wait lemmy.world, that explains things

https://welshundergroundnetwork.cymru/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/blackshirts-and-reds-by-michael-parenti.pdf

The one consistent theme throughout the war has been that western analysts have solely focused on considering the negative consequences for Russia without ever stopping to think what the negative consequences for the west might be.

Amusingly, I predicted this exact scenario right at the start of the war, looks like mainstream western press finally figure it out.

Nobody knows whether Russia plans to take over all of Ukraine or merely keep the areas friendly to Russia and make the rest of Ukraine west’s problem. The latter seems a more plausible scenario to me. Russia will likely take areas like Kharkov and Odessa because there is a strong pro Russian sentiment there. Then western Ukraine where the nationalists are will become a rump state without any industry or agriculture. This will become an ongoing burden for the west because the state won’t be able to function on its own, and will require constant flow of money to prevent it from collapsing.

We cannot understand class behavior by examining individual morality. Viewing the capital owning class as a collection of mustache twirling villains is not a useful framing. Rather, we should look at them as the human personification of capital itself. Their social being, their entire material condition, is defined by the accumulation of private profit and the protection of property relations that enforce their dominance.

Their inability to relate is not a personal failing but a direct result of their objective position in the capitalist mode of production. They live in a world insulated from the precarity of rent, medical debt, and wage slavery that defines life for the working majority. Their consciousness is shaped by them being insulated from the problems regular people experience. Therefore, critique of their lack of empathy is a liberal dead end because it mistakes a systemic outcome for a personal choice.

The focus must be the capitalist system itself, which necessarily produces the inequality and the divide between the capitalists and the workers. The fundamental contradiction between the socialized nature of production and the private appropriation of wealth is the core issue. The solution is to dismantle the economic base that creates them as a class and move towards a system where the means of production are socially owned, abolishing the very material conditions that breed alienation and disparity.

lol

We are witnessing the purest expression of imperial hypocrisy. For years, the US propaganda apparatus diligently constructed a fable, a so called “debt trap” mythology, to frighten the nations of the Global South away from China’s Belt and Road Initiative. It was a tale of predatory lending designed to isolate and contain a strategic competitor.

And yet, what do we find? The most eager client for these very loans, to the tune of over 200 billion dollars, was none other than the United States itself. Turns out that the entire narrative was a conscious fraud. They never believed their own warnings. They recognized that Chinese financing was a credible, attractive alternative to the stranglehold of Western financial institutions.

So, while publicly sounding the alarm to scare away other customers, the empire privately availed itself of the service. Here we see the very essence of imperial strategy. Its goal is to monopolize the very resources and opportunities it denies to others, all while cloaking its cynical self interest in the righteous language of concern.

I literally addressed your ‘argument’ in detail, and you just continued to double down on your bullshit. You’re a troll, and an artless one at that. You’re not fooling anybody here.

hey it works great on reddit :)