Yea, organized resistance is both ethical and the only real option that isn’t nihilism.

You can say killing, or assassinating.

Organizing, same as it always was.

The theory that the builders of Empire were the ones that understood it, and the inheritors of Empire are true believers in the false justification the builders gave and thus defeat itself when given the reigns is coming more and more true.

Surprise surprise, those given access to the levers of power in the US are almost never pro-worker in reality.

Sliding right and left. It’s becoming more polarized as Empire decays.

That’s not what’s happening. The theory that the builders of Empire were the ones that understood it, and the inheritors of Empire are true believers in the false justification the builders gave and thus defeat itself when given the reigns is coming more and more true.

Genuinely great comm and resource.

Lmao.

The theory that the builders of Empire were the ones that understood it, and the inheritors of Empire are true believers in the false justification the builders gave and thus defeat itself when given the reigns is coming more and more true.

No, not every nation is Capialist. That’s a misunderstanding of what Capitalism is or a redefinition of it to the point of uselessness as it becomes over-applied.

A bit silly to go for VTI over VT, the US is in decline and international is accelerating.

To be clear, the PRC is more driven by the latter than the former, see the Belt and Road Initiative and the massive expenditure on green energy and poverty eradication. They are focused on developing the Productive Forces, but have reached a level of development that allows them to tackle the issues you describe in your second paragraph.

The PRC has a Socialist Market Economy. The presence of private ownership in an economy isn’t enough to determine its structure, otherwise the inverse would apply and the US’s publicly owned structures would make it Socialist. Rather, what determines the “label” of an economy is which is primary, public ownership and planning, or markets and profits, and where its heading. Ie, do markets serve the interests of the public sector and are subservient to it, or does the public sector serve the private sector and the pursuit of profits?

Thanks for the shout-out, comrade! For anyone that wants to join, we are a month in so it will take a bit of aggressive reading to catch-up, but we do have archived links for past threads, both for this year and last year’s, so you can go through those threads and get up to speed.

The reason you don’t see it more is because “authoritarian” isn’t a hard line you can cross, but a general descriptor, and as a consequence many will disagree about the legitimacy of that vague descriptor or believe other countries like the US fit that descriptor better. What do you personally think counts as sufficient to label one country authoritarian, and another not? Can you give an example of each, or is every country authoritarian? Does it matter if some are more or less authoritarian? All of these questions have different answers from person to person, because they apply to a general descriptor and not a hard metric, like “does the PRC have growing wages for the working class?” Or “do Chinese people enioy their system?” Food for thought.

They did end up saying AnCapism or Minarchism would be better than current regulated Capitalism. I mean, if that happened to the US Imperialism would be kneecapped, so I suppose that would technically be better for most people.

It started as a picture with Obama as Tigger and Xi as Pooh, together, then Shinzo Abe as Eeyore and Xi as Pooh again. Then, westerners loved the Pooh imagery and used it a ton, still do. It was always based on appearance from the origin, not becayse Pooh is an idiot or anything, that’s just not true. Moreover, now you can see non-Chinese people making caricatures of Xi that are without a doubt racist using the Pooh thing as justification.

I don’t know why you’re getting so mad either.

You were giving sympathetic advice to someone defending the racist caricature you claim to oppose, so pardon me for interpreting it that way. As for “defending Xi a little too much,” what does that constitute? Saying people shouldn’t use racist caricatures against him?

The good thing about China is that they have a lot of reason to be hopeful, due to many massive improvements in the last century, skyrocketing in the last decade. USians largely still envision 90s China, and are having that image shattered.

You’re free to elaborate on the humor of satarizing a Chinese man as a yellow cartoon bear. Calling me a “tankie” for thinking that maybe we shouldn’t be using potentially racist caricatures doesn’t make much sense to me personally.