Homelander would be the more accurate “capitalism,” though. Hell, even (had to look up her name) Stormfront would be the accurate “capitalism,” considering she’s a “closeted” Nazi. Supes doesn’t belong anywhere in this pic- Supes is basically the American ideal that never existed at any point within its history, nor at any point within capitalism’s history.

Who’s “fascism,” then? I suppose that Red Skull comes to mind as the most cliche pick, yet looking him up that’s weak sauce, as he’s just Hitler’s protege. Anglo-AmeriKKKan settler-capitalism is not the student- they are the progenitors and inspirations of Hitler and fascism…

Cuck Pit USA

That’s my take on him too. A decent enough sort also that I’d be perfectly down to do so.

TBH, having looked his history up a bit more now, if anything I’ve come to respect him more. Just the wiki page alone (while of course, copiously slandering him with references to the pedo charges- charges to which he rejected even a plea deal) speaks volumes, as to just how much he’s suffered (I was aware of some of it), and to how utterly suspicious the charges against him are. Seriously, you can look it up for yourself (while of course knowing that wiki is biased as all hell- and yet the cases made against him come off as stinking to high hell).

That’s why the answer should be disarmament, not ramping up.

The Soviets already tried that path, though. We all know how that has ended up, with the events leading up to Ukraine.

There can’t be any trust in the genocide-reich, as I see it. Whatever treaties they make, even whatever weapons they genuinely destroy (and even with inspectors it can only be questioned if they have more), whatever gains in disarmament are made, will be ephemeral.

I agree that the long game is the only safe path forward- but a buildup of weapons is the necessary backup plan- and arguably (as I see it) more important, even, than the optimistic safe path that, while theoretically possible, may not succeed (for instance, if the US pre-emptively launches nukes before it declines to such an extent, or even just out of spite).

So long as MAD exists, I see it as more important than anything else to ensure that it exists as a bulwark- and if not a bulwark, as a promise- towards the west. And I don’t see it as worrying that Russia is drifting towards a first-strike policy; personally I hope that China and North Korea move towards it too in time (so long as the current US regime which seeks global hegemony is around, anyways).

If humanity is to exist on the precipice of destruction- the risk must be equally shared, and it must be understood that our (humanity’s/anti-imperialist’s/AES’) triggers are just as resolute, just as sensitive, and just as broad in scope as that of the imperialists’. As I see it, that is part of MAD as well- it is not a “sane” course of action, perhaps- it is not the course of action that one would take if self-preservation took priority over all else- but it is the only course of action that sufficiently addresses the circumstances we face; it is the only fully responsible path when faced with such an insane (for lack of a better word), anti-human threat, like that poised over the world since the first genocide-reich and ascendant hegemon became also the first nuclear power.

The world can move towards disarmament- and I hope by all means it does, though with every precaution taken not to do so prematurely- once the global and hegemonic system of imperialism is done away with. But not before; the risks that come from failing to offer anything but equal and total annihilation are too great as I see it.

Yes, it is very well possible that the charges of him being a pedophile are completely false and fabricated by the U.S. government, but him deflecting from it and downplaying the charges as opposed to completely dismissing them is completely disgusting.

Personally I’ve only ever seen him completely and vehemently dismiss the charges- maybe he deflected in the past, but if so I’d think that he must have stopped doing so sometime in the last… year or more(?) that I’ve been aware of him and listening to his content.

My assumption as such was and still is, from what I’ve seen of him- well, maybe he’s suspect. Certainly I don’t think that he should be trusted with anything vital- not due to the charges, which considering the circumstances I dismiss entirely until proven otherwise (as we all know the empire loves its smears), but due to the fact he served in the US army, and the amount of US brain worms he has (even if he comes off as halfways decent at least, a risk is a risk). But overall- from what I’ve seen- I haven’t seen anything to dislike.

Agreed. FWIW I’ve not anything meaningful against Scott, I like his contributions/work towards peace and the truth. If all Americans were like him, the country would be a hell of a lot better off- maybe (definitely) not an AES state, sure, but it would at least stop being such a sociopathic hellhole, and could instead be a meaningful partner towards a better world.

My mention of the brain worms at the start of the comment was because of what you described, and the context of discussion. But through it all- with people like Scott- I think that his innate character is predominantly good, and he is not only a rather sensible person but an empathetic one- and whatever the disagreements I might have with his (minor) brain worms, that shines through, in all the times I’ve watched him.

Honestly, for all of Scott Ritter’s American brain worms- he might just be right (that a US civil war would bring on the very real possibility of nuclear strikes on every other relevant state). This kind of sociopathic, malevolent behavior is exactly what the US track record suggests it would resort to, and exactly what anyone with sense expects from it.

That said, IMO- this just further goes to show how necessary it is for the US regime to be overthrown, and American society to be de-Nazified (or rather- de-Americanized). A maniacal regime that banks on forever wars, constant destabilization and suppression of the rest of humanity through funding (or creating) terrorists, settlers, and fascists wherever they go, which sustains itself off of exporting its debt and thus inflation, and which is dominated by a hegemonic, totalitarian mentality, is incompatible with humanity- either we destroy it, or it will destroy us all, likely sooner than later.

Sounds like your last few brain cells finally fizzled out.

Interesting, only one of the two of us supports genocide and the imperialist regime. Who exactly is the Nazi here?

Why yes actually, I would prefer Trump (though I don’t support him and don’t think anyone should) over Biden. And no, I don’t think things would significantly change for Palestine, at least not due to a second Trump term- but at least, I view a Trump presidency as marginally less likely to start WW3 (only marginally because by-and-large POTUSes are figureheads), meaningfully less effective at rallying the rest of the west to the US’ fascist coalitions, and considerably less effective at manufacturing consent- in the imperial cores and beyond- for the fascist policies that both parties- and indeed, the entire US political establishment- are so dedicated to.

Biden and the DNC are the more dangerous, deranged, unified face of fascism as I see it by almost every metric. Though no one should be supporting Goebbels over Hitler, or vice-versa.

If the purported “left” you associate yourself with decides to back Genocide Joe to avoid Genocide Trump- I hope you get the candidate you deserve (Trump).

Again, the point of the meme was to divide the left so that it makes it easier for Trump to be president.

You can’t divide something that was never part of the “left” to begin with. Biden and the Democrats are not left, they have never been left. Those who support genocide and one half of the neoliberal duopoly are not left. Hope you enjoy Trump!

Well, if they’re just all figureheads (by and large they are), then what does it matter if it’s Blue Hitler or Orange Goebbels? And are we going to pretend party politics (for all that the two-party monopoly is a farce in and of itself) mean the poor widdle Democrats have no influence on congress, or that they have no extensive track record of support of Zionism and all other sorts of fascistic and imperialist ventures, same as the Republicans? The pathetic excuse you give for your beloved Blue Nazi party falls flat on its face. Blue Nazi, Red Nazi, take your Nazis and go home, no one here’s interested nor braindead enough to fall for your schtick.

That you can’t even use a good example shows how bad-faith your arguments are. No one gives a shit what crappy suit Obama did or didn’t wear.

Bush II started the Iraq War- and Obama started the west’s still-ongoing crusade against Syria, catalyzed the regional destabilization of his predecessors to the extent a literal terrorist-state (ISIS) came to existence, and turned Africa’s most prosperous country into hell-on-earth with open-air slave markets.

So really now, what is the difference? Evil white imperialist, vs. evil token black imperialist spokesperson for the empire, I suppose one of them at least says nice things about the LGBT community… I’m sure the gays in Syria were grateful even as they were being tossed off of buildings by daesh, or as they were facing civil war and the targeted destruction of water infrastructure in Libya.

Same with Obama, Trump, and Biden. The ICE camps never changed (and didn’t start with Trump), the drone strikes never changed, the genocidal sanctions, militarism, systemic destabilization and support of terrorists across the globe, and the natural progress of capitalism further and further into its later stages (neoliberalism) as the contradictions continued setting in, none of it ever changed. The only meaningful difference is that Trump is worse at the optics, and perhaps isn’t slobbering at the bit to start WW3… so if anything, while all three are genocidaires, war criminals of the highest order, and thoroughly corrupt capitalists- Trump is probably the preferable choice, not that anyone halfways decent should even think of supporting any of these monsters.

Maybe the Mongols were too religiously and racially tolerant and humane, so they weren’t “badass” enough for him.

Doesn’t sound like there’s any hope for him, apart from magically gaining a sense of human decency, or getting a medical dose of lead.

If all the past 500 years of white racism, genocides, colonialism, and other “accomplishments” are something to be proud of and “badass,” though, why’s he whining like a little removed about supposedly “anti-white ‘racism’?” What’s good for the goose, must be good for the gander… Maybe the supposed “anti-white racism” should then be considered a sign that the rest of the world has learned the lessons of the west; maybe actual anti-white racism should be considered hella badass. If he wants to go all darwinist about it, maybe he should consider that perhaps by his logic a “superior,” “badass” group of peoples are returning to the forefront, and the weak “whites” whose feefees get hurt by… objective reality and history, for whom simply coexisting with other peoples is apparently so impossible it’s called “white genocide,” and whose genes are apparently so weak they get diluted by a drop of “non-white” blood- those wimpy whiteys of the west (no relation to the actually decent Slavs and Celts) are simply returning to their rightful place in the dustbin of history.

I wonder what he would think about that? Maybe it’s the rest of the world’s turn to be “badass” and teach the west a thing or two. It would be nothing to be ashamed of, rather the opposite after all… right?

The populations of similarly large countries like China, Russia, India, or Brazil aren’t remotely similar, though. And the specific American ignorance is a most intolerable kind- an arrogant, chauvinistic, hyper-aggressive, and often willful ignorance (granted, the same applies to the rest of the west, it’s just that the US tends to be the worst in of the lot in all these aspects). The rest of the Anglosphere trails not far behind, but the US is a country that basically celebrates obnoxious ignorance in its entirety.

I think a lot of times Western Europeans especially like to project onto Americans and act like they’re better when in reality our countries are nearly identical except they have better social services. That’s about it. The populations act similarly, not the same, but similarly.

Euro-brainrot (a similar degenerative disorder related to Anglo-brainrot) is definitely a thing. But as a Canadian I’d have to say that there is something particularly rotten about Angloid culture and mentality (a particularly severe case of capitalist brainrot compared to the Euros, and also of course the biggest issue- settler-colonial mentality which inherently poisons every aspect of the society).

The brainrot is diminishing as the material conditions and white demographics also do- but the Angloid brainrot is far more pervasive, and destructive (even towards their own societies). And the US is the worst of the lot.

Aight, for this one I’ll have to (re)look up several things for sourcing and I’ll reply in a more extensive fashion later as a result, but the gist of it (apart from the fact both nations obviously don’t resort to regime change at the drop of a hat, or at all- and actually negotiate towards win-win results) is-

• both of these countries (and their corporations- which while still generally a mix of capitalist and state enterprise, are actually held accountable for their behavior by both respective states) support other nations’ attempts at securing sovereignty over their own natural resources (as western capital smears it- “resource nationalism”). Examples would include Indonesia’s raw copper export ban (and many others like it) aimed at moving up the value chain by moving the refining processes (and thus the value-added profits) into their own countries- and Niger raising their uranium royalties from €0.80/kg to a more market-accurate rate of €200/kg (basically stopping France’s free ride- many other countries are demanding renegotiations of “post-colonial” royalties agreements forced on them).

• China and Russia are actually aiding in the development of value-added industries in the global south (factories, refineries, etc- including those that meet local needs, from solar panels, cars, concrete plants, etc), in the training and education of local populations (and various technology transfer programs) and in the development of infrastructure suited to local development and needs rather than neo-colonial resource exploitation. The various projects of the BRI is probably the best example of this, interconnecting countries across Africa and Eurasia, and facilitating regional trade and integration in regions (like pretty much all of Africa/Latin America) that have been made dependent on exporting to western countries prior. All over the world you see telecom infrastructure popping up in places the west had left barren- power plants, airports, decent roads and even at times railways leading to bumfuck-nowhere towns (as someone who has lived in bumfuck-nowhere towns myself), schools, sanitation infrastructure, etc… as well as the rise of domestic agriculture that meets local needs- and it’s not the west that is aiding with that. There are so many examples I could bring up, but China’s support in building Afghanistan’s first wholly owned photovoltaic factory (solar panels, basically) comes to mind- a stark difference compared to the decades of US occupation where they left the economy to the raw resource corporate bandits and tribal opium warlords. Russia meanwhile is building a nuclear power plant in Burkina Faso, which is negotiating a federation with Mali and Niger (two countries France has been looting for Uranium for decades). I could point to all sorts of similar infrastructure projects and agreements that primarily serve to meet domestic needs- high speed passenger rail connecting Java in Indonesia, rail lines connecting Ethiopia and in the works of extending to Kenya and South Sudan, as well as similar rail intended to ultimately connect starting from Tanzania, Kenya, and Uganda and moving towards Rwanda, Burundi, and the DRC).

• China, Russia, and the rest of BRICS are actually providing financing without the strings attached that enslave countries as described in my prior comment- I’ll delve deeper into this (and all the rest) in a bit in later comments, though it might be a while from now. These loans are also with far better terms and the possibility (and a track record) of debt forgiveness where needed- incomparably superior to those provided by the west.

Going deeper into all this will be a process, so while I’ll be working on it here and there, I might also try to call out for assistance by making a megathread and requesting other 'grad posters chime in or something. But FWIW among the primary sources that I’ve been following for a while now to educate myself on all of the above- Geopolitical Economy Report and Prof. Wolff at Democracy at Work (as well as, admittedly, r/Sino) are great; while I’ve not read much of their works also, the Tricontinental is great and I’ve listened to a fair bit of Vijay Prashad’s stuff.

Thanks for the clarification, which I fully agree with- buying sex is not some “revolutionary” or “liberating” act.

That said, as for the second thing, I think I’d have to disagree, ultimately. Societal ills exist- hell, they continue to exist even in every AES that has risen up so far, and will always be a work in progress until a truly complete socialism is built (and even then, truth is humans are humans… fingers crossed, but people are complicated beings and I don’t see that going away). Until we have some perfectly utopian society- if that is possible- (a better society that is always improving however, is undeniably possible- hence why we’re both communists) there’s good reason to believe sex work will exist in some increasingly minuscule form even under AES- and the truth is, it will not be the failings of the individual (sex worker, that is)- but it will be the failings of the socialist society thus far (of course, as no system is “perfect”- but communism presents the path forwards, and of course I believe that) which will need to be attended to, that lead to this inevitability.

The act of purchasing sex should not be normalized; sure. But the truth is, the societal consequences and stigma have almost always been brunt by the “industry’s” victims, the sex workers themselves- and these stigmas play a significant role in keeping many of them within the work to begin with, or forcing them into more dangerous, disenfranchised, maligned circumstances.

It’s not a matter of prudishness as I see it- but a matter of human decency, that the stigmas against sex workers should be combated. Perhaps “normalization” is not the most effective way to go about this- hell if I know- but I definitely think that any disdain and othering of sex workers- and all other lumpenproletariat- is a reactionary cultural belief in and of itself that should be worked against and ultimately purged. I suppose to be specific, I think that the “normalization” of sex workers is absolutely necessary; as for sex work itself and the sex “industry”- that’s another matter, though at some point it becomes hard to cleanly divide the two when it comes to normalization.

Maybe I should avoid the language of “normalization” as you say. The end goal however is simple- sex workers and all lumpenproletariat should be destigmatized and integrated into society- (perhaps the words destigmatization and integration would work better)- both for decency’s sake, but also because these stigmas and marginalization play a large role in why they remain in such circumstances.

Personally I found Michael Hudson’s talks on “super-imperialism” and the role of the world bank as the most enlightening and eye-opening in this regard.

https://youtu.be/K9nbj4X556A?si=15pKFZdPEqScPwBB

The long story short is- they want countries to be insecure, to depend on the imperial cores- even if they may be “free” and “independent,” through IMF/World Bank/etc influence, the goal is to keep their economies permanently colonized.

(Sensible) protectionist policy and state-backed development has been the formula through which every industrialized and wealthy country has gotten to where they are now- with no meaningful exceptions. Without protecting domestic production and nurturing it so that it can survive the disruptions and hostile environment that is the “free market,” a country’s independence can be destroyed even without boots on the ground- through dependence on imports of food, medicines, technologies, etc.

Forcing a country’s markets open, while forcing austerity upon its citizenry, prevents domestic industrial subsidies/state development, agricultural subsidies, medical subsidies, and so-on. It provides a route through which international capital- imperialism, basically- can come in and destroy a nation’s natural self-sufficiency, flooding these countries with cheap goods to destroy domestic production, and then purchasing its land, labor, and infrastructure on the cheap once it has been left destitute. This applies to foodstuffs in particular, across the global south- in many parts of the world, countries are still enslaved to the same agricultural colonialism they have been for centuries- global capital usurps domestic production and focuses it on cash crops, while the nation at large is dependent on imports for their dietary staples, for instance. Effectively, at the flick of a switch the west can inflict famines upon these societies through sanctions. Through “temporary” austerity, they can inflict a permanent austerity on a society, wherein all wealth of resources, labor, and intellectual potential flows to the imperial core, and the colonized are effectively made barren and thus dependent.

I can go further into how China (and even Russia) differs from the “cheap goods” strategy of the west (specifically around how- unlike the west, they are actually collaborating with the rest of the world to collectively move up the value chain and thus destroy the “chain” altogether). But this is the gist of it.