秦始皇帝

Most of the world (read The White supremacist western empire)

The shah that they all supported was soooo much less authoritarian. Please grow up.

I wonder why Iran might have a favourable relationship with Russia over the client states of the power that has spent decades trying to destabilise and pillage them. I guess we’ll never know.

Ukraine being within range of Iranian missiles and attacking Iranian ships while they’re not at war with Iran is newsworthy due to the implications of what this could very easily lead to.

It’s literally exactly what they mean.

LeftWing: Socialism Communism Anarchism Etc All trying to push society to progress beyond the now to new modes of production and organisation.

RightWing: Conservatism(liberalism) Nazism Libertarianism Feudalism Etc All trying to return to the mode of production and organisation from their imagined golden age.

The centre then if course is simply upholding the status quo of the current mode of production and organisation be that through inaction or actively.

You seem think left right and centre are concrete static labels floating above reality as opposed to what they are in reality which is a quick way to note the direction of an ideology in regards to the present.

Just saw this but @[email protected] seems to have beat me too it.

But effectively:

I couldn’t so boldly say things can get better very quickly. Can they really?

They can, simply look at China or the USSR when the revolution came and effectively every metric that matters (life expectancy up, poverty down etc.) went vertical.

Does human nature support that

Human nature isn’t real. Material reality precedes thought/nature.

Things really can get a lot worse and very quickly.

Things can also get a lot better very quickly. Being against major change because change can be bad is like being against having a big cake because shit can also be big.

No it is unfortunately you who does not understand what left right and centre means. The centre is those who hold up the status quo. The right are those who long for tradition and a return to the old. The left are those who strive for progress and the new. Liberals lie between upholding the status quo and wishing for a return to status quo of a few years ago when imperialism was less nakedly obvious. Liberals are thus centre-centre right.

Thinking Trump is some aberration imposed upon Amerika by outside forces as opposed to the culmination of everything Amerika is requires a complete and total disregard for what Amerika has done and continues to do and the reasons that underpin it.

Tldr it’s the copiest cope Amerikans have ever coped.

Xi Jinping, Cheng Enfu, Wang Binglin, Tian Pengying, Xie Fusheng

Honestly it’s such a broad area of research that naming a single greatest is impossible due to each researcher having their own speciality.

Stop with the clean wheremacht nonsense. Stormtroopers getting mulched is good.

You condemn the union? Wow you are evil. A pro confederacy pacifist now that’s a first. Do you also condemn the allies? The ANC? The IRA? The militant unions who won the 8 hour work day and 5 day workweek? and If your answer to any of this is no you have quite the inconsistent position.

whataboutism

Nonsense word used by shithead debatebros to avoid comparative argument that would expose their hypocrisy and inconsistencies.

Yeah with every response I’m more sure you are a privileged white pacifist from the imperial core. To be consistent you of course must condemn the ANC, the union in the American civil war and the allies in ww2 for the use and dissemination of weapons. I hope you one day grow up but for now please fuck off

You are not engaging with the argument. You are assigning a fixed moral meaning to the abstract act of supplying weapons while ignoring who controls them, who receives them, and what they are used for. Calling every arms transfer “profit from death” is just an easy handwave to avoid dealing with reality. It is moralism that erases ownership, state power, class interest, and concrete material conditions.

Continuing to show your paper thin moralist understanding of the world.

You are assigning a fixed moral category to the abstract act of supplying weapons while stripping away the concrete political relationship. Arms supplied to an occupying power are not equivalent to arms supplied to a state defending its sovereignty. The relevant questions are: who receives the weapons, against whom are they used, and what political purpose do they serve?

Yes, China exports arms. But supplying Mali or Burkina Faso as they fight US/European bavked jihadist insurgencies is not equivalent to the United States arming Israel or the the RSF (through the UAE). The Sahel’s crisis was intensified by the destruction of Libya and by a regional order shaped by French domination and the CFA-franc system. Treating every arms transfer as morally identical erases the distinction between supporting sovereign resistance and enabling occupation, proxy warfare or mass killing.

China also does not have a US-style, privately dominated military-industrial complex. Its major defence enterprises are publicly owned and directed according to state defence and foreign-policy objectives. Lockheed Martin and similar firms, by contrast, are privately owned institutions whose structural interest is the continual expansion of military contracts, weapons markets and conflict. Which they then “lobby for”, the west’s legalised form of corruption.

What you are is an apologist for the status quo who has a paper thing understanding of political economy and use human rights as a shield to condemn people calling out your nonsense.

Yes yes you love your idealist nonsense I get it you don’t have to keep telling me about how you don’t take into account material reality.

Your “criticism” was that you imagined it wasn’t a military engagement because you didn’t know what you were talking about, that China should just let India ignore their sovereignty, that china shouldn’t aid the third world in standing up to the global hegemon that’s spent well over a century immiserating and exploiting them. Your “criticisms” are privileged nonsense that you should be ashamed of.

Says the hindutva troll shilling for the modi union getting to ignore China’s sovereignty at their convenience

Why would I be polite to you when you have done nothing but lie and act like a smug chauvinist asshole?

I pointed to the treaties, the inciting incident etc. and your response was simply nuh uh followed by a fantasy you cooked up. Fuck off.