What does that have to do with the internal collapse of the USSR?

you’ve still not made any actual assertions. “The internal collapse of the USSR” makes it seem like you’re gesturing toward having some actual knowledge, which you’re refusing to disclose, instead making smug assertions that this hidden vague knowledge that you refuse to declare means you’re right. So, what does “the internal collapse of the USSR” actually mean to you? What are you imagining (the pictures and words in your brain) when you say “the internal collapse of the USSR,” and what were the causes in your opinion for whatever you’re imagining?

It doesn’t seem like you actually know what you’re talking about, because you’re desperately avoiding making real substantive statements in any of these comments, instead throwing tantrums when pressed on what you actually think. Tell us your actual positions, without petulant ‘McCarthy-if-he-was-a-redditor’ tantrums, or otherwise stop pretending to have any.

But we both know that’s not why it collapsed.

okay, then tell us why you think it collapsed? These vague insinuations and gesturing don’t prove your point, they make it seem like you’re unsure of the basis of your own assertions.

Edit: And for the record, the first ever experiment of a modern socialist country in history, with no earlier examples to work off of, succumbing to a series of both external and internal contradictions doesn’t say anything concretely about the viability of socialism as a whole. In fact, their massively successful strides toward constructing new relations of society, and the betterment of living standards for the vast masses of its people, and the provided security of housing, employment, nutrition, community, and healthcare which was established after fully collectivizing and industrializing (industrializing in 1/10 of the time it took the west to industrialize, without the fundamental basis of primitive accumulation through global colonialism, settler-colonialism, genocide, chattel slavery, child labor, aggressive wars, and malthusian sanitation practices that under-girded the western industrial revolution; and doing so after suffering such destruction in WWI and the civil and counter-revolutionary-interventionist war no less) proves there are extremely strong cases for it being a model of success to learn from and build off of, while learning from its shortcomings and mistakes.

As far as I know it’s because both sides had pretty banal low-level and straightforward stated goals that were all “met” so there wasn’t a clear “winner” and a “loser” in those strategic goals. It was really more of a 3 week skirmish than a full war. Vietnam obviously wanted to force China out of their country, and China said they wanted to bat Vietnam on the nose and force them to pull out of and not occupy Cambodia, or Laos or Thailand.

Which China left meaning Vietnamese succeeded in their strategic goals, and the Vietnamese diverted major resources and pulled out of Cambodia and didn’t occupy Thailand and Laos meaning the Chinese succeeded. There weren’t really any major strategic goals that were stated by either side that showed blatant failure; like China never said they intended to fully occupy Hanoi and create a Chinese puppet state and failed. Vietnam as far as I know never said they intended to continue occupying Cambodia or occupy Thailand and then failed to. So in a way they both got what they wanted and it was a status quo antebellum situation. Thus indecisive in the context of if it weren’t ‘indecisive’ there would have been a winner or loser.

Thailand and Laos were under multi-factional civil wars whose royal governments were also US proxies; so the Vietnamese were also involved there (and involved with their local communist parties), prompting Sino-Soviet-split-related concerns with China since even though both China and USSR provided support to Vietnamese communists; the USSR became the dominant supporter and ally of Vietnam and continued to be. China also had an alliance with Cambodia dating before Khmer Rouge even; which was in part because Cambodia wanted assurance against the larger Vietnam and Thailand. The split in the Chinese Cultural Revolution era between the ultra-lefts and others had half of the CPC supporting the Prince and half of it supporting the Khmer Rouge against the prince. North Vietnam and Khmer Rouge provided support for each other for a while too. The politics were a mess. No idea what other involvements China had with Thailand and Laos other than Sino-Soviet fears.

People overstate the significance of Chinese casualties as meaning a loss when that’s not how war works. Strategic objectives are all that matter. The losses (if you average the wildly disproportionate claims from all sides; impossible to actually know when you look at it) were more even than something like The Winter War between USSR-Finland; and though that war had the Soviets suffer disproportionate losses, it was still a complete strategic victory for the Soviets; they got everything they were after which had refused by Finland in previous requested land-swaps, namely gaining the Karelia buffer region.

Cases in point:

• These NATO Generals Had Unusual Backgrounds: They Served in the Third Reich
• When the CIA Bankrolled a Nazi Spy Chief
• (Said spy chief and his organization)
• Documents: CIA concealed Nazi war criminals
• Revealed: How the CIA protected Nazi murderers
• How [CIA-hired] Nazi butcher Klaus Barbie helped kill Che Guevara and unleash global cocaine scourge
• CIA ORGANIZED SECRET ARMY IN WESTERN EUROPE
• How Nazi Billionaires Thrived in Postwar Germany
• Loyal to their Class, Unhinged from Democracy [US political economic elite connections with German Industrialists & Nazis]
• Revealed: How Israel Turned Nazi War Criminals Into Mossad Agents

There’s a long and ongoing history of this; for the US, UK, and Israel.

• [DECLASSIFIED] - CIA INVOLVEMENT IN UKRAINIAN NATIONALISM
• {2014: Ukraine crisis: Transcript of leaked Nuland-Pyatt call [where they hand-picked new regime; Oleh Tyahnybok is Nazi leader of Svoboda party]
• [2014:] How the far-right took top posts in Ukraine’s power vacuum
• [2014:] TORCH-LIT MARCH IN KIEV BY UKRAINE’S RIGHT-WING SVOBODA PARTY - BBC NEWS
• [2016:] Congress Has Removed a Ban on Funding Neo-Nazis From Its Year-End Spending Bill
• [2018:] Israel is arming neo-Nazis in Ukraine
• [2018:] Ukrainian neo-Nazi C14, known for racist and homophobic attacks, gets public funding for ‘patriotic education’
• [2018:] Ukrainian Militia Behind Brutal Romany Attacks [Nazi group ‘C-14’] Getting State Funds
• [2019:] The Russians and Ukrainians [operating out of Ukraine] Translating the Christchurch Shooter’s Manifesto
• [2019:] How to Mainstream Neo-Nazis: A Lesson from Ukraine’s New Government
• [2019:] MASS Neo-Nazi Marches in Ukraine today to honour Stepan Bandera
• [2020:] Nationalist marchers [including Tyahnybok’s Svoboda] in Kyiv say Ukraine is under ‘occupation’ by ‘Jewish clan’
• [2021:] Like, Share, Recruit: How a White-Supremacist Militia Uses Facebook to Radicalize and Train New Members

And just for fun, and just in case

• Ukraine Channel 24 – Host Calls for Genocide Against Russians! (16.3.2022)
  here’s [PROOF from their own source’s “apology” lol]
• “To fight, kill, fulfill the tasks of the West” - “Bandera Readings” in Kiev, Ukraine [by C-14 leader Yehvan Karas]

The “middle class” never existed. The “middle class” is an invented wedge to split the working class and try to turn segments of itself, against itself. It has no material basis. It is the ‘myth of upward mobility under capitalism’ distilled into a propaganda phrase to obscure the dualistic and antagonistic class relations in capitalist society between the PROPERTIED and UNPROPERTIED (those who own capital and those who do not), and the contradictions and conflicts therein.

It is false consciousness; personified by and in the ‘middle manager’ who is PROPERTYLESS (proletarian), but paid more and promised the “opportunity of more to come” to align themselves with the interests of the PROPERTIED, and take on the role of a low-level overseer – to function as both a compliance enforcer and a mediative focus-dulling pain-sponge standing in the middle of, and soaking up the conflict between, the ONLY REAL TWO CLASSES IN CAPITALIST SOCIETY: The Worker, and the Capitalist.

“Middle class” is liberal sleight-of-hand in its core and conception, and a term to be derided and discarded in all use, except as a magnifying glass to show the ways capitalism distorts and deceives about the real nature of its own properties and relations; and how the ruling class generates and contributes to the development of false consciousness through their reframing of production’s own characteristics, in order to reify into political “identities” to be captured and capitalized upon those roles which naturally manifest out of the laws of functional industrial-productive logistics, ie. the need for ‘managers’ to administrate complex or large-scale productive and distributive tasks. This serves double roles in the laws of colonial and imperial relations in places like the USA, as this distinction is also in practice highly racialized and rooted in the ongoing historical unfolding of these basal-and-superstructural systems of exploitation.

Make note of the conspicuous absences and obfuscations when duopolist-exploiter X or Y says they “fight for the middle class;” that they are not fighting for you or me in the working class, but pandering to those “temporarily embarrassed millionaires” that they’ve bought off enough or otherwise tricked into this false consciousness, to give them their ever-shrinking electoral margins they require and fight each other over so they don’t have to pay any mind to the working class masses who make up the majority; because they in reality work for the big bourgeois, the capitalists, and the petty-bourgeois “small business tyrants” who think of themselves as capitalists — all at the expense of the working class domestically and abroad.

literally the house burning dog meme

America can’t stop tons of drugs and weapons getting delivered into America every day

who is it that you think built and began that whole project?

Makes one think who all has been benefiting from the expansion of militarism and conflict, doesn’t it? But no need for us to worry, because I’m certain the peace-loving Democrats, who I’m assured by very democracy-valuing liberals, are despite all appearances definitely not nearly-indistinguishable from the open-fanged right-wing Republicans, and will stop this US militarism which is destroying the planet faster than anyone.

Pay no attention to the 3rd parties who actually come out against militarism; If we just give the wing of the bipartisan-imperialists who actually rely on working class margins whatever votes they want regardless of their actions forever, then surely because of how appreciative they are of us that they will gift to us some result that’s remotely different than all of exactly this and exactly what brought us here… right?

God idk what version I’m even using. I never update programs like this unless I have to. From breaking things, to confusing my workflow and moving things around; I’ve always been more frustrated than thankful. I haven’t updated Reaper in ages too and I’m certain they’re better about keeping continuity than anyone.

Edit: lol people are mad about my own software updating habits? why and how are .worlders this way? I can’t imagine the realities they live in, and am glad so

C A P I T A L I S T I N N O V A T I O N

and https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gehlen_Organization
and https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sunrise_(World_War_II)
and https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paperclip
and https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio
and https://www.historynet.com/these-nato-generals-had-unusual-backgrounds-they-served-in-the-third-reich/
and https://www.redstreetjournal.com/p/cia1
and… yknow i’d be easier to name the nazis that the US intelligence and military didn’t hire. which some were instead by MI6 and Mossad, like the pioneer of the gas vans Walter Rauff [Archived]
And for good measure: just a few of the industrialists and political elite of the US capitalist class who financed and were deeply connected with the Nazis and the German capitalist class for whom fascism were the anti-communist market-seizing attack dogs. (“first they came for the communists…”)

How have I known about Varoufakis for years as a serious political economist and speaker-on-the-topic, and never heard he was a Valve employee with a catalogue of ‘gaming-economics’ blogs in the early 2010s? LMFAO what a world

That article is literally just reporting what the president did. How does that mean they’re “pro-gun control?” Do you not even read the articles and just seethe and shit yourself about what you think about the wording of headlines? You are such a raging rightist ideologue you have been blinded to all reality and don’t even understand the things that you are mad at. Is this satire? Are you a real person who engages in media and politics like this or have I been trolled?

If you’re serious, the US must have gasoline in the water or something (but ah that would be COMMUNIST to regulate that; or even report on it!)

“typical Hamas press”

CNN

deeply unserious individual

No, neolibs have figured out how to placate segments of the (ever-shrinking) petty bourgeois and defeatist windbags (like you’ve allowed yourself to become in saying these things, but can still self-criticize and grow from), who lack or otherwise benefit from not having an active dialectical consideration of the circumstances before us — in the bare-faced exposure of the sharpened contradictions between mass political movements in society; here between the reactionary bourgeois establishment and its allies, and the advancing of progressive segments and theirs; which itself in the arena of parliamentary and protest politics, and how the media reports on it, are significant representations of wider political trends.

And by not thinking before speaking, and engaging in this liberal and reactionary rhetoric you actively stand in the way of building communism and working class momentum more than Macron does, and you are perpetrating the same “keeping people unaware” that you say the media is. I don’t think you should trust what it “sounds like” to you, because I don’t think you’ve given serious thought to any of this. How does the media “keep the majority unaware” when we’re, all of us even outside of France, hearing about and talking about it?

And “Things aren’t bad enough” for what? For an immediate revolution and dragging Macron to the guillotine right here and now, like we’re remotely in a stage of things in material reality where that’s what you think “building the communist movement” is? In what way is that, to you, a reasonable framework to analyze the current material conditions and consequences for communists and how to orient within them? And how is it not just unthoughtful and inattentive idealist tripe completely disconnected from the material reality and trajectories that currently exist, and which only serves to justify sitting on your hands and telling others to sit on their hands because you’re waiting for… What, exactly? Some utopian revolutionary miracle to pop into existence on its own out of thin air and awake the placated masses (of which surely you’re not a part?)? Revolution is built; and its building takes dedicated and active long-term political engagement among the progressive elements of society with communists, even if not yet in the position to dominate its most visible “official” leadership channels, still always at the forefront of the struggle as members of the most politically advanced segment of the working class.

How do you expect to create revolutionaries before having them even come to recognize revolution as, not only an option, but a necessity; which can only be done through these kinds of lived political experiences highlighting and vindicating through agitation and propaganda the correct analyses of the communists, that bourgeois parliament will not and can not be the instrument to achieve their aims?

You’re contributing to and advocating placation. Your “it’s hopeless why bother” attitude is the “copium” (internet-poisoned term), which serves nothing but to take (and worse, try to further in others’ minds) a lazy capitulation into your own placation. Comrade it is not only wrong, but it is intolerable opportunism. It is a reactionary and defeatist attitude, and is not in any way a cogent recognition of the reality — which is that the amount of rage and disaffection over this in the masses of the working class left-wing (and even just ‘not right-wing’) populace of France, which were able to mobilize as they did to get such results to compel these self-exposing acts in the ruling class, spills visibly through even the bourgeois-media articles about it. You have to close your eyes and plug your ears to not hear mention of the anger, frustration, exasperation, and that’s just what they do mention. I guarantee they couldn’t and wouldn’t be scratching the surface of those masses that aren’t being interviewed who harbor more severe sentiments or would, with proper political education, having experienced this. Many of even the petty-bourgeois reformist leaders of these parties are calling for obstruction and protest as less motivated, more opportunist, and bourgeois-aligned representatives of their much-more pissed off bases who carry much greater potential.

I’ve worked with and organized alongside US communists that became communists out of their experiences and disaffection over how the DNC and Democrat Clinton campaign undermined and slandered Bernie Sanders and his supporters in that grassroots groundswell. And Bernie and that whole experience was milquetoast and petty compared to this, and had more comprehensive targeted propaganda. And still it made many communists, some of whom have contributed more as more capable Marxists than even I had managed at the time, to elevating the consciousness of the working class and movement-building in their communities, instilling communist political understandings, analytical methodologies of theory and practice, and organizational principles in action around peoples lived material realities and experiences at the hands of the system.

People are pissed, and more than you allow yourself to recognize have, by the reality of the situation and living this political experience, come to or are primed but haven’t-yet-been politically educated to understand and advocate, some of the first and most important recognitions, conclusions, and emotions toward bourgeois politicians and their system, and of its bourgeois class character, inherent and unchangeable without smashing it and putting in its place a proletarian dictatorship to maintain power against the these-and-worse bourgeois machinations and reactions.

Just because the masses aren’t immediately fulfilling your idealist projections of what you unrealistically ‘require’ of them to “prove” to you personally that this is a progressive development for the communists (which is opportunist — rather than trying to engage actively as the most politically advanced segment of the working class to make and lead people to the proper conclusions, you are tailing behind mass movements among and as a member of the least advanced, soaking blankets to throw on the advancing segments in the most critically significant and educational moments); like they’re not immediately revolting and dragging Macron to the guillotine over this when that’s not the phase that things are in doesn’t mean that this is not a progressive development for the communists. I strongly suggest you consider all of this and correct these opportunist and defeatist attitudes, which are misaligned with reality and run counter to progress.

because nothing seems to be working.

This is an inspiring sign for communists. No reason for pessimism. A large mobilization of masses of engaged politically active workers in a state where the masses still largely believe in parliamentarism; who formed sprawling coalitions into a large left national upswelling that also made international headlines, now have themselves and onlookers been shown, better than any propaganda alone ever could, why bourgeois liberal democracy is an impediment to progress rather than a channel for it; and that the Liberals will side with the fascists to keep the left from getting an inch. This has made more communists than you probably realize. Especially if your communists have been reading their Lenin and agitating on this point, which probably a lot of workers didn’t even need much agitation to expect this because of the state of things and how just… unbearably awful Macron is in every way

…
It is a good day friend. Communism will win, and these liberal politicians are helping it do so. Don’t let the systems and their media and propaganda make you believe otherwise in their lies. They’re trying to convince you of your own defeat because of the implications if you don’t believe you have been, and instead realize they’re selling you the rope they will be hanged with; and you push harder in smarter ways that they can’t keep up with, using connections built in these mass movements and coalitions which invariably have radical new elements that just need drawn together.

You’re ahead of them in this. They’ve, in a very real dialectical way, undermined liberal democracy and created more enemies to the capitalist systems and institutions than they made allies, by their own blunders in being incapable of conceding anything to intelligently reify socialists back into feckless parliamentary legitimization of bourgeois democracy, and their failures to navigate contradictions in ways that aren’t so short-sighted to look absolutely villainous to huge swathes of the population (and internationally, because this was a large enough movement to make headlines around the world; with a knock-on effect for the international proles who see parallels). Macron’s so scared of radical politics he’s making them everywhere he steps.

I’m hoping the Communists in France have been reading their Lenin. I can’t think of a better gift Macron could have given the communists. “Left-Wing” Communism, an Infantile Disorder

…
This has stripped more and more active and engaged and hopeful people of their illusions about bourgeois democracy than even bernie-clinton 2016 nonsense. Which even that created a lot of communists; and that was relatively milquetoast compared to this huge national mobilization and upswell and coalition movement which was big enough to make international headlines no less. If the French communists have been reading their Lenin and agitating on this stuff even before it happened (as you said, very predictable) then the communist movement has gained 10x more than any eurosocialist thinks “the left” lost.

exactly my thought

people consumed all these dystopian movies and thought “what a great rubric for society!” we’re so fucked lol. These death machines (like drones and such) are also where the most work and funding go for machine learning and AI research too. What could go wroooong

I suggest Rosa Luxemburg’s Reform or Revolution to break people out first, less scary than Lenin, and a I think a “woman’s touch” does a thing for peoples minds under patriarchal norms, with the assumption that they’re somehow less capable of all of the things they’re afraid of. It was critical in my political education when I was starting off grabbing from everywhere to see what gripped the road I saw us flying down (Conquest of Bread sucked, never read more ‘kum-ba-ya’ utopian idealist tripe in my life, and I could tell that having barely even read much Marx at that point); and Reform or Revolution is more focused on dismantling the single topic. From there, once the reader are forced to mull on that reform will never save us, haunted by their discomfort and spurred by the sprouting seeds of their discontent the only logical next step is to try to find out “okay, well then what is to be done?”

But you have to give a background lesson first if the book/site of it you send them doesn’t explain in the preface, the whole thing that in the context of her book “Social-democrat” meant socialists in general; both revolutionary and the Bernstien-type ‘voting in socialism through reform’ revisonists; because this was in like 1900, before the failure of the second international and resultant split of the communists. It’s only after all of that and the 3rd international and the betrayal of Rosa and the communist KPD by the reformists that that the “social democrats” came to be understood as we know them today, reformist welfare liberals (which, incidentally, thoroughly and undeniably vindicates Luxemburg, Lenin and the Bolsheviks, et al and their criticisms of reformism).