if you had a time machine would you go to the present and kill netanyahu

tl;dr: Santander & BBVA

No one succeeds like an apartheid emerald mine failson.

A question framed as having a only two possible answers is a dichotomous question, and if the answer doesn’t fit that framing then the framing is false. It’s the wrong question to ask.

deleted by creator

Is the FDA good or bad?

This is a false dichotomy.

Are they a necessary evil?

Framing things in moralistic terms just further obfuscates things.

The FDA is an enormous organization. It contains contradictions. It contains multitudes. Yes it is in a variety of ways compromised by the capitalist class, but that doesn’t mean the entire enterprise is without value. Black and white thinking isn’t going to cut it here.

Should they be thrown in a volcano and remade?

If you remade the FDA from scratch under capitalism, the result would be roughly the same, because the structures of political power would still be the same.

She’s got an excuse for everything. They’re shit excuses to historical materialists, but they’re good enough for corporate social media platforms. She should write Langley’s Liberal International Order hasbara handbook.

Scratch an Global North liberal and an imperialist bleeds.

This person is very smug about her capitalist realism, probably because she’s convinced that she personally benefits from it and wants to maintain it, while simultaneously crying liberal crocodile tears about the damage it does.

There are no “other sides” to capitalism than the oligarchy and their imperialist projects that you say you have never liked.

The US has never been and will never be a democracy, because it was born of a bourgeois revolution[1]. The wealthy, white, male, land-owning, largely slave-owning Founding Fathers constructed a bourgeois state with “checks and balances” against the “tyranny of the majority”. It was never meant to represent the majority—the working class—and it never has, despite eventually allowing women and non-whites (at least those not disenfranchised by the carceral system) to vote. [Princeton & Northwestern] Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy

That is true for private property, meaning land for resource extraction and for situating factories & offices, not for personal property, meaning homes to live in.

Why do insist on being confidently incorrect over and over?

It seems you’re going way out of your way to aggressively not understand how imperialism and neocolonialism work, nor compradors’ role in it.

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jakarta_Method
• https://michael-hudson.com/2021/10/3rd-edition-super-imperialism/
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessions_of_an_Economic_Hit_Man
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine
• https://www.michael-parenti.org/book-against-empire

.
At this point I think your ignorance is intentional. To paraphrase Upton Sinclair, it is difficult to get a person to understand something when their self-interest prevents them from understanding it.

I also find it hilarious that communists will preach socialism to those who reside in capitalist countries, completely neglecting that converting to Stalin or China type socialism will make the average American poorer because at least 60% of Americans actually own their own property, the land is not leased.

1. How do you not understand the difference between private property and personal property?
2. 93% of Chinese people own their own homes, vs 66% of Americans.

This has gotten ridiculous. You’ve shown over and over that don’t know anything about anything, but you keep on going anyway.

Some of those countries don’t even have plumbing.

Michael Parenti: Africa is rich. Quote from a similar speech:

The Third World is not poor. You don’t go to poor countries to make money. There are very few poor countries in this world. Most countries are rich! The Philippines are rich! Brazil is rich! Mexico is rich! Chile is rich! Only the people are poor. But there’s billions to be made there, to be carved out, and to be taken. There’s been billions for 400 years! The capitalist European and North American powers have carved out and taken the timber, the flax, the hemp, the cocoa, the rum, the tin, the copper, the iron, the rubber, the bauxite, the slaves, and the cheap labour. They have taken out of these countries. These countries are not underdeveloped, they’re overexploited!

The point is that anarchism historically has not succeeded and cannot succeed in the real world that we actually live in today, in the face of monopoly capitalist/imperialist states that will do everything in their power to plunder the resources of all other states.

Michael Parenti, Blackshirts and Reds:

But a real socialism, it is argued, would be controlled by the workers themselves through direct participation instead of being run by Leninists, Stalinists, Castroites, or other ill-willed, power-hungry, bureaucratic cabals of evil men who betray revolutions. Unfortunately, this “pure socialism” view is ahistorical and nonfalsifiable; it cannot be tested against the actualities of history. It compares an ideal against an imperfect reality, and the reality comes off a poor second. It imagines what socialism would be like in a world far better than this one, where no strong state structure or security force is required, where none of the value produced by workers needs to be expropriated to rebuild society and defend it from invasion and internal sabotage.

The pure socialists’ ideological anticipations remain untainted by existing practice. They do not explain how the manifold functions of a revolutionary society would be organized, how external attack and internal sabotage would be thwarted, how bureaucracy would be avoided, scarce resources allocated, policy differences settled, priorities set, and production and distribution conducted. Instead, they offer vague statements about how the workers themselves will directly own and control the means of production and will arrive at their own solutions through creative struggle. No surprise then that the pure socialists support every revolution except the ones that succeed.

The pure socialists had a vision of a new society that would create and be created by new people, a society so transformed in its fundaments as to leave little opportunity for wrongful acts, corruption, and criminal abuses of state power. There would be no bureaucracy or self-interested coteries, no ruthless conflicts or hurtful decisions. When the reality proves different and more difficult, some on the Left proceed to condemn the real thing and announce that they “feel betrayed” by this or that revolution.

I dissuade Party members from putting down people who do not understand. Even people who are unenlightened and seemingly bourgeois should be answered in a polite way. Things should be explained to them as fully as possible. I was turned off by a person who did not want to talk to me because I was not important enough. Maurice just wanted to preach to the converted, who already agreed with him. I try to be cordial, because that way you win people over. You cannot win them over by drawing the line of demarcation, saying you are on this side and I am on the other; that shows a lack of consciousness. After the Black Panther Party was formed, I nearly fell into this error. I could not understand why people were blind to what I saw so clearly. Then I realized that their understanding had to be developed.

I’ll read them all the same because it’s nice to know the kind of lies other people like to believe

If this isn’t a tell that OP herself is extremely biased against anything that goes against hegemonic imperial core ideology, I don’t know what is.

Yes, when you go from relatively less to relatively more, you’ll experience improvements like life expectancy and child height. But that doesn’t mean anything when compared to the bigger picture of a failing and disingenuous social and economic model.

What bigger picture is there than improvements in material quality of life conditions, like calories available and infant mortality rates and life expectancy and literacy levels and gender equality and and and? And what is that but the socioeconomic conditions? Before the revolution this was an preindustrial, illiterate, feudal state of desperately precarious peasants. And after the revolution it was war-torn, and continuously threatened by imperialist states, and then, not long after, invaded by the WWII Axis powers. And still the material conditions of the masses improved by leaps & bounds compared to their starting position.

The Nordic model isn’t a socialism model which works for socialism purists, but it makes the most sense for those who don’t want to be subjected to oppression from one source or another.

Again, the “Nordic model” has been predicated on spoils of neocolonialism. How do the neocolonized feel about their subjugation and oppression? And under decades of grinding neoliberalism, the social safety nets have been eroding all over the imperial core, and the bourgeoisie aren’t going to give them back even if they could (which they can’t, especially now that the empire is deteriorating). These are bourgeois democracies, they’re not proletarian ones.

Yeah you’re not going to read them. And everyone knows there is no such thing as unbiased sources, so \/\/.

Either read a book or stop posting wiki articles on a topic you don’t know anything about.

• https://discomfiting.medium.com/debunking-communism-killed-more-people-than-naziism-7a9880696f67
• https://www.iskrabooks.org/stalin-history-and-critique