Ah fair, maybe pile in some execution vans and Stalin’s copiously large spoon

The US has commited genocide against Koreans (both sides of the parallel), Vietnamese, Iraqi, Palestinian, and far, far more. The US is currently trying to topple Iran because Iran is refusing to play ball with the genocidal US Empire. The US Empire is by far the worst state on the planet, without it the fascist Entity engaged in current war with Iran would not exist and Palestine would be free.

This is extremely naive. Iran has its problems, but there’s no comparison, the US is not a democracy and is the active creator of genocide around the world today. If Iran was toppled, conditions for Iranians and Palestinians would get far worse, not better.

In this case, it makes sense. The DPRK has minesweepers, a strong relationship with the Russian Federation, and a desire for on-the-ground experience for its soldiers. There’s absolutely no reason for them to send prisoners, especially as it would be less effective and more costly.

Anything is possible if you just make shit up and assume anything the DPRK does is cartoonishly evil, rather than taking Occam’s Razor and having any attachment to reality.

Probably mine clearing specialists. Mines were heavily used during the Korean War, the DPRK certainly has had experience with clearing them out.

Yep, 100%! The only solution has always been a single, secular Palestine, with minority protections. That’s what the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and many Palestinian liberation groups have advocated for for many decades.

Israel has been a genocidal settler-colonial project since its inception, and will continue to be even if Netanyahu was publicly hanged. Israel has never truly been defensible since its inception a century ago.

All systems change, Capitalism doesn’t “pervert” dialectics any more than feudalism did. It isn’t perversion so much as it is the progression of dialectics, this is why Marxists describe the dialectical movement as endless spirals. All systems resist the next stage in development, in fact Capitalism is quite a young system in comparison to how long feudalism lasted.

As for Imperialism, I recommend you read Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism. In it, Lenin describes how Capitalism has grown and morphed since the time of Marx, who didn’t live long enough to see Imperialism really become the dominant contradiction upon which all other contradictions rest in the modern world.

Thanks! And gotcha. I think I follow what you’re trying to say. Personally, I don’t really agree that Capitalism’s resiliance disproves dialectics. Imperialism is not distinct from Capitalism, as an example, it’s Capitalism at its latest stages, when Capital must move outward or die. This exports the worst of contradictions to the Global South, but doesn’t perpetuate Capitalism, it’s a temporary stop-gap. Crisis still rocks the Capitalist system, concentration continues in fewer and fewer hands, and the proletariat continues to swell in ratio compared to the Bourgeoisie. As Imperialism is fought against, this brings the disparity back to the Imperial core (Burkina Faso kicking France out, for example).

The dialectic still moves forward in all of this. In all this time, there’s still movement, there’s still increasing disparity, there’s still drive for revolution. Marx was wrong in that he thought revolution would come to the developed countries first, but Marxists like Lenin and Fanon analyzed why that didn’t happen, and it was because Imperialism is that final delay. Dialectics continues to be at play, but the primary contradiction is Imperialism, not an individual nations’ class struggle. Ie, Burkina Faso’s number one contradiction is combatting Imperialism, not resolving internal class conflict, same with the US, where the proletariat largely wishes to continue Imperialism over changing the entire system.

I think, as far as countries like the USSR, PRC, Cuba, etc are concerned, they are examples of Marxist Socialism. You don’t have to agree with that as a form of socialism you agree with, but I don’t agree with rejecting Marxism as validly Socialist. I personally don’t agree with Anarchism, as an example, but I acknowledge it as a form of Socialism as well, and that’s good enough for left unity IMO. I say they follow Marxism, as all are examples of societies where the State is governed by the proletariat, and the large firms and key industries are overwhelmingly publicly owned and thus the proletariat is in control of the government and economy.

Either way, to return, adaptation is a form of dialectics in action. Dialectics doesn’t mean entire systems can only change into new entire systems, but that everything is in a constant stream of change, inwardly propelled. Systems like the welfare safety net don’t resolve class contradictions, they delay revolution at the expense of, usually, lower super-profits from Imperialism.

No problem!

The problem is that in the era of Imperialism, war is a necessity to certify new markets and redraw Imperial lines. The US provokes war in order to secure new markets for financial domination. It isn’t about progress, it’s about plunder.

Exactly. Fascism and liberalism are both superstructural elements arising from the Capitalist base, liberalism in better times and fascism in dire times. They aren’t really distinct ideologies so much as they are the same ideology in different circumstances, and this lets liberalism pretend it can beat fascism.

Why the Hegelian dialectic, and not the Materialist dialectic? Marx’s advancements on Hegel are, to my knowledge, near universal in accrptance among dialecticians, as Hegel could never escape the trap of his Absolute Idealism. Hegel’s insistance that everyone moves towards their own self-interest, and that this advances the universal Spirit, are wrong, but Marx’s correction on the dialectic to return it to the economic base and Materialist outlook are what brought about Historical Materialism.

If you are speaking on the Marxist dialectic, then your critique doesn’t follow outright, as Capitalism has changed into Imperialism, and Imperialism is what caused the Russian, Chinese, Cuban, Vietnamese, Korean, etc revolutions. Each of these new Socialist systems is still stamped with what came before it, as is consistent with Materialist dialectics, so this may already be what you’re getting at, if I’m reading you correctly. Resolving contradictions is a historical process, not a mental one.

The DNC and GOP are not hostile factions, but different wings of Capital. Organizing goes a lot further than random collective actions, but the tedious work of building organized structures, party building, doing the groundwork. We need to study former successful revolutions like the Russian, Chinese, Cuban, Vietnamese, etc and adapt what we can apply to our revolution. Parties like PSL in the US are already doing that, and are rapidly growing because they are at the forefront of resistance movements.

France, the US, and the UK have all reportedly been found defending “Israel” from Iranian missiles and drones, they are already involved. It seems like this very well could escalate.

The US Empire needs far-right states to serve as footholds, it can’t just rely on aircraft carriers to project hard power. Israel is a land-based aircraft carrier. Now, I agree with Yogthos, the Empire has weakened its industrial capacity and genuinely is a paper tiger, it can be flashy for a quick period but lacks the necessary industry to pivot to a wartime economy necessary for protracted war.

The winning strategy has always been worker organizing, and it certainly isn’t too late to mitigate the damage of Climate Change. Handcuffing yourself because we have no way of acting within the rules set out by the system is the exact type of nihilism the system is designed to instill, even Climate Doomerism is a tool of the oil barons to demoralize activists and organizers. We can change, and it takes organizing and overthrow of the present state of things, not playing a game created by the House to only ever allow them to win.

My point was about the USSR being democratic, which is historically true. They held elections, decided economic decisions collectively, and extended democracy not just from the realm of deciding which bourgeois politician or party represents you to the economic and political sectors governing policy and direction. A simple “they weren’t dude” doesn’t disprove historical fact.

Unless, of course, your parameters for deciding if something is democratic or not is decided by vibes, there’s really no reason to call it undemocratic. As an overall measure of material functions of democracy, the USSR was more democratic than the major powers of the allies and axis during World War II. They certainly had flaws with their democracy, hence the inclusion on my part of Zhenli’s essay, but these flaws weren’t because they had the “wrong recipe,” but because democracy is a material structure that needs to be built.

As for the “tankie” jab, I’m not going to apologize for being a Marxist. I agree that they were the most important force in World War II, but I disagree with your characterization of their democracy, hence why I offered sources for you or onlookers to read into to learn more. The opening of the Soviet Archives has only affirmed these primary sources as accurate, and the Zhenli essay helps us reframe how we think about building democratic structures in general.

Iran is a flawed state, certainly, but if Israel succeeds then they will succeed in killing far more women and queer people than the Iranian state could ever hope to execute, along with cisgender folk, liberals, etc. This is pinkwashing. As a queer person myself, this type of rhetoric is just Imperialist apologia, the path to queer liberation of Iranians would be dramatically pushed backwards if Israel succeeds in destroying Iran.

Further, yes, Iran is necessary to stop the genocide in Palestine at this moment. When Western countries are all condemning Iran and backing Israel, it is the Global South that backs Iran. Gazans are cheering, Yemeni people are watching the bombings of Tel Aviv on the big screen. Israel has been the single greatest obstacle in queer liberation in the Middle East as the fomenter of chaos, genocide, and destabilization.

Why is it that queer liberation happens in some countries, and not others? When does it happen? Social progress is a product of economic development and liberation of the Working Class. Bombing Iran and creating a failed state would result in thousands of deaths of queer Iranians, children, and many more.

Do some self-crit. You’re caping for Israel and advocating for the country doing the most to oppose genocide to collapse.

What would that look like? Trying to help Israel destroy Iran, allowing the US and Israel to sweep in and commit genocide against them like the US did with Iraq? The Iranian state is what currently stands between the people and utter devastation, even if that state is flawed, without it the people of Iran have no destiny to speak of. If revolution comes to Iran, it should be on Iranian terms, not on westerners whose regimes benefit from Israeli aggression against Iran.