Soon: "Sorry, only chrome is allowed. Please download chrome to access youtube"

All states will use whatever means necessary to suppress the class struggle regardless of abstract metaphysical presuppositions like "rights", which they easily throw in the trash whenever convenient.

This used to be so annoying when I used RedReader with Reddit. Sometimes I would click a link, not paying attention to the url and thinking it was an article, and would be greeted by the Youtube app hijacking my screen and blaring an ad at full volume in my face.

Soc-dems betray their principles every 5 seconds. Opportunism is a long cherished pasttime for them. SPD murdering Rosa noises

I mean, the feds will "empower" themselves if they really want to. They've done worse things to suppress the class struggle

Indeed, his associates say Mr. Singham has long admired Maoism, the Communist ideology that gave rise to modern China.

Replying with an article that refutes this claim is not on-topic?

What if the state of the French police is but a reflection of the profound malaise engulfing the rule of law in the country as a whole?

What if it's the opposite? The "rule of law" is nothing but the collective will of the ruling class and the police is the enforcement organ of that class, so it makes no sense to say that increased utilization of police is a "malaise" of the "rule of law". Actually, it sounds like it's working as intended. The real reason- the bourgeoisie response to the intensification of class struggle- is totally absent from the article. Instead it focuses on some mystical "abandonment" of "liberal values" as if "right wing" ideas suddenly achieved a will of their own and "infected" the police departments and functionaries of the state. Someone reading this must come away more confused than they were before they read it.

I do use NewPipe. However, there's no way to tell RedReader to open YouTube links in NewPipe.

It's never been more obvious that this is all a puppet show. And they hate that it's obvious. Look at how fast the two "opposing sides" (lol) join hands when it comes to something that has to do with war or crushing labor strikes. The rest of the time it's terminal gridlock, posturing, and ostentatious displays of feigned aggression. And it all just so happens to line up perfectly with the will of the bourgeoisie.

Everything they did was "legal", for the most part. What are you going to charge them with?

The problem is private property and the capitalist mode of production.

Bourgeois party does bourgeois things, more news at 11.

China's bourgeoisie capitalist regime preps for WW3.

You have a bourgeoisie dictator as your avatar.

This article is working overtime to polish that turd.

I can find just about everything ever written on MaM and libgen.

As opposed to China's bourgeoisie dictatorship leading to the exact same thing? Read Marx.

How about you let Ukrainians the Ukrainian bourgeoisie decide how best to defend their homes property and class interests?

If people in Russia "support" the war, it is because the bourgeoisie control the flow of information and education in the country and uses it to instill beliefs in the proletariat that benefit their rule. The ruling class of every country in the world disseminates ideas of nationalism using its vast resource to ensure the population consents to being cannon fodder for "national interests". In reality the working class shares no interests with its ruling class or "nation" at all.

What point are you trying to make? That Russia in 2023 constitutes some kind of non-capitalist mode of production? That's beyond stupid if that's what you're getting at. The asiatic mode of production is pre-capitalist

The government will seek to “restore authority,” an official close to Macron told POLITICO, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive issues. An official from the Elysée Palace told Agence France-Presse that nothing would be “taboo” in the discussions on how to handle the situation.

The national bourgeoisie use those patriotic feelings to manipulate the working class into slaughtering their actual brothers and sisters across borders. The people facing the exact same conditions, the exact same assault on their living conditions, the exact same war imposed on them. To be an internationalist isn't to devalue a connection to the community of fellow workers in your country, it's to extend it across borders.

I'm confused- you call for a socialist party that is completely free of bourgeois influence which I agree with, but then you namedrop the DSA - a "big tent" reformist group. DSA members run as democrats in elections and they endorse democratic candidates, so they definitely aren't free of bourgeoisie influence.

The capitalist regime will never allow a peaceful transition of power to a socialist party - through voting or otherwise. History has shown this repeatedly. "Democratic rights" are exercised in a manner that serves the interests of the bourgeoisie, thus democracy is nothing but a smokescreen for the dictatorship of Capital.

"The executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie." --Marx

Most importantly, we should emphasize internationalism over localism. Capitalism is international and globally inter-linked, so must be the struggle for socialism.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/bordiga/works/1957/fundamentals.htm

There are several articles there. The first one is about Lebanon. Like I said, you might have to scroll to the one about China if the hash link isn't taking you there

cluster bombs

"Some of you may die, but that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make"

Not a tankie. Hate tankies

When at around ~30 seconds he said that Christians were tolerant I almost choked on my food laughing. Didn't watch the rest.

Russia's history included a violent overthrow of the Czar followed by a subsequent extremely fast and turbulent industrialization process under state capitalism. Yes, this is a different developmental situation from that of the Western bourgeoisie, which evolved much more slowly and continuously from the liberal bourgeoisie revolutions. This could lead to variations in the superstructures (including political ideologies), but this does not imply a different economic base.

Capitalism's laws are independent of the will of individual capitalists. Even when individual bourgeoisie espouse liberal ideas like "freedom of the press", etc, they are ultimately driven by the imperative to accumulate Capital above all else and respond to its inherent crises in such a way that preserves it. This is because Capital is a social, impersonal force, not an individual one.

This is as true in "the west" as it is in Russia. Their actions and their stated ideals do not need to align at all, and can/ must change as a response to social conditions and crisis in production. The Russian oligarchic bourgeoisie is driven to accumulate Capital in the same way, having the same economic base, even if the specific form it takes is different due to different historic conditions. As it is in China, as well.

The bourgeoisie of the world do not want war, but they must, nevertheless, go to war if they want to preserve their class privileges due to the imperatives the laws of Capital places on them.

All those examples are capitalism and changes absolutely nothing for humanity except the shape of the slave driver. Your mistake is thinking of commodity production and wage labor as unchanging, eternal states of being which comes from the bourgeois economic ideology taught to you, a notion Marx already destroyed. There was a "before" capitalist production and there will be an "after"

This is all really trivial and only really even true during relative peacetime. As the imperial blocs approach general conflict and subsequent intensification of class struggle these appearances will easily melt away and all competing interests are subordinated to the national interest. If the tools at the disposal of liberal democracy are not enough to contain and subordinate the class struggle happening at the time to the national interest, the bourgeoisie will easily abandon all those illusions and resort to fascism. It's really going to depend on the strength of the labor movement to come. The bourgeoisie of the west has enjoyed a weak labor movement since the end of WWII but that's a trend that may change as we approach the third world war.

To address your concerns, anarchists recognize that the bourgeoisie will resist revolutionary change. That’s why anarchism advocates for a decentralized society where power is dispersed among communities, making it harder for counter-revolutionary forces to consolidate. Anarchists believe in direct action, self-defense, and community organizing to confront and neutralize counter-revolutionary threats.

If anything this makes it even easier for counter revolutionary forces to consolidate. With the revolution pulling itself in umpteen different directions, you have no coherent programme at all. That ignores the fact that anarchists can't even agree on anything amongst themselves, let alone that capitalism should even be abolished at all without even realizing it. Many of them believe that commodity production is fine, because they think it's merely a policy issue or that capital can be "democratically controlled" or whatever.

Up to this point we've assumed that an "anarchist revolution" was even able to make it this far, but even that seems laughable.

Moreover, anarchism goes beyond removing individual bourgeoisie. It aims to eliminate the structural mechanisms that perpetuate capitalism. Anarchists advocate for the abolition of private property, wage labor, and the state, which are fundamental pillars of capitalism. By dismantling these institutions and replacing them with non-hierarchical alternatives, anarchism seeks to create a society where capital accumulation and exploitation are impossible.

Anarchists have a superficial understanding of private property, wage labor, and the state. The fact you think these are "institutions" is evident of that enough. An "anarchist revolution" would simply re-create these under a different name or wind up serving the counter-revolution.

While voting alone cannot prevent the emergence of new capitalist classes, anarchism emphasizes grassroots organizing, communal decision-making, and direct participation in shaping social and economic structures. Through these means, anarchists strive to create a society that is fundamentally egalitarian, cooperative, and resistant to the reemergence of capitalism.

What does any of this even mean lol. Who knows how all that fluff will accomplish what you're talking about. You might as well just say we'll sustain the revolution by holding hands and singing kumbaya.

Marxism does not distinguish between capitalism managed by a liberal free market, an oligarchy, or a state. The distinction between them is quite trivial and does not change the analysis.

If an actual fascist dictatorship were a real threat the democratic party would be totally impotent against it.

War with China- the same thing that will happen if Biden wins.

No one. Let the two opposing sides fraternize to take down both their ruling classes.

Finland has already reached Nato's agreed defence spending target of 2% of GDP, and Sweden has drawn up plans to do so by 2026.

and the working class pays for it as always