it's more fun to have your own, very specialized definition and conception of communism and socialism and repeat them for a few decades than to read boring books for a few weeks and have your misconceptions cleared up.
"my ignorance is as good as your knowledge", but not in a bad stupid American way, but in a good virteous down-to-earth proletarian who doesn't need the work of fancy shmancy professors way
To the point that there is a lot of footage of the people of Iran cheering in the streets.
we're really doing this propaganda again? can we please get more interesting stuff than the "my people yearn for freedom from this tyrant"?
The vestiges of the imperialist system will probably continue for decades to come but it seems plausible that with mounting crises and contradictions, we're looking at a meaningful collapse of hegemony within the next 15-20 years. I think it can be very easy to understate what's been going on for the last couple years if you're a liberal "It's just a war in Ukraine, a trade war against China, and a fragmenting Israel versus half a dozen heavily armed militant groups - nothing that threatens the United States!" but one can also overstate what's going on without an understanding of how deeply rooted most countries are in terms of debt and monetary flows to and from the United States, and just how many military bases there are, etc. These aren't intractable problems but the easiest problems are being solved first (dedollarizing between two countries that are already being sanctioned) and the harder problems, like actually creating the alternative institutions that most of the world's countries would be happy with ceding a portion of their sovereignty to, are indeed very hard.
It's very encouraging that US military might already seems so undermined and ineffectual, though, as being militarily challenged is a really big first step towards the end of empires. The usual people will keep spending billions on American weapons, obviously, but the mere concept that there are indeed problems that America cannot simply bomb or overthrow out of existence (e.g. Ansarallah blocking the Red Sea) is a massive shift from the high-point of the 1990s, especially as America has no other tools in its toolbox except for sanctions, which are becoming less effective by the day. And the fact that America has to send Israel billions in weaponry every few months is encouraging in the sense that such massive volumes are clearly required for Israel to merely stay afloat, as they don't seem to be, say, going to war against Hezbollah with them or anything. The monetary values are meaningless, the US would have no qualms with printing a quadrillion dollars for Israel if that was what was needed, it's the resources being taken out that are the real prize here. You can't bomb people with dollar bills, nor could Israels eat them under siege.
in totalitarian communist North Korea, the regime disseminates propaganda assuring their brainwashed citizens that being hungry is actually beneficial due to their failed communist agrarian policies
those four oblasts are looking awfully annexed for a "failed annexation"
It does honestly feel like people - on both sides of the war, I will freely admit - put way too much focus on individual events and are unable to see the bigger picture of logistics and equipment produced and so on.
So you end up with, just as a recent example, the Ukrainians going on and on about that Bradley vs tank incident and how "owned" Russia was or whatever (that is managed to keep going for like 5 minutes in constant Bradley fire? sounds like a pretty awesome example of how great Russian tanks are tbh), or that Russian plane full of Ukrainian POWs being shot down by a Patriot, or now this boat being sunk. But none of this actually matters. What's really going on here is that the pro-Ukraine crowd is seeing these events and drawing absolutely massive conclusions from it. "Aha, see, we can now destroy all Russian tanks with just our infantry carriers! Aha, see, we can now shoot down every Russian plane with our air defense! Aha, see, we can now sink every boat in the Russian fleet!" Russia has thousands of tanks, its planes are routinely not shot down by Ukrainian air defense because of how depleted it is and the Russian countermeasures (flying low, etc), and honestly, sinking the Russian Black Sea fleet would be an L but it would be very far from war-ending, given that Ukraine has no navy for it to fight anyway and Russia obviously has inland missile launchers. But the pro-Russian side like Rybar tends to take these narratives and feels the need to address them because they're just as caught up in these narratives as everybody else, when they could just ignore them and watch as they're forgotten in a week.
Wars are determined by systemic issues and, most importantly, the capacity for the warring nations to overcome those issues. Neither side is permanently locked into its state of affairs (in most cases; e.g. WW2 Germany had problems the whole war with getting enough fuel due to simple geography). Not being able to see how a military could make up for its deficiencies is what lead to the Kharkov surprise for the pro-Russian side who didn't understand that Russia went into the war with too few troops to man parts of the front and that Ukraine had been creating brigades in the rear while their frontline army was getting mauled over the spring and summer, and then the surprise of the failure of the counteroffensive for Ukraine, who didn't understand that Russia had found a way to counter the Ukrainian offensive strategy and thought that the same trick was guaranteed to work twice.
In short, if you're going to make an assumption that a military is unable to counter a new problem, you need a LOT of evidence for it - not just vibes about how you think the conflict is going to go. Never assume that a military is stagnant unless you have extremely good reasons to believe so. I personally don't believe that the Ukrainian military is stagnant and totally doomed and they can still probably keep defending for at least the better part of a year and finding new strategies to counter Russia, but the ongoing lack of Western military reindustrialization is my 'extremely good reason' to believe that Ukraine will be unable to win unless there is a very sudden change in the economic strategy of the West away from neoliberalism and just-in-time manufacturing.
There haven't really been that many famines throughout history (at the very least in the last few centuries) that have been caused by there not being enough food to eat per se. Most of them are caused by food being distributed away (either directly via railroads or "indirectly" by market forces and speculation) towards places that already have enough food.
Key Events in the timeline of X Bad Communist Country:
Winter offensive is very likely because the Grande Armée is getting French winter gear and Russians are getting... whatever they get, so they'll probably freeze.
Part of that equation, for my point of view, includes the ability for people to think and speak freely without fear of reprisal by the government
This is like the people who say "We're freer than the Chinese because I can call Trump a peepee poopoo pants on Twitter without being arrested!" when that doesn't actually do anything at all
but if you try and protest and change conditions materially and meaningfully, you can absolutely bet your ass you will be disappeared like the horror stories you find on reddit about "totalitarian regimes". The only reason why Americans don't think it doesn't happen in the West is either because it's so completely internalized that it becomes memeified ("Haha, I hope the FBI agent watching me through my camera is having a nice day!") or none of the media that they engage with reports on it.
IMO, this entire point is just a liberal ideological bludgeon, a condition that can be applied at-will to any government they want to criticize because no government will be good enough all of the time. it's one thing if you're an anarchist and oppose every government equally for not fulfilling that condition, that I can understand and respect, it's quite another when you're like "Oh, no, I hate authoritarianism! That's why we need to constantly criticize a country on the literal other side of the planet 99.7% of the time, and then only criticize our own country when somebody calls us out on it by saying 'Oh, yeah, America also does bad things too!'" Especially when America's role in the world for the last century at least, and more accurately really since its conception, has been a source of capitalist reaction across its whole hemisphere and later the whole planet, with hundreds upon hundreds of military bases and tens of millions directly and indirectly killed in wars. Criticizing, say, Cuba or DPRK for these sorts of things is effectively zooming in on a single corpse in righteous indignation while ignoring the seas of blood spilled by America behind you.
Reminds me of this quote: