griefstricken

It's 2024 and you are deepthroating the White House narrative. You trust the people who invaded Iraq because they said Al-Qaeda was there to tell you who "the bad guy" is.

I will show you plenty of sources, including actual video of Ukrainian forces torturing and killing civilians that has been verified independently. But first I want a source for your claim that Russia is indiscriminately bombing civilians. I will show you how easy it is to verify that your sources are not independent, funded by western finance capital, and undermined by statements from think tanks which cater to higher brow audiences on "your side" aka the ruling class that knows you don't know how to research and most of their population is functionally illiterate.

I am well aware of what the headlines say. You don't know your head from your ass without the Associated Press or the BBC weighing in on the subject.

drag the war out as long as possible

You have very poor reading comprehension, or you are very dishonest. They are stating their intent to prolong the war beyond any potential peace agreements. Do you even know what a "stay-behind operation" entails? First the West intervened in 2022 to stop Kiev from negotiating, they prolong the war with aid, make a lot of money, and they intend to use the territory to launch attacks on Russia no matter what happens to the army and the government.

Think Crocus Hall style attacks. That is what the real Operation Gladio entailed.

Drones flying into apartment buildings. Knowing this is what the west promises even after potential negotiations will make Russia settle for far, far fewer territorial concessions. Between the missiles and the provocations they may steamroll the entire country after they dispose of the main lines of conflict.

There are many other points to cover here but it is important for you to understand you cannot breeze your way through historical references and then pretend you know what Operation Gladio was. You're lazy.

Why exactly are you so convinced Russian leadership wants to massacre Ukraine and have a wasteland on the border? Ukraine was a vital trading partner for Russia prior to the western coup. Why do you think that the US and its allies fund a proxy war on Ukrainian territory? Out of the goodness of their hearts? They have been privatizing state assets in Ukraine, speculating on them, taking advantage of the spike in European requirement for US natural gas to replace Russia, and making huge military industrial purchases to replace what Russia destroys.

I'm sure Russia will settle for a slowly steamrolled Ukraine as a second option if the terror attacks on Russian office buildings etcetera continue, they might not even stop at western Ukraine, it could go on for years. They have been willing at many points to freeze the conflict so that they can go on making some money with Ukraine. Like I said it took them ten years to come to the aid of Donbas while civilians were being bombed there (Ukrainian leadership openly bragged about making the eastern Ukrainians' children stay in bomb shelters rather than school). The west chose the drawn out destruction of cities, the destruction of a dam for no good reason.

If Putin doesn't care how many Ukrainians die, why is he even averse to hitting their rail lines and electrical infrastructure? They clearly save these attacks for retaliation when negotiations fall through yet again and the bellicose US statements get out of hand yet again.

The whole mystification of Iran and Russia's clear strategy of "fuck off so we can stabilize and develop" that inevitably results in risks to our own stability is too funny. Western orientalism is strong in 2024 as it was in 2001.

Russia doesn't benefit from destabilized hostile states on its border. What about that is so hard for liberals to understand? Putin and the oligarchs literally wanted to loot their country and sell shit to the west and you idiots have driven them to China. I should thank you, but you didn't have any say in the matter.

Wow someone should have tried threatening peripheral countries by withholding trade deals, aid, loans from the World Bank and IMF in exchange for political changes. Why didn't anyone think of that already? 🤣

The global financial system does not care about human rights, firms want peripheral countries to remain undeveloped to keep costs down. With improvements in living standards come improvements in civil rights. That is what every single person who studies any society will tell you, except for liberals who want to justify extortion and sanctions, but only to "help" of course.

Ah yes, the gamer race. I wish I could show this message to Adolph Reed.

So you want them to remain undeveloped. Do you even know how Afghanistan ended up under Taliban control to begin with?

in b4 liberals come in complain about how countries they consider backward should not be allowed to develop in any way

Still haven't decided if I hate this fucking album the original song is from but I keep listening to it regardless.

Oh shit I didn't see this and I was just speculating they might escalate again tit for tat.

I see a lot of reading lists with a link to a dead group chat that put the onus entirely on the reader to sort through the books. There need to be more reading guides that include some responses or recent articles about a book along with chapter questions so readers learn not to slog through a book without knowing whether they truly learned anything.

A pamphlet, even offline, should be a doorway into the hypertext world of the history of socialist praxis. It should mention a book or a website for those interested in the message to continue learning about what they just read, but there needs to be something there to actually receive them. For instance entry level well-cited history books that deconstruct imperialist history or "international relations" or neoliberal "economics". Helps back up a message. But websites and e documents are still not used to their full educational potential by much of the left.

I think ban messages should always cite and link to a rule, the banning interface should make that an easy task, letting you check off a few reasons, with an "Other: [text]” area. The ban message should contain the rule citations and a custom message. This would lead people to receive bans in a less arbitrary manner. Arbitrary bannings are likely to make people disregard rules entirely, in my experience.

There are plenty of ostensibly Marxist organizations that function as alt-media outlets and generic activist NGOs for liberal causes. There are few online spaces actually educating socialists rather than browbeating them. Best not to learn by example from contemporary activist organizations and online spaces frankly. Look at what works everywhere, not what exists, failing in the first world.

Ooh definitely send this feedback to them. I am gonna forget to.