u/FleetingRain - originally from r/GenZhou
She had the heart and the brains, just not the guts or the arms

u/kjk2v1 - originally from r/GenZhou
https://www.reddit.com/r/GenZhou/comments/rqvywd/in_defense_of_geopolitical_realpolitik/

1. Optimistic argument: Historically, it is a multipolar world, not a unipolar world, that has given class movements in multiple countries political momentum (regular class struggle).

2. Optimistic argument: Developing countries can play off sugar daddies against each other.

3. Pessimistic argument: Even if a proper multipolar world (instead of a bipolar world) makes inter-imperialist war more likely, it also makes revolution more likely because at least one imperialist side will be utterly discredited.

u/ProlesOfMischief - originally from r/GenZhou
With the “unipolarity” of the U.S.-commanded system, it basically dominates the world’s resources. If any socialist or god forbid revolutionary government comes to rule, the U.S. has the power to sanction this government, preventing its development which causes stagnation, poverty, and crises which become the biggest threat to socialism. Such governments cannot get necessary resources elsewhere because there is no one else to turn to. Populations can easily lose hope, and this makes it easy for U.S. intelligence and NGOs to foment color revolutions.

In a multi-polar world there are competing systems. If a revolutionary government comes to power and gets sanctioned by the U.S. and its allies, there is another option available in the competing system. Said country could then appeal to this competing system in order to develop trade relations and improve the economy, developing socialism etc.

It’s no coincidence that the height of socialist uprisings occurred in multi-polar eras of great power competition, and since the collapse of the Soviet Union and global domination of U.S. finance capital, our movement has been in pitiful state.