Almost like propagating breakaway “states” in all of your neighbors territories empowers nationalist in said neighboring states?

How would you describe what Igor Girkins “paramilitary” group were doing in eastern Ukraine in 2014? You know, when he wasn’t shooting down a plane full of civilians…

I think that’s par for the course for most fail sons in situations where they are in it over their heads.

I feel like this is giving them a bit too much credit, it’s pretending like they had the dignity to be indignant in the first place. In reality Nicholas had no idea what was going on, his last moments weren’t begging in powerless rage. His last words were literally “what?.. What?”.

I feel like most people like to portray the romanovs like they were from game of thrones, when in reality it was a lot more like if Buster or Gob from arrested development ran a totalitarian empire.

OG conservatives, it was originally founded by Nixon and then run by kissenger for years.

Ehhh… It depends on what you mean by human cognition. Usually when tech people are talking about cognition, they’re just talking about a specific cognitive process in neurology.

Tech enthusiasts tend to present human cognition in a reductive manor that for the most part only focuses on the central nervous system. When in reality human cognition includes anyway we interact with the physical world or metaphysical concepts.

There’s something called the mind body problem that’s been mostly a philosophical concept for a long time, but is currently influencing work in medicine and in tech to a lesser degree.

Basically, it questions if it’s appropriate to delineate the mind from the body when it comes to consciousness. There’s a lot of evidence to suggest that that mental phenomenon are a subset of physical phenomenon. Meaning that cognition is reliant on actual physical interactions with our surroundings to develop.

Okay, real talk, the concept of ethics in general is a human construct. One that is impossible to apply across all cultures, and even when they are accepted as social mores, they are illogically applied and are often full of internal contradictions.

For example, if it’s unethical to “kill someone who’s done nothing to you and didn’t want to die.”, then can we assume it’s ethical to kill something that has slighted us? Or is it okay to kill something that isn’t conscious of it’s mortality?

How do we determine if something doesn’t want to die? How do we delineate the difference between something like zooplankton or krill from plants?

I don’t really eat meat, but that’s mostly for health and environmental harm reduction. However, I understand that humans are imperfect beings, and have different social mores to adhere too. Out of all the evil man has unleashed over our evolution, I would hardly say that consuming animal products is anywhere close to the top of the list.

Plus, I think the way the west classifies veganism is a bit culturally insensitive. Different cultures subscribe to different interpretations of attributes when defining traits to life forms than in the west.

For example, there are Buddhist monks in Korea that eat a “vegan diet”, except their kimchi is made with krill. Now if you ask if they eat meat or animals, they will tell you no. However, culturally krill aren’t really considered an animal, they’re viewed more as a plant.

I would hardly call a person who’s spent their entire lives living off of plants a carnist or “bloodmouth”, just because they eat a little krill. But, I would like to hear your opinion on the matter.

Not off the top of my head, no, but my point is that the principles themselves were not Marxist nor Communist

So, just a vibe check then?

In what manner? Vibes?

Lol, in the same way as the Khmer Rouge…you never extrapolated how they were feudal to begin with.

Mao was not a deinustrialist, nor was he a nationalist. Yes, different forms of revolution are required, but intentionally setting the clock on progress backwards, rather than forwards, is inherently a reactionary position, which became self admitted!

First of all, I don’t think anyone can rightly claim Mao wasn’t a nationalist. He was an ardent anti imperialist and he wasn’t an ethno-nationalist, but still a nationalist at heart. Secondly progress is relative to the revolution, Cambodia prior to the revolution was for the most part dependent on substance farming. Adapting a centralized apparatus to control the economy is still progress.

but he was never operating under Marxist principles. At most, he took inspiration from the Chinese revolution with regards to the agrarian focus, but instead focused on deindustrialization and nationalism.

They didn’t deindustrialze, they were never industrialized to begin with.

More vibes.

Hilarious considering your arguments have been completely vibe based. Even when I ask you specify your claims… Nope just vibes.

He had denounced Marx and created a form of Feudalism.

When did he denounce Marx, do you have a quote?

Also, the same accusations of feudalism can be charged at North Korea.

His “agrarian Communism” was an expliciy rejection of Marxism from the get-go, as his concept of deindustrialization goes directly against Marxism

Or as the maoist say, Marxism with Chinese characteristics. The same charges could have been levied at aspects of the cultural revolution. Different forms of revolution are required for different forms of societal structures and limitations. The vanguard approach is not exactly going to fly in a mostly agrarian culture.

you have nothing in common with Communism except the name, you have to justify why you believe yourself to be Communist.

Lol, that’s not up to you to interpret. You are conflating nearly 50 years of history to a single decade. I could make very similar arguments about the Soviet Union based on just the 80’s as well.

I think it’s pretty obvious that we’re just trying to distance communism from a regime no one can morally defend. Nearly all the arguments you made have been levied at China, Korea, Russia, or Cuba at some point, but we tend to defend them because the ends mostly justify the means.

don’t believe I made the point that contemporaries criticized their fascism outright, I made the point that they were fascist and rejected Marx. Calling them Communist isn’t accurate in any way, plus they were stopped by the Vietnamese Communists.

I think what’s pertinent to the original argument was that they were communist while the Khmer Rouge were committing their atrocities. Labeling a country that transitioned from communism to fascism as a purely fascist government is misleading and reductive.

Also, being opposed to a communist government does not mean you’re automatically a fascist. As we know communist China attacked communist Vietnam right after the US Vietnam war.

The history of geopolitics in Asia is very complicated and cannot be summed up in a short Lemmy comment

It’s no more complicated than the history of European geopolitics. As an Asian person, I get told this by western people a lot. I think it’s just a hold over from the western interpretation of the east being based in mystery. Also, the complications of any topic does not validate the type of misleading/reductive comment you made.

my point was to distance Pol Pot from Communism, because he wasn’t a Communist and denounced Communism, nor did he implement Socialism.

I think this is completely inaccurate depending on what time you are talking about. I would say Pol Pot was probably one of the most ardent communist of the 50’s, it was just a weird type of agrarian communism. And in the regions he controlled he did attempt to construct a classless agrarian socialist society.

Pol Pot didn’t really divert from communism until the 80’s and that was a last ditch effort to get the west to support his failing regime. I don’t particularly believe that “We chose communism because we wanted to restore our nation. We helped the Vietnamese, who were communist. But now the communists are fighting us. So we have to turn to the West and follow their way.” constitutes as denouncing Marxism.

China, the USSR, and North Korea were/are Socialist, and should be judged as such, for better and for worse. Pol Pot and the gang were not, so judging them as though they were is just silly.

You haven’t supported the argument that the Khmer Rouge were never communist… Now I’m willing to compromise and say they transitioned away from communism as did the Russians, but that doesn’t detract from the fact that they were communist at some point.

How exactly was Pol Pot/Khmer Rouge not communist in the 50s-70’s?

Khmer Rouge was backed by the US and was lead by fascists who rejected Marx, like the Nazis.

I think that’s a highly misleading and highly reductionist interpretation. The Khmer Rouge was supported by the US, but mostly after the conflict had ended.

The Khmer Rouge was overwhelmingly supported by the CCP, especially during the Vietnam war, and before the Chinese invasion of Vietnam afterwards.

Also, PolPot wasn’t criticized for his diversion from Marxism until the 80’s, well after the most turbulent times in Cambodia. And even then Deng Xiaoping only criticised the Khmer Rouge for engaging in “deviations from Marxism-Leninism”

The only person on the left who accused him of being a fascist was Hoxha, but that was after his schism with the maoist. So to him any communist Asian was basically a barbaric fascist.

Yeah… My oldest cat makes different noises for different requests. Yowling near door to go outside, chirping near bowls for dinner, and little mews while following you around to be picked up. And I’m not really sure it’s an outlier case as the other two younger cats are starting to learn to do the same.

If however a country would be prepared to cut through the red tape and have a standard design developed for say 10 plants at the same time, the price and construction time would be decreased greatly.

That’s a pretty big ask for a democratic government where half of the politicians are actively sabotaging climate initiatives…

The only countries where this is really feasible are places where federal powers can supersede the authority of local governments. A nuclear based power grid in America would require a complete reorganization of state and federal authority.

The only way anyone thinks nuclear energy is a viable option in the states is if they completely ignore the political realities of American government.

For example, is it physically possible for us to build a proper deep storage facility for nuclear waste? Yes, of course. Have we attempted to build said deep storage facility? Yes, since 1987. Are we any closer to finishing the site after +30 years…no.

The recurring issue with communism is that capitalist powers keep on trying to corrupt, infiltrate and sabotage popular governments.

Idk, while capitalism meddling in communist governments is a reoccurring theme, I think blaming all problems that have occurred within communist governments on any level of outside corruption is highly reductive.

The problem with Marx is that while it points out problems and offers some solutions, it doesn’t address the way to organize a governmental hierarchy. Specifically it does not outline the required path of transforming a revolutionary government into a functional communist government.

Revolutions require a very rigid hierarchy of control and command, and most often resembles a military command structure rather than a bureaucratic one. Transitioning the state control from the hands of revolutionary militants to bureaucratic policy makers is the pitfall of any revolution, Marxist or not.

It is definitely limited by the cultural understanding of linguistical norms. Because the language we utilize in the methodology predates it, the language itself can limit most people’s conceptual understanding of whatever topic you are utilizing the methodology on.

Accurate communication is hard.

would argue that Muslims are, by default, required by their religion to make the hajj. You make it sound as if it’s opt in, but their religion mandates it with some exceptions.

Nah dude, the vast majority of Muslims never go to mecca. It’s not a mandate anyone enforces but yourself. I think only like 9% of Muslims ever actually get to make the trip.

A person’s sex is science, but their gender is a social construct.

Even sex is not the black and white dichotomy most people make it out to be. The way we define and dictate someone’s sex isn’t reproducible for everyone. The intersex population is larger than what most people assume, and can vary in ways that defy the way we normally evaluate sex. It can range from someone having different chromosomal pairings, to having a varied arrangement of secondary sexual organs.

Anyone saying that someone’s sex is scientifically dependent on “x” is either ignorant, or academically dishonest.

In the exclusive economic zone, the coastal State shall have the exclusive right to construct and to authorize and regulate the construction, operation and use of:

(a) artificial islands;

(b) installations and structures for the purposes provided for in article 56 and other economic purposes;

© installations and structures which may interfere with the exercise of the rights of the coastal State in the zone.

There no language in the EEZ article that mentions “territorial military outpost”.

According to who?

In the exclusive economic zone, the coastal State shall have the exclusive right to construct and to authorize and regulate the construction, operation and use of:

(a) artificial islands;

(b) installations and structures for the purposes provided for in article 56 and other economic purposes;

© installations and structures which may interfere with the exercise of the rights of the coastal State in the zone.

Can you link what article that falls under?

Well…they tried. What else would you call it when western backed NGOs organize astroturfed protests and violent riots aimed at toppling the elected government because the government is trying to pass a law that would expose foreign funding of said NGOs?

Well typically a revolution would require a change in the status quo, not a protest against the government rapidly shifting policy.

They aren’t trying to create a revolution, they are trying to preserve the status quo. The reason they are upset is because it’s the same policy Orban used before cracking down on independent journalism.

NATO troops have been in Ukraine since 2014

Lol, invited of course. That’s not invading someone…

Ukrainian troops have been on Russian territory since 2022 when the new oblasts voted in a referendum to join Russia.

Lol, and now it’s okay for foreign governments influence voting…

Color revolution bad, Russia funding and arming separatist groups all over eastern Europe good.

Them doing so forced Russia to intervene to protect those people and as a result there is now a larger conflict in Ukraine.

Those people Russia armed and agitated against the government in the first place? How many of Russia’s neighbors actively have armed separatist regions being bolstered by Russian troops? Surely it’s just a coincidence, and surely Russia has a long history of being very empathetic towards minority groups…

Comparing Palestinians with Nazis who want to commit ethnic cleansing is grotesque genocide apologetics and literally a Zionist talking point.

My dude, you are literally repeating nationalist talking points. Maybe take your own advice and consume sources that aren’t funded by the Russian state.

This shows to me that you are not engaging in good faith

I very much doubt you ever engage with anyone in good faith.

Nah, there’s pretty clear rules. It’s just that the main power in the region tends to ignore them when it suits them. Again, how is the Philippine government breaking international law?