This is the inevitible result of nations wholly relying on mercenary groups to fight their wars. As major powers, not just Russia, continue to rely on privatized militaries these militaries are going to become emboldened and realize how much power they have over their capitalist financiers.
The other day I was listening to an old episode of The Deprogram where they talked about this. Surreal to see it actually happening now.
It's amazing that liberals think this man is any less verbally unhinged than Trump in the ways that are meaningful and relevant to being a president of a country.
Being bro-y isn't a problem if your intended audience is bros. It would just be nice to also have a funny communist podcast that is more accessible to women and queer people who are put off by bro humor.
I like the Deprogram but are there any funny communist podcast that aren't so "bro-y"?
It's hard to radicalize female friends that have trouble reading when the only podcasts I can find are dominated by men.
The more you read about the student protest at Tiananmen the more apparent it is that there was nothing Marxist about them. They totally excluded labor groups from even participating in the protest.
Communism was in a precarious state post-USSR. It makes sense that past analysts even from people like Parenti don't hold up well in hindsight. The entire communist movement was in the unfortunate position of having to make concessions to capital.
Russia is currently anti-imperialist due to their circumstances, not because of state ideology. It only makes sense their news media would reflect that.
US prison population and military expenditure compared to China should say it all. That and the fact that people can't afford healthcare and housing despite having full time jobs.
Anyone who isn't convinced by those simple metrics is just operating off of racism and privilege and there's not gonna be much you can say to convince them otherwise. IMO, value your mental health and move on.
There were unfortunately plenty on the left who supported 90s economic reforms in Russia, even in communist circles. It's not entirely indicative of someone's politics in general.
Not really talking about Sachs here. Just putting it out there.
I think the major split between communists around the world when talking about imperialism shows that we need an updated materialist definition of imperialism as it reflects the world today.
If we're just going off of the export of finance capital that Lenin described then Russia meets that definition, economically. China meets that definition (although others on lemmy have gone into great detail about how even that is not the most accurate to say).
But is Lenin's definition still enough or does it, by itself, obscure the actual power dynamics at play on the world stage today?
You must be from the reddit exodus.