Munrock ☭ @ Munrock @lemmygrad.ml

香港，中国

---

Read more

Posts

5

Comments

96

Joined

3 yr. ago

It's a good opportunity for a stakeholder analysis.

When you tabulate who stands to benefit and who stands to lose from French troops being deployed to Niger compared to being deployed to Ukraine, it's very obvious that the French government serves the interests of groups other than the French people, or even itself.

His proffered respect for the Royal Family has dropped dramatically with the death of Elizabeth. In the first show back after being sworn into parliament he was openly decrying the fact that he has to swear loyalty to Charles to be able to keep his seat. He'd never have been so vociferous with his crticism about that with ER2. I guess being born right after the Attlee government, the Queen was associated with a childhood in the kind of Britain he's been fighting to get back ever since. And then there's also the realpolitik of Elizabeth having been quite popular, and extremely popular relative to Charles and his Duchy Orignals™ drama farming progeny.

Prolewiki is going from strength to strength and it's great to see.

It doesn't surprise me at all. Both the Tories and Labour governments have been fucking over Rochdale for years. The town is a shadow of what it once was.

Galloway's main appeal to people in Rochdale was pointing out that you can't be born in Rochdale unless it's in an ambulance on the way to Oldham, you can't be educated in Rochdale if you have any special educational needs, and you can't die in Rochdale unless it's in an ambulance on the way to Oldham.

In the past couple decades they've had their hospitals, aged care and education all cut to save costs.

He was telling Rochdale folk in a town hall debate that even if they disagree with his beliefs (i.e. Catholic views on gender and sex), he's the only one with a stake in actually doing anything for them, and Rochdale apparently agrees.

Edit: I'd encourage folks who think GG is just grifting with his rhetoric on Gaza to go back and view the archives of his talk show; it's been an issue of contention for him for decades. You can go back even further, as far back as standing in the pickets with Scargill in the miner's strikes. If he's a grifter, he's awfully bad at it considering he somehow always ends up on the right side of history (which has also been the losing side, and the less profitable side) since before most of us were born.

He's now got the record for the most different parliamentary seats held. He was previously tied with Churchill at 4, Rochdale is his 5th.

The Worker's Party has been around for a while now and Corbyn hasn't joined. I think Corbyn is done with party participation at this point. He's too near the end of his career and he's pretty much guaranteed to win his Islington seat for as long as he wants it, so party membership offers nothing that would be worth compromising his individual convictions in favour of party policy for.

But Corbyn and Galloway have been speaking up for Palestine before the current farce of Western Left decided it was fashionable. Before most of the Western left was even born. Galloway got ousted from Labour for opposing the war in Iraq and he's since been constantly smeared and demonized the same way Corbyn has.

The prevailing attitudes toward Galloway and Corbyn don't surprise me at all. Modern Western leftists constantly deride and dismiss both of them for having ideas and mentality of the kind you expect from people who were born in the 40s and 50s. But when either of them travel to South Africa or South America or the Middle East, actual leftists and retired resistance fighters are there greeting them as comrades.

edit: Galloway's podcast is significantly more popular in the Global South than it is in the West

Where 'toxic' is not being in lockstep with State department narrative.

I wonder if that moderation happened before or after Mohammed Al-Bukhaiti left

The moon.

it seems fair that people who had to put in a lot more work to get to a position where they can do their jobs should be rewarded more.

This is true. However, the clarity of this statement gets muddied with the disparity in privilege and opportunity.

An individual born into wealth has to put effort into passing medical school, while an individual born into poverty has to put the same amount of effort into just surviving and still may never be able to afford medical school.

And yet the latter may have had a prodigious talent for medicine that will never be uncovered.

In before "maybe it was Hamas"

ha who am I kidding libs probably said that a thousand times before I could react.

JT’s videos are great as a gateway to socialism for the most propagandized Westerners.

Your words.

It changes how you effectively educate. It affects how receptive people are to an idea.

And the delivery methods are materially different. If you pointedly espouse revolution over reform on YouTube you'll get the video deleted or suppressed and/or your account suspended.

But if the proletariat really is materially unchanged, you could always bypass YouTube and distribute pamphlets. The proletariat's relationship to the means of production is unchanged, their material conditions have changed dramatically in the past 150 years.

The audience of the Gotha Program was essentially the same as JT’s audience.

I really don't think the working class of 1875 Germany viewed the political landscape through the same Overton Window and culturally endemic Red Scare as JT's audience.

JT’s videos are great as a gateway to socialism for the most propagandized Westerners.

Which is exactly his target audience.

the only art that gets filtered through history and that gets to survive and be representative is what the upper class allowed to be uncensored,

This is why I love the preserved graffiti in the ruins of Pompeii. They share a relatability with cave paintings that other historical art lacks.

阿吉野马

Don't forget Kissinger is still alive.

• Accept the application from the US
• Make a similar, corresponding request of the US
• Do both of the above loudly and publicly

The two state solution would, IMO, would not last. And I think China knows that, and also knows that it would eventually end in Palestine's favour, which is why they advocate for it.

In a two-state solution, Israel would get propped up by the US for as long as it's beneficial and affordable to the US. Considering:

a) Israel's ability to bomb and terrorize with impunity would be severely curtailed by any peace deal,

b) US economic might is on a continuing downward decline, and

c) Unfettered by Israeli blockade, the Global South, Belt & Road, BRICS etc. would be able to throw their support behind Palestinian redevelopment, development and prosperity, and the NATO hegemony would be under pressure to make Israel competitive with that. And they'd have to throw money at it knowing they won't be able to keep up.

The US would be looking for excuses to withdraw support pretty much immediately. Any two-state solution that frees the Palestinian territories from Israeli occupation and suppression will look like a stalemate on paper, but it would completely curtail Israel's strategic usefulness to the US, and the US will throw it under the bus like it does every other puppet-ally that outlives its usefulness.

And I think the US and Israel know this as well. Depending on the terms, the US would see the two-state solution as effectively cutting their losses with Israel, while Israel would see it as doom. So for China, pushing for a two-state solution has the additional benefit of driving a wedge between Israel and the US, in addition to the benefits an actual peace would create.