Ron DeSantis Proposes Unprovoked War on Mexico
Redcat [he/him] @ Redcat @hexbear.net Posts 0Comments 33Joined 2 yr. ago
On balance, the West is a far better influence on the world
NATO has bombed and destroyed not just Iraq, but the majority of the middle east. It runs an occupation force today in Syria. NATO didn't just destroy Iraq, it colonized Iraq's agriculture, which is now dependent on imports from NATO while it feeds pasta to Texan schools. NATO has transformed Libya into an open air slave market, flooded Syria with weapons, backed Israeli Apartheid, blockaded Iran, couped the government of Pakistan, and caused a famine in Afghanistan on their way out by sanctioning yet another people. The little girls whose rights NATO countries cared about so very much then starved to death. Not for any reason, not to achieve any objective. But only out of spite.
NATO has couped and propagandized it's way across Latin America. This is not ancient history. It is current and ongoing. It claims outright that they won't stop blockading Venezuela until it's oil is owned by american shareholders. So not only bombs, deaths by starvation and lack of medicine are perfectly fine for the organization. Just as Syrians and Chinese people have no right to territorial integrity, Cubans have had no right to ally with whoever they want for generations.
NATO runs an actual and currently existing Colonial Empire across Africa. One of it's leading voices, France, owns the infrastructure, finances and natural resources of dozens of countries, assassinating its way into total dominance. Then it gives some scraps back to those colonies, and calls it 'Foreign Aid'. Berating the poors for being so dependent. Once challenged, NATO has yet again chosen to starve people to death with trade wars on basic infrastructure, food, and medicine.
I'm Brazilian. When the Bolsonaro family was literally calling Chinese monkeys on twitter the Chinese were remarkably patient. The USA berates us for being 'anti-american' because we aren't grateful of how Biden chose not to coup us last year. As if it's not humiliating enough that a fascist in this country can draw on the history of America and outright ask the CIA for help staying in power. There are now US troops supporting the coup government of Peru. Right after coup attempts in Bolivia and Venezuela. We now watch as high ranking US government officials float the idea of invading Mexico, under the cover of a war on drugs. After years of waging it in Colombia and Central America. But we all know it's because Mexico nationalized stuff that Americans don't want to see owned by Mexicans.
There are no fucking standards for comparison. There are no regions of this world which do not witness current and ongoing hybrid wars waged by NATO countries at the behest of the USA.
The West is a defensive alliance between warmongerers. The Americans at least have the decency of wearing their thirst for blood on their sleeve. Democrat or Republican, they've all had their share of wars they enjoy supporting. It's the Europeans who will cry on TV while sending volunteers to Iraq and Afghanistan.
I only pray for any people who is targetted by NATO's eye of sauron. Or has to make do with sharing a border such an evil collection of governments.
More importantly, the actual article makes the case that it's the AfD who's courting China. The article claims that AfD used to take on a more anti-China rethoric. Now they don't, and say outright they don't wish to do regime change in China. What should be a wakeup call for the right wing coalition to stop being so incompetent, is being sold by Germant State Media as criticism of the far right. Liberal infighting, is what it is.
you can't convince me the Mormons won't deify Donald Trump centuries after they are the only american group to survive the climate wars. his hair is the same color as their golden tablets that aren't real.
It's a wide discussion, you can see arguments of all sorts. You can estabilish where it came from, what were it's contemporary philosophical and aesthetic influences, what were the material conditions that led to it, and how far back you wish to place each of them. One can go so far as to say that Corporatism is an echo of pre capitalist Europe, and the guild economies of centuries past.
It depends on wether you're working with a conception of history or if you're working with present-day definitions of common american political parlance. Corporatism did not straight up mean privatization. Only it was a political project with the aim to promote and secure private sovereignty over each sector of the economy. A society organized as a body - corpus. That is what Corporatism meant. You have the head, you have the arms, and the legs. Each part autonomous, and sovereign over it's sector. Just as the fingers don't tell the brain what to do, the employees must not contest the employer's ownership of their labour. If one knew what to do with finance or production, one was a factory owner or a banker. These last elements were to be empowered and secured by the Fascist state, an entity born entirely to subsume class struggle into nationalist fervour. Hence Corporatism.
The reason why Corporatism was not defined by the interdependence of State and Private Corporations is because it couldn't have been. As that would have been no different from Liberal or Socialistic States. All Industrialized economies are predicated on the state, on it's monopoly of violence, on it's ability to enforce property, contracts, to secure the money supply, and to galvanize social economic efforts. This even moreso true in the time period, as all the Liberal states of Europe were predicated on colonialism, just as the United States was predicated on manifest destiny. There's no capitalism or industrialization without state action. Corporatism's innovation - which is really an echo of early modern political thinking - was in ideologically subjugating civil society to the wishes of the private.
Nowadays people are too quickly to call any state they dislike 'corporatistic', 'corporativistic', or something along those lines because, ultimately, we live in society that is organized around those ideas. Every country from the liberal west to the post colonial east at one point played along Corporatist rules. Even when those Corporatist states were dismantled - early in the US, after the 80s oil shocks elsewhere - we continued to conceptualize the economy and our roles within it according to what the fascists had in mind. So the word loses all meaning. People will say the US is corporatist now because the State intervenes in the economy. Except it always did, and the hopes that the government would stop caring about social harmony and welfare, and limited itself to enforcing contract and property only, was always there. We merely live in a post Soviet acceleration.
the guy decided to run against a religious icon, and now he's eating so much shit it's incredible
Well, they are right. Fascism was very much predicated on state enforced privatization. That's what 'Corporatism' means. A political ideology where society is organized like a body - corpus - and each part is sovereign. Private Companies would thereafter be the lords of their respective sectors. Fascism isn't defined by close relations between the Private and the Public sectors because that's actually true for all forms of industrialized societies. Even and in many ways especially the early adopters of industrialization. British free trade ideology was limited to the United Kingdom, while India was run as a resource and tax farming colony for the benefits of British Capital. The State, with its armies and political supremacy, is no less important there.
This is an important distinction to be made because Fascism was invented to enforce social harmony in face of class struggle. It is meant to subsume all political discourse of clashing interests between bosses, employees, landlords, farmers, urban workers, service workers, and so on into the body of the nation. In a fascist society you're not supposed to question the political order, as, for an example, bankers know best about the banking system which is why the State enforces their rights and power over their employees, and ensures that as much economic power is privatly held as possible.
That famine was an investment in democracy.
non hostile sovereign state
For the past several decades NATO has utterly destroyed various countries around the world, while maintaining ruthless tradewars against the peoples of Cuba, Iran and Venezuela, as well as a brutal colonial regime across much of West Africa. NATO won't stop at invading your country either. They'll maintain occupations in Syria and blockades of Afghanistan from now until the end of time.
NATO would rather see the people of Niger and Mali starve to death rather than pay market rates for their resources.
NATO will crow that countries in South America are too defiant, why, they didn't even try and coup the brazilian elections last year!
NATO is, simply put, a defensive alliance of the world's preeminent warmongerers.
Hosting NATO troops is the epitome of hostility.
Unfortunately for you some countries can actually resist. And resist they shall.
Does Ukraine not have the right to defend their territory?
Do eastern ukrainians have a right not to be ethnically cleansed?
Yes, yes, China is great
i disagree since they'll court anyone, even americans and nato
Not really surprising that german state media would fall in line when it comes to China reporting. The chinese have a history of playing ball with pretty much anyone from Israel to the EU and beyond. If there's even any basis to the article's thesis, it is the rabidly pro-US faction that rules Germany today which is making the main choice in this matter.
The United States is not an arbiter of which Mexicans are to be extrajudicially executed by drone strikes. You're acting like a coward who's only too happy the Mexicans are too weak to strike back.