Brazil develops tropical wheat and predicts self-sufficiency in 5 years

I lived in the UK from 1997 - 2010 when the Labour Party was in power. Guess what, the world didn't end. People were pretty happy. It was good times.

As I have said in previous comments, I believe that there should be a natural oscillation between socialist policies, which involve tax and nationalisation, and capitalist policies, which involve tax cuts and privatisation. Everything should be context dependent.

I think the UK is a bit of a sham democracy because of FPTP but we have historically had a pretty decent mixture of the capitalist and the socialist. In fact, people are pretty pissed off here right now, precisely because the socialist element (nhs, transport, education) has been eroded in quality so much by the encumbent capitalist element that they are no longer functioning properly. As a result it is highly likely the Labour Party will win the next general election.

If that were to happen, the world will not end and things will carry on as normal, just as it did in 1997. After a few terms pass, the ideological flaws of the Labour Party will manifest in their own problems, the populace will become angry with them and go on to re-elect the Conservative Party again. I will be happy when both of these things happen (the re-election of Labour and the re-election of the Conservative Party after that) because that is the natural way of things and means that the system is course correcting properly.

If you have lived in a more extreme country that does not have proper democratic protections and has had an authoritarian socialist government then I'm sorry you've had to experience that. But there is not much difference between that and the horrors of an authoritarian capitalist society such as the Arabian nations which used slave labour to build its football stadiums.

The problem is not the ideology. The ideology is simply a model that can be applied to a problem to see if it fits. The real problem is twofold. The first part being people who take ideologies to their extremes and refuse to compromise or adapt to context or, possibly even worse, those who don't care an iota about the ideology but will twist it (and anything else) for their own ends, abusing their positions simply for personal gain. The second part of the problem is weak political systems that do not have sufficient checks and balances to contain these zealots and/or self serving individuals.

> Lula is adept of the so-called "class conciliation", therefore he is not a communist by any means.

That he even mentions this marxist class bullshit is bad enough.

> Lula is against the idea of a revolution, with makes him a social democrat on the left spectrum, at most.

If you actually watch the decades old videos where he explains why he's against it, you'd realize it's because he thinks they don't work as a communist regime installation strategy.

His plan is to do it small bits at a time so that nobody notices. Boil the frog slowly so it doesn't jump, as they say. Since he's a cancerous old guy, he's been accelerating his schedule as of late so it's become a lot more obvious.

So we have a free hectare and we want to produce food. We decide to culture wheat in that space.

Our wheat would reach around 1m high, thus our "food 3D printer" has a volume of 100 x 100 x 1m. We could obtain 2 to 7 tons of wheat in that space

With corn our production space is 100 x 100 x 2 m and we can obtain on average 5 tons of corn (but we could obtain 7-10 tons with some extra effort).

With avocados our production volume is 100 x 100 x 25 m. We could obtain between 7 and 13 tons of Has avocados, but with a good culture practices, good rootstocks and smart planning we could produce 23 tons

With Oranges we could harvest also 10 - 22 tons of oranges

And bananas would yield 50-60 tons of food... on average

So If our goal is to feed as many people as possible, what should we culture, trees or herbs?

> Taking into account the most economical outcome in the short/medium term also can make your country or community poor in the long term. If you care about the future of where you live, its important to cultivate and support local industry, even when its more expensive.

Your solution is the short-term one, maybe not even that. In the long run, your community is much better off producing what it does best and trading with others for what they produce best, rather than everyone trying to do everything at some mediocre level.

Your solution is like Microsoft building its own furniture and cars and flying its own planes, rather than making software and buying the furniture, cars, and air travel from those who are expert in it.

During the 20th century, real-world communism (as opposed to the academic theory) always leaned on ye olde Russian imperialism, which, reincarnated under a new red flag, lent it the necessary muscle. Of course it was awkward to admit that the Communist bloc is actually an extension of the Russo-Soviet empire, so a lot of ink was spilt to recast the Russians/Soviets as liberators, bringers of peace and progress.

As of today, Russia is no longer even superficially left-wing in its state ideology, but the old personal and political ties to the far left in the rest of the world are still there. That is one of the reasons why "tankies" support the invasion of Ukraine and even cloak their support in the same "peace movement" jargon recycled straight from the Cold War era. That is also why countries such as Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua are sympathetic to the Russian imperial project.

Another reason is shared anti-Americanism, of course. The US has a much worse record track in Latin America than in Europe, no wonder that systemic competitors try to exploit it.