This is odd. They have the budget to run with real journalists and outlets. Is this some reverse-psychology move? Where they want people to see that its AI and thus not take it seriously? What aim does that achieve?
Real journalists / content writers have pesky morals and tend to become whistleblowers when they've had enough.
Nothing interesting, much less sinister, is happening on the site though - and it seems to have zero traffic. It is likely just spreading encrypted signals to the military elsewhere.
Real journalists / content writers have pesky morals and tend to become whistleblowers when they've had enough.
What are you talking about? There are entire groups of renowned "journalists" that turn out to be CIA collaborators. The renowned New York Times admitted they receive approval from the US government. Bellingcat, renowed "independent investigative journalists", turns out to be CIA-funded, and is awfully quiet with their investigations in situations where it does not suit NATO allies' agenda. There's a reason why the p…
The only systematic state propaganda in question is the propaganda you are retailing here. Bellingcat-o-mania in particular is a pure, paid, propaganda initiative of Putin's Assadist phase. Billions were spent to produce armies of brains that type what you just typed.
There is a significant difference between socialism and communism, Americans seem to purposely conflate the two, they are not the same.
Smells like "no true scotsman" fallacy because they are nearly synonyms. Nobody in USSR could tell the exact difference or at least there was no consensus, and you are expecting modern Americans to do better huh? This basically sums it up: > According to the Encyclopædia Britannica, "Exactly how communism differs from socialism has long been a matter of debate, but the distinction rests largely on the communists' adh…
The German Social Democratic Party is the literal actual identical party of Marx and Engels.
That we assign to the Bolsheviks the mantle of one or another 19th c epithet is a kind of secret pact between the two sides of the Cold War. It is itself doctrinal Leninism even if the State Department spreads it. Its func
It's strange that people look at the millions dead from starvation from communism, and the quite recent destruction of Venezuela, and still think communism can somehow work this time .
millions died due to exploitative labor practices by colonialist invaders exploiting the resources and cheap labor potential of the people in it yet I don't see you aknowledge that. communism wasn't behind american slavery or the Belgian occupation of the congo. Not a fan of communism but I dont' think unfettered capitalism is much better. both systems benefit a minority of people at the expense of the majority large…
Unfettered capitalism postdates 'colonialist invaders' by two or three centuries. Spain and Portugal didn't notice capitalism ... so they turned into backwaters.
> Enter your email to keep reading for free. > This is not a paywall. Yes it is. I'm supposed to pay with my email and chance to be spammed. No, I won't be doing so.
Thankfully, it works in reader mode, and you don't even have to go to a paywall bypass.
It's strange that people look at the millions dead from starvation from communism, and the quite recent destruction of Venezuela, and still think communism can somehow work this time .
Deliberate starvation is more of a capitalist thing. It's not like China or communist parts of India have a big famine problem, while the US and their partners are causing famines in e.g. West Asia right now. Left wing policies actually work pretty well, this is why the US has spent so much resources undermining movements and states trying to implement them, and this is why the Soviet needed nuclear weapons to surviv…
Famine ceased to be a major world issue after the collapse of the Soviet Union, which abetted infantilism of different types in most of the countries that originated after WW2.
In my childhood there were always children starving everywhere but the causes of this were finally throttled, by and large, in the 90s and 00s, with a bit of regression in the recent past. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?location...
This is one of the most important features of the history of the last half century but goes completely unnoticed.
There are lots of socialist countries in the world that are doing fine.
Pretty much every remotely developed country is capitalist. The wealthiest country with a non-capitalist economy is Cuba or Turkmenistan, depending on where you draw the line.
Also depends on how you define capitalism, and whether you consider Socialism with Chinese Characteristics to be capitalist.
Is this where we pretend a bunch of rich market-capitalist European countries are “socialist” or are you talking about China and Vietnam?
For some people, even the government interventions by those specific rich market-capitalist European countries are "too socialist" and get the exact same "didn't you realise Stalin killed millions?" kinds of responses.
It's just a motte-and-bailey argument. You say you're okay with social democratic policies when you're opposing anything stronger, but oppose social democratic policies when anyone is trying to actually implement them.
Nordic style social democracy works quite well though. Communism sucks, but too much unregulated Capitalism isn't great either, as we can see in USA and many other countries that suffer from extreme inequality.
Nordic style social democracy only works well (I think) if the country has reliable sources of income separate from corporations; Norway has a trillion dollar investment fund from oil and gas revenue that is still being added to. The Netherlands earned billions from a gas field in Groningen which they used to fund the social securities systems (subsidies, benefits, etc). But with the closing of those gas fields (they…
Social democracy is a class-collaboration system where both the owning class and the working class compromise on their own interests (minimizing vs maximizing real wages) for the sake of stability or national interest. Class-collaboration systems -- however desirable they might be --are inherently unstable because the conflict between the owning class and working class is built into the basic structure of the economy. It's also the case that the state, which administers the conditions of this collaboration, is not a neutral party, but a tool of the owning class. Since the 70s, and especially since the 90s, that's resulted in the rollback of social democratic measures put in place after the Great Depression when the bulk of the owning class recognized them as necessary for stability. State oil revenues are a material factor that has slowed that rollback in e.g. the Nordic countries relative to the Anglosphere, but the underlying dialectic isn't any different.
For some people, even the government interventions by those specific rich market-capitalist European countries are "too socialist" and get the exact same "didn't you realise Stalin killed millions?" kinds of responses.
It's just a motte-and-bailey argument. You say you're okay with social democratic policies when you're opposing anything stronger, but oppose social democratic policies when anyone is trying to actually implement them.