Ok, it’s interesting to know. Thank you, comrade.

Sorry, I think my question got lost in translation.

First of all, I’m sorry for the extra anxiety with the elections. It must be really painful seeing half the US voting for a guy openly advocating for genocide, and the other half voting for a woman openly funding the genocide.

My question was about the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine saying that the citizens of the US shouldn’t vote for Harris or Trump. What do you think of this?

Hey, seeing the election results, I think it’s safe to say that Trump won. Can I ask on your opinion of the PFLP calling for boycott to both Dems and Cons?

Now that they’ve lost, since all libs claimed that supporting genocide was just for the elections, kamala will start to campaign hard against genocide, won’t she? Won’t she?!

So after the supreme court dictaminated that the president has absolute immunity during official function, they could have done literally anything to prevent this brand of fascism from going into the institutions. Turns out they would rather lose the elections.

Hahahahahahahahhahagaga

Volcel police, take me captive!!

sup my fellaaaaa

Wellcum to the club. We got beanis, we got book recommendations, we got seriously funny people, we got revolutionary drive… Fuck what a nice place this is.

Living under a cock*

Since when is Rami Malek so buff?

At risk of mansplaining, I’ll leave two explanations in this comment. A graphical one, and a numerical one.

1. Graphical. Let’s imagine two circles A and B, which overlap over some area. The set of points covered in the overlapping area between circle A and circle B are the intersection of A and B.

2. Numerical. Let there be two sets A and B. A contains the numbers [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9], and B contains the numbers [2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14]. The intersection of A and B is the set of numbers contained in both A and B, i.e., [2, 4, 6, 8]

From the article:

PredictIt, a prediction market platform where users can buy and sell shares on the outcomes of future events

Are we now using euphemisms for the word “betting”? Like, that’s literally a definition of a bet, isn’t it?

Imagine being a Zionist and being told you’re superior to Arabs, and being given orders to capture this absolute unit of a chad. I hope he’s well <3

My experience as a native Spanish speaker with Castilian accent listening to Puertorican accent mainly comes from Jovani Vazquez (I know, I’m sorry), and she sounds not much like him at all. Her pronunciation of the “s” is inconsistent, as if she were forcing herself to pronounce it where a Puertorican would skip it or exhale it but forgot to do it 50% of the times.

Write-in / Escribir-en

Did they just try to make a phrasal verb in Spanish? Rofl

Oh but I’ll enjoy so much watching either the chuds or the libs going full foam mouthed over losing

“You just don’t understand the complexity of the american democratic system”. Yeah, well, maybe that’s the fucking fault of the contorted and convoluted system that does every trick it can to prevent democracy

I think it’s the mathematical symbol for applying the intersection of two sets

This is the point I make when I discuss this with libs. Either the policy of the government can be democratically brought to putting an end to genocide, or death to America.

Because in the western world it’s such a controversial topic, I’ve found that half the books that you’ll find discussing (from a socialist perspective) the Soviet Union even in a tangential manner, will show an opinion on this.

The book “Human rights in the Soviet Union” by Albert Szymanski does a good job of a material analysis explaining the reasons why states use oppression in Chapter 1, and Chapter 7 is dedicated to “Toleration and Repression in the USSR: 1917-54”. The numbers are a bit outdated because it’s written before the official numbers came out after Perestroika, but the analysis holds up IMO.

Michael Parenti in “Blackshirts and Reds” does a good job of an analysis in my opinion, showing that the overwhelming majority of Gulag inmates were in fact just petty criminals and not opposition as is most often implied, and puts a perspective on the social situation at the time. I’m guessing this is more the perspective of anarchist socialists, since the book heavily leans towards decentralisation without getting into the historical and material reasons why AES states don’t go further lengths in such efforts.

For a perspective on the economic situation of the USSR over all its history, I highly recommend “Farm to Factory: a reinterpretation of the Soviet industrial revolution” by Robert C. Allen. It’s a sometimes dry book that goes into high detail on the economy of the late Russian Empire, how it was affected by WW1, the revolution and the Russian Civil War, the details of the Dekulakization and the first 5-year-plans, WW2, and the economic trend until the 70s (economic miracle) and after the 70s (“stagnation” period). A good material analysis on the reasons for oppression can’t be done without an understanding of the economy of the country, the distribution and class of labour and the productive forces, etc. The importance and difficulties of a quick industrialisation for the survival of the USSR, which suffered the biggest land invasion of its history barely 10 years after coming out of a jumble made by World War 1, Russian Civil War and Dekulakization, cannot be overstated in my opinion. Also, the economic analysis shows that forced labor from Gulags wasn’t a significant source of labor for the country and industrialisation could have been carried out with or without it.

Albert Szymanski’s book “Is the red flag flying”, there’s a brief section (10 pages long-ish) on Stalin in Chapter 10, which starts with a sentence I think every Marxist-Leninist should tattoo on their arm: “It is peculiar that many Marxists who maintain a consistently material position when analysing the development of capitalist or pre-capitalist societies […] resort to explaining developments in the Soviet Union from the 1920s to the 1950s largely in terms of individual personalities - ‘Great Men’, personal motivations, power hunger, and so on. This is true of both apologists for Stalin and their arch opponents the Trotskyists”. You don’t have to like or agree with Szymanski’s view on Stalin and the purges, but he’s 100% right that a material analysis should be done, and history shouldn’t be explained in “big man” theories, which many resort to when talking about Stalin era.

Lastly, the Russian journalist Дудь (has a channel on YouTube called вДудь) made a 2h documentary from a non-socialist perspective talking with family members of victims and stuff like that, describing some of the harshest Gulags mainly in the Siberian region of Kolyma in the far north. It’s a bit of a lib piece (in the Russian sense of liberal), but I’m not against the idea and it’s much better than the slop you’ll find in the western world libs. It’s both subtitled and dubbed to English, BTW, if you want to find the video just look up “vdud Kolyma” (or вДудь Колыма) on YouTube or google, it’s called “Колыма - родина нашего страха / вДудь”.

Hope any of this helps