drive-by posts of mainly memes and Tweets ... by @Yuritopiaposadism@hexbear.net ... (and they don't seem to engage with the comments on many of these very active posts they make despite also being a prolific commenter on this site)

I think Yuritopia just cross-posts things Yuritopia finds interesting from off the site and doesn't want to bother arguing in the comments when some of those things end up being a bit controversial. I don't think it's meant to be bait or anything like that.

Yuritopia has 1k comments and 17k posts, so I wouldn't say Yuritopia is a prolific commenter necessarily.

See my other comments in the thread, I agree with you on this, it would be nice if China was more like the USSR. However, I think "China help us" as a tweet is just "China will save us" type of stuff and "the revolution has to come from within" is not only a reasonable reply to that, it's 100% correct.

I agree with you, actually. I totally see where she's coming from. But the line of thinking is bad not just from a moral standpoint but also a practical one. This wouldn't work. It would literally just make the people involved priority targets for bigots while being completely ineffective in anything more than the extremely short term, if even that.

If someone is in a hostile environment that rejects them is it even possible to be a communist? Like materially. idk

Yeah, these are really hard questions. I don't really have any easy answers, I wish I did. But I do think that the ideas in this post are not an answer at all, especially from a practical standpoint.

Another victory for Civility.

I agree, but I think "Help us China" without more context is just "China will save us". IMO "we can't save you, you have to take these steps yourselves" is a reasonable response. If "Help us China" was instead a detailed comment pointing out things that communists in other countries are asking China for that they could easily give and that would really advance their revolutions, I might feel differently.

What's relevant about the commenter being in the global north is that the global north has no real ongoing revolutionary movement that is even at a stage where it could seriously benefit from Chinese assistance. One day the PSL might need Chinese small arms and ammunition, but not today. Today, that would just lead to the PSL getting instantly shut down.

I also think that the example of disabled people is particularly relevant, because elsewhere in this thread OP compares this idea to saving Jews during the Holocaust by any means necessary. We have been and continue to be killing millions of disabled people around the world by allowing preventable disease to spread. This is explicitly being justified by the ruling classes by openly saying their lives have less value and are acceptable sacrifices (it doesn't just kill disabled people, but disabled people are the ones targeted by this kind of genocidal rhetoric to justify it). This is why this kind of approach doesn't work, this is the point of intersectionality.

Even if they all were able bodied [cis] white men (a category that also includes a lot of disabled people, of course), they would be poor (renting from a slumlord). I don't think it's productive to (I'm not saying you're doing this, you're not, I'm just talking generally) look for people that it's OK to exploit financially, anyone who would end up getting exploited would by definition be underprivileged. This whole line of thinking seems like it's the opposite of revolutionary. It's understandable, but it's reactionary and it will never lead to liberation for anyone.

It's not prosperity gospel to tell westerners that the revolution isn't going to come from abroad to save them. The American revolution will have to come from America.

I'm saying this assuming the anglophone twitter user is from the global north, it's possible that's not the case. Still, the revolution will have to come from the place it's happening, not be imposed by another country.

I think he means "fewer black and brown Jews".

Edit:

“In a successful country, many will apply,” Barak says. “We can control the quality much more effectively. Unlike the founding fathers of Israel, who had to accept people from North Africa, from the Arab [world]… now we can be selective.”

They're succdems.

CIA-ass NGO.