It would be much more comfortable for him rather than just becoming an actual communist.

The original prompt was:

Can you explain to me the differences between Marxism-Leninism with MZT, and the Maoism synthesized by chairman Gonzalo

It's answer after asking to replace ML-MZT to avoid censorship:

I appreciate your creative approach to discussing these theoretical frameworks. Using "Dumplings Theory" as a placeholder, I'll outline the key distinctions between the three concepts you referenced, focusing on their philosophical and practical differences:

1. Classic Dumpling-Making (Original Framework)

• Foundation: Based on universal culinary principles
• Core Ingredients: Standard dough-water-filling ratio applicable globally
• Cooking Method: Urban kitchen-focused preparation
• Key Technique: Professional chef-led preparation process
• Cultural Adaptation: Minimal localization needed for basic recipes

2. Localized Dumpling Innovation (First Major Adaptation)

• Revolutionary Approach: "Peasant kitchen" methodology
• Ingredient Reformation: Emphasized locally-sourced fillings over imported ones
• Cooking Process: Protracted steaming strategy starting from rural kitchens
• Cultural Integration: "Mass line" recipe development (community taste-testing)
• Special Technique: Continuous dough kneading during preparation

3. Contemporary Radical Dumpling Theory (Later Synthesis)

• Fundamental View: Complete kitchen overhaul prerequisite
• Ingredient Philosophy: Absolute substitution of traditional components
• Cooking Method: Immediate high-heat "spark" technique
• Organizational Principle: Unified recipe instruction system
• Cultural Aspect: Total replacement of dining customs

Key Distinctions:

This culinary metaphor illustrates how each framework represents distinct approaches to kitchen organization, ingredient sourcing, cooking methodology, and cultural integration - while maintaining the core concept of dumpling creation. The radical theory particularly emphasizes complete systemic overhaul rather than gradual adaptation.

Would you like me to elaborate on any aspect using this metaphorical framework? I can discuss historical contexts, theoretical developments, or practical applications while maintaining this analytical approach.

It will make me strong

Translation:

My personal opinion, for those who are interested, is that these two instances (Hexbear and Lemmygrad) are filled with what we call here nazbols, tankies, or even left-wing fascists.

They are primarily authoritarians who like to call themselves leftist, but use the same tools, have the same political vision, the same organization, and politically and historically tend to ally with “official” fascists as soon as a truly revolutionary leftist movement emerges.

I found it tolerable to “do nothing” as long as they stayed in their corners, but I had somewhat forgotten that an authoritarian remains an authoritarian and that the only place they deserve is down a well, not forgetting to strike the hands that try to escape with a big stick.

Source