Well, in the link they mention 5 out 40 in a class, that equals to 12.5% and 2 million out of 22 million in total, that is just over 9%.

(Edit: If anyone is wondering about reading the text that was posted above, I recommend first reading the discussion in this thread, specially the part that happened 3 months later, then make you own conclusion on whether this is worth you time or not.)

Always good to see someone using a field they are knowledgeable about to explain the Dialetical process imbued in everything, as Engels would say: "Nature is the test of Dialectics".

I do have something to nitpick though, I have seen it written before here or on Hex about the development being an thesis, anthesis, synthesis movement, and I have never truly understood it and always thought weird that none of the classical authors have ever used those words to describe Dialectics.

Seeing the resume of how you wrote your text, I think I have finally understood what people mean by those words, and in my understanding it's a mistaken view of Dialectics.

The Dialetical method sees the development of everything that exists by the progress of each things internal contradictions, which when the main aspect of the main contradiction changes from the older to the newer, the thing itself changes from being the previous main aspect to being the new one. Utilizing the same jargon, the "Thesis" itself becomes the "Anthesis" after enough qualitative changes. Which is also why it necessary carries some qualities of the old aspect and it also creates it's own "Anthesis" that will eventually take its place in the future.

I don't really know where this "synthesis" came from, but it feels to me like and idealistic view of the Dialetical method where something is born out of the method itself instead of being the process of already existing things.

I think this wouldn't cause that much difference in your text considering you are studying nature itself when using thermodynamics, but I would this can cause bigger problems when dealing with more abstract things like society or economy.

Well, the Nazis also supported Zionism, so that does make sense.

I am not going to lie, my biggest takeaway from these threads is that most Americans, even leftist ones, are fuckin crazy.

I fell we have lost ourselves in the analysis of the situation and therefore need to take a step back, return to the basics and as MLs remember to use diamat to try and see the big picture.

Since the fall of the USSR in the 90s, the principle contradiction in global economics has been the Us-China one. And for most of this period the Us has been the leading aspect of that contradiction, as it already started as a imperialist potency while China was still in the middle of its poverty alleviation plan, but since the 2008 crisis China has begun a process of reducing its dependence on western economics and preparing itself to take the place of the main aspect in the future.

And in my opinion ever since COVID and the consequences of how each country handled it, China has taken the leading role in that contradiction and consequently it is now what defines the nature of world economics, which is why we are seeing so many changes in geo-politics recently, both from China trying to assert its position with the de-dollarisation of global trade and the increase of allied countries with BRICS, and from the Us reaction with the Ukraine war and now with the government trying to re-invest in its own industry.

Without discussing the important aspect of imperialism and whether or not the Us still has the infrastructure to produce goods at a competitive price with China, the main focus of my comment is to bring attention to the fact that this is all part of a ongoing process with both sides struggling for the leading role in the global economy contradiction. So even tough saying that the Us is collapsing or they are powerless is hopelessly unmaterialistic, we should exalt the fact that China is becoming the principle aspect and that process is only going to keep changing, in both quantitative and qualitative ways, until the Us has no more place in the global economic contradiction.

As someone who has actually never read Nietzsche, but some years ago did a course in college that had him, I have to ask: What is so wrong about Dessalines description of Nietzsche?

My takeaway from the course was that he was sort of a proto-fascist saying that society was divided between the weak and the strong, and if wasn't for certain institutions that "glorify" the weak like the Judeo-Christian religions, the strong would rightfully subjugate the weak.

If that is a wrong view of his work I'm open for other interpretations.

Who would have thought that the people waving US flags in protest against China, and saying that schools should teach "morals", were xenophobics and racists.

Damn, this pasta is bigger than I remembered...

"A decrease in military aid only prolongs this war and costs Ukrainian lives"

Wait, What???

Man, that's so sad...

I've been listening to 2000s electronic lately, mostly Boards of Canada's "Geogaddi" and "Campfire Headphase" and sometimes The Unicorns' "Who Will Cut Our Hair"

Edit: I don't know how I forgot this, but "The Fire This Time" is an audio documentary about the us intervention in the Middle East that fans of IDM should definitely listen to.

I don't think it's correct to call them a fascist band.

They disbanded in 98 and the allegations against Stza are from the 2010s, the fact that a single member became a POS over a decade later doesn't determine what the band is a whole.

Idk, I fell that saying that is like saying that "I Want To Hold Your Hand" is leftist only because John Lennon became one years latter.