I'm the only cook in our household. And i'm ok with that, so long as i don't get asked to bake. We can just buy baked goods if we want them. We have a very affordable bakery just around the corner (perks of living in a country obsessed with bread).
Otherwise, white people are going to keep being caught by surprise when the violence of the state suddenly includes white people sometimes
The question is, how often is that "sometimes"? Is it still infrequent enough that white people are willing to accept the tradeoff? Is losing the occasional in-group member an acceptable price to pay for keeping the group privilege? Some violence always bleeds into the in-group from the margins but so long as the group as a whole still benefits sufficiently, will they not still begrudgingly accept it?
"Yes some of you may get caught in the crossfire now and then, but overall most of you will still be better off. That is the bargain we offer."
So far it has worked. But now that the benefits are beginning to dry up, for how much longer will that social contract be accepted? And this applies more broadly to the imperial core population as a whole.
The entire European deployment:

Germany 13, Norway 2, UK 1
With this they have reached the limit of their capabilities and exhausted their 2026 budget.
Germany consistently on the wrong side of history. Germany consistently on the side of genocide:

Seriously, is Traoré trying to become the reincarnation of Thomas Sankara? Cause damn that's some based shit.
I mean...Sankara was murdered in '87...Traoré was born in '88...just saying...the timeline fits.
No but all jokes aside, he's been awesome so far.
Europe doesn't need to be a "major global player militarily", no one wants to attack Europe. And the last thing the world needs is German re-armament, we saw how that ended the last time. Russia doesn't need to be "deterred", Europe just needs to learn to get along with them like normal neighbors and stop attacking and demonizing Russia while being a bunch of stuck up racists and American bootlickers. It doesn't matter how much money you have if you don't have sovereignty. So long as Europe continues to allow itself to be a collection of US vassal states things will only get worse.
Because he was unshakeably principled as a communist and anti-imperialist, and during his leadership the USSR posed the biggest threat to the global system of capitalism that the world has ever seen. He could not be reclaimed for the purposes of anti-communist propaganda like Trotsky nor relegated to the status of a mere theorist like Marx or an idealist revolutionary like Lenin is sometimes (erroneously) portrayed. Stalin achieved too much in practice for the building of socialism, while the victory of the USSR in WW2 under his leadership gave socialism an immense prestige boost around the world.
In short, he scared the bejeezus out of the bourgeoisie for what he represented and what he could have inspired in people across the world had he not been smeared with the lies of Khrushchev and the anti-communist propaganda of the West (frequently borrowed directly from Nazi anti-Soviet propaganda), so they vowed to forever destroy his image and make sure no one like him would ever arise again.
Sadly, this ploy worked. Thanks to Khrushchev's speech of lies you even had other principled communists (at one point even Che Guevara believed some of the accusations leveled at Stalin) around the world start to doubt what they thought they knew about Stalin and the USSR which caused a worldwide crisis of confidence among communists and a massive split between those parties who accepted the Khrushchevite lies and those who didn't.
Meanwhile in capitalist societies anti-communist indoctrination raised entire generations to internalize the belief that Stalin was equivalent to Hitler and the USSR another Nazi Germany, which destroyed their communist parties as effective political forces and made sure that most remaining communists and socialists would have an almost instinctual aversion to the Marxist-Leninist line and practical revolutionary politics.
This led to Western communists retreating into the realm of purely academic Marxism as an economic and not a revolutionary theory, or into all sorts of schools of pseudo-Marxist radical liberalism (like the "Frankfurt School"), anarchism, ultra-left deviations, or just straight up defect to social democracy.
But i will end this on an optimistic note and remind everyone of what Stalin himself said:
"I know that after my death a pile of rubbish will be heaped on my grave, but the wind of History will sooner or later sweep it away without mercy."
Of course. What is the point of building infrastructure if politicians and their corporate buddies can't pocket a few billion in public tax money? Can you even imagine such madness as building a bridge at cost and on schedule? Can you even imagine your country not being ten years late and three times over budget when they build, say, an airport for their capital? I can't.
A little reminder of who this fascist CIA asset was: he regularly participated in neo-nazi marches, advocated to strip non-ethnic Russians of their Russian citizenship, and called muslim Chechens "cockroaches".
Also, Hasan's reaction
Ugh...sorry but i tried listening to ten minutes of that and i immediately remembered why i stopped watching him. He is such a lib and his audience is even worse. It's like they have the attention span of a five year old and are physically allergic to learning history. No, Hasan, Putin is not spending 30 min giving you a history lecture because that history (at least the pre-21st century history) somehow directly justifies the actions he is taking, that is not the argument at all. He is doing it to give you context and educate you because you and most of your audience are historically illiterate ignorants with zero knowledge about the background of a region of the world where you now think you are qualified to comment on.
From Twitter, this post sums it up best:
"Westoids complaining about Putin's interview being too pedantic have an inflated sense of self-worth: they assume the interview is primarily designed to appeal to them. Little do they know the West has become so irrelevant that it's no longer even necessarily the chief intended audience for Putin's transmissions. For instance, many of Putin's statements go viral in China, generating hundreds of millions or even billions of views/impressions on sites like Weibo, vastly larger engagements than the entire population of most of the West combined. In the east, where the citizenry is learned, historically-literate, etc., Putin's longueurs are actually appreciated, dissected, and discussed. This is particularly the case in China, where the majority of people are not only history buffs, but have a sacred respect for history and tradition.
In the West, Putin's words may fall on deaf ears and be drowned out by illiterate popculture noise, but the West is no longer relevant to the world. In other places, Putin's words will reverberate, consummating their intended effects."
Literal SS divisions and Bandera's band of sadistic mass murderers were not right wing extremists according to the German government, nor are the Azov thugs with swastika tattoos, and anyone who dares to challenge this official narrative is a left wing extremist, Putinist, and an enemy of freedom and democracy. This is not an exaggeration, you can look this up: all the actual (non-socdem) left wing parties in Germany are on government watch lists and are considered a threat against the constitutional order. But they dare to claim that the DDR was a totalitarian police state. The BRD is just a continuation of Nazi Germany.

You forgot make a mess, with flour and dough everywhere that you have to clean up later 😂