27
submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
1
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

German Journalist Alina Lipp:

"For the first time, the EU bans its own citizens from entering Europe: Thomas Röper and I were sanctioned today by the EU, because of our reports from Donbas. The consequences for us: "Those designated today will be subject to an asset freeze and EU citizens and companies will be forbidden from making funds available to them. In addition, natural persons will also be subject to a travel ban, which will prevent them from entering or transiting through EU territories." The freedom of speech in "free, democratic Europe" is finally dead."

17
submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
12
submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
9
submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

The first in a very fascinating series of videos on Chinese history.

9
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

I thought this was interesting and important to share. CONTENT WARNING: Unfortunately there is some reactionary anti-LGBT rhetoric in this interview. Skip 19:30-20:00 to avoid it.

34
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

A surprisingly good video despite the somewhat clickbait-y title. The most important takeaway: Global south countries are no longer buying the West's propaganda, even about long demonized countries like the DPRK. "Your enemies are not our enemies." A polite way of saying: GTFO, we decide who we do business with, not you.

39
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

You can also find Traoré's interviews with Russia Today and Sputnik here: https://libya360.wordpress.com/2025/05/13/president-ibrahim-traores-interview-with-russia-today-and-sputnik/

It is truly a pleasure listening to this man speak (the second interview is AI dubbed unfortunately, and even in the other two videos i could tell, with my limited knowledge of French, that occasionally the translation is a bit off, but nonetheless you get the jist of it). He is incredibly eloquent and has such a good grasp on geopolitics, and exactly the kind of world view one would hope from an African leader.

I highly recommend listening to at least the third video on the second article, where he is giving a speech to the African university students. It was really inspiring, and the students also seemed to think so, as toward the end some of them were shouting Sankara's famous "La Patrie ou la mort, Nous vaincrons", "Homeland or death, we will win".

If this is representative of the general attitude and outlook of the young African generation then the AES (Alliance des États du Sahel) will prosper.

24
submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
73
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

The red flag fell over the Kremlin in 1991.

The West declared victory. China took notes.

For three decades, the CPC has dissected why the USSR collapsed—not because socialism failed, but because its guardians surrendered.

Here’s what China learned.

1 — Bread, Then Ballots: How Economic Mismanagement Triggered Collapse

China's first lesson: economic reform must consolidate socialism—not dismantle it.

Gorbachev reversed this logic, liberalizing politics before resolving stagnation.

“Gorbachev was pushing political reform ahead of economic reform; China under Deng was promoting economic reform ahead of political reform.” — Victor Gao

Perestroika unleashed market chaos without structure. Supply chains collapsed. Prices exploded.

"The privatization reform led to a serious polarization of the distribution of wealth, a lack of socialist ideals and beliefs, an extremely chaotic sense of ethics and morality, and an all-round regression of the social spirit." — Li Shenming/Chen Zhihua

The acute failure wasn’t socialism itself, but reform without sequence, without control.

2 — Historical Nihilism: How the Communist Party of the Soviet Union Lost the Will to Rule

The CPC’s second lesson: revolutions die when they lose faith in themselves.

“There are multiple factors contributing to the disintegration of the Soviet Union, a very important one being Khrushchev throwing away Stalin’s knife and Gorbachev’s open betrayal of Marxism-Leninism.” - CPC leader Hu Jintao

“Khrushchev’s denunciation ‘shook the foundations’ of Soviet authority.” — Hu Jintao

Gorbachev’s glasnost reforms—intended as renewal—accelerated ideological collapse.

"After the legalization of private newspapers and the privatization of state-run media, the main media in the Soviet Union were soon controlled by private capital and elite forces inside and outside the Soviet Union.

Capital at home and abroad tried its best to vilify and subvert the socialist system and preach the glorification of the eternal rule of capitalism...

With the implementation of the policy of "openness without restrictions," a vigorous trend of historical nihilism that negated the CPSU and the Soviet Union rapidly spread to the historiographical, theoretical, and ideological circles." — Li Shenming/Chen Zhihua

“An important reason [for the Soviet collapse] was that their ideals and convictions wavered.” — Xi Jinping

A party that discredits its own history cannot hold power.

Historical nihilism was suicide by self-critique.

3 — From One Party to No Party: How the CPSU Dismantled Itself

The CPSU didn’t fall to a revolution. It collapsed because no one defended it—not the Party, not the people, not the army.

Gorbachev’s reforms eroded Party control: contested elections, a presidency outside the Party, pluralist elites.

"The so-called Gorbachev-style socialism was just a slogan, he himself did not have a well-formed concept.

At that time Gorbachev also came up with this slogan, ‘More socialism, more democracy’. This is a very stupid way of putting it. Is there socialism or is there not socialism?

The reference to more or less is nonsense.

So when the question was raised as to what is 'more socialism', Gorbachev, the proponent of this formulation, himself spread his arms and didn't know how to answer." — Aleksandr Kapto, Former Head of CPSU Central Committee’s Ideological Department

When the Party’s authority dissolved, the state followed.

Reform without discipline became liquidation.

4 — One Union, Fifteen Flags: How the USSR Imploded from the Periphery

The Soviet Union constitutionally allowed its republics to secede. And when the center weakened, they did.

“Even a symbolic secession clause can become a real dagger when central authority wanes.” — Global Times

Gorbachev’s decentralization enabled nationalist movements to legally dissolve the Union.

“Moscow’s failure to ‘subordinate ethnic identity and stamp out local nationalisms’ was a primary reason the federation dissolved.” — Prof. Ma Rong, Peking University

Beijing responded by rejecting Soviet-style federalism.

China recognizes ethnic diversity—but sovereignty is indivisible. National cohesion is a red line.

5 — Overreach, Not Encirclement: How the USSR Exhausted Itself Geopolitically

The USSR wasn’t simply outgunned—it overextended itself trying to match imperial pressure on imperial terms.

Arms races, Afghanistan, client-state subsidies—it drained itself.

Military spending rose to an estimated 15–17% of Soviet GDP by the 1980s, a colossal allocation that starved civilian sectors.

The CPC sees this as partially self-inflicted. The West pushed, but the USSR walked into the trap.

The Chinese lesson: strength begins with development, not illusions of trust or military footprint.

6 — Dollar Wars: How U.S. Finance Helped Break the Soviet Economy

The CPC also studied how the USSR was broken by oil shocks and credit warfare.

In the 1980s, oil revenues were the USSR’s lifeline. When Saudi overproduction—backed by the U.S.—crashed prices, Soviet income collapsed.

“The Soviet economy was ‘fragile’ by the 1980s, overly dependent on resource exports and burdened by costly obligations.” — CCTV / Global Times

Desperate, Soviet leaders turned to Western credit—but loans came with strings: liberalization, privatization, and chaos.

Core lesson: never let your economy be hostage to foreign currencies, foreign markets, or foreign lenders.

7 — Peaceful Evolution: How the West Won the Information War

The USSR didn’t just lose a battle of arms. It lost a battle of ideas.

Western liberalism entered via glasnost, NGOs, dissidents, and cultural infiltration. The CPSU disarmed itself ideologically—and the West filled the vacuum.

“The CPSU’s removal of the seal of Marxism and Leninism in the ideological field... set free the demon, which destroyed it. The collapse of thoughts brought the collapse of the CPSU.” — CPC Documentary

Western NGOs, spies, and propaganda efforts incubated a pro-Western fifth column within the USSR.

Ideological security is national security. If your enemies teach your youth what to believe, you’ve already lost.

7 — No One Resisted: The Final Lesson of Soviet Collapse

When the end came, no one defended the Soviet Union. 19 million Party members stood down. The military didn’t act. The state evaporated without resistance.

The Party had died long before the flag came down.

“In the end, nobody was a real man, nobody came out to resist.” — Xi Jinping

The CPC sees this as the endgame of ideological surrender, strategic confusion, and liberal reform: not death by external blow—but collapse from within.

"Individuals from Khrushchev to Gorbachev slowly distorted, castrated, falsified, and betrayed the correct theoretical foundation laid by Lenin for the CPSU...

If the foundation is not strong, the earth moves and the mountain shakes. Having lost the theoretical basis of Marxism-Leninism, the Soviet Union’s collapse was inevitable." — CPC documentary

From Beijing's 2006 documentary 'Preparing For Danger In Times Of Safety – Historic Lessons Learned from the Demise of Soviet Communism':

"From the 1991 Soviet disintegration to the end of the 20th century, Russia’s gross domestic product (GDP) declined by 52% compared with the GDP level in 1990, while it declined only 22% during the war years from 1941 to 1945.

Over the same period (1991 to the end of the 20th century), Russian industrial production decreased by 64.5%, and agricultural production by 60.4%.

As the ruble devaluated, prices rose 5000 times.

Since 1992, the Russian population has been declining. In 1990 average life expectancy in Russia was 69.2 years, but it fell to 65.3 years in 2001, almost 4 year’s decline. The male life expectancy in some parts dropped a full 10 years.

The disintegration of the CPSU and the Soviet Union has brought disastrous consequences to the people and the country, far beyond these figures and situations."

75
submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

This is the Yaxi Expressway in southwest China's Sichuan province. It features some of the highest and longest bridges in the world.

Here's a little article about it: https://themindcircle.com/yaxi-expressway-traversing-the-clouds/

Side note: am i the only one who finds this crazy scary to look at? I'm sure it's awesome driving on it, but looking at it from afar it looks wild.

53
submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
[-] [email protected] 69 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

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.

[-] [email protected] 74 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

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.

[-] [email protected] 61 points 1 year ago

postmarxist-hegelian thought

Jesse, what the fuck are you talking about?

[-] [email protected] 68 points 1 year ago

Doesn't really matter what you're comfortable with. The fact is that the Al Qassam brigades are the main force of resistance against the genocide in Gaza.

[-] [email protected] 67 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I've said it before and i'll say it again, westerners just don't do well with the existence of contradictions. We tend to have a hard time understanding that things can be both good and bad at the same time. For many of us, even for well-meaning leftists, it has to be either one or the other. If something has even one bad aspect to it then it cannot possibly be good, or conversely if something is good it cannot possibly have bad sides to it. There is a kind of infantile, Marvel comic book way of thinking that has infected far too much of western society.

Perhaps it is because of the dualistic, (good vs evil) nature of western religions as opposed to eastern philosophies which more often consider two opposing aspects to be able to coexist in the same thing (Yin-Yang)...anyway, i don't want to get distracted with metaphysics here. Point is we need to learn that it is possible to admire the many good aspects of a society like the DPRK while rejecting the problematic ones. The same goes for having critical support of other, even more problematic countries but which nonetheless fulfil an important anti-imperialist function and which do not deserve to be the target of western orchestrated hybrid warfare, coercive economic measures or color revolutions. Purity fetishes will get us nowhere.

We have to accept that not all contradictions of a society can or will be resolved immediately, especially when that society is facing existential external threats and is still struggling materially. Yes there are also exceptions such as Cuba which has admirably managed to institute some of the most progressive social legislation in the world even while suffering under a brutal blockade, but in general we should expect that most societies need first to resolve their primary contradictions before being able to resolve their secondary ones.

[-] [email protected] 75 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

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.

[-] [email protected] 69 points 1 year ago

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."

[-] [email protected] 62 points 2 years ago

The good thing about anti-natalists is that they can't pass their anti-natalist ideology on to their children.

[-] [email protected] 67 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Illegal settlers contribute in equal part to the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians as their armed forces do. The military oppresses and kills the indigenous people and the settlers come in to replace them, to steal their homes and their land. The armed occupation forces cannot be disentangled from the settler population, they are two sides of the same coin.

Armed resistance to apartheid, oppression, occupation and genocide is a fundamental and inalienable human right. The oppressed are not obligated to obey your rules of conduct or your morality in their fight against their oppressor. Palestinian civilians are killed and kidnapped every day by the occupier, where is the international outrage and condemnation for that which has been happening for decades to the Palestinians?

And how can they call the same settlers who just days prior were busy storming the holiest places of the Palestinians innocent bystanders? When settlers themselves often pick up arms against Palestinians when they want to evict them from their homes, and form up in lynch mobs to go and terrorize Palestinian neighborhoods and smash their shops.

And with compulsory military service to the "IDF" is it not these very same "civilians" who have been - and with call-ups of reservists will in the future again be - soldiers for the occupation army?

[-] [email protected] 66 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Hahaha, this is such whiny loser behavior. They chose to kill their own industries with the sanctions they effectively imposed on themselves, then they cry foul cause China is winning since it didn't do dumb shit like cut itself off from its main supplier of cheap energy or from a whole market of 140 mil people. Suddenly competition isn't so great when you're losing huh?

Also, what is stopping Europe from subsidizing its own industries more like China does? Oh yeah, the dumbass neoliberal rules that they imposed on themselves. So now because they are being fucked over by their own self-imposed limitations in what the state is allowed to do they expect other countries to shackle themselves in the same way? Lol.

And who are they going to go crying "no fair" to? The WTO? Good luck getting a sovereign state like China to let some loser Westoids dictate its domestic policies.

I can tell you right now what the Europeans are going to do which is what they always do: double down on their idiocy and resort to the only "solution" they know which is more sanctions. They're gonna try to ban Chinese EVs which won't really work because the demand will still be there so there will be a hundred loopholes and workarounds.

Instead it will hugely backfire as these things usually do, possibly ending with Europe losing the Chinese market for their own EV exports.

[-] [email protected] 64 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Lol, the cope is really getting out of hand. First it was "China can't domestically produce high end chips", now the talking point is "ok maybe they can but only cause they violated sanctions". Do they realize this is an admission that a) their sanctions aren't working, and b) that they have nothing to do with any "national security" but simply with a futile attempt to hamper a competitor nation's technological development because their own industries can't handle competing on an even playing ground.

Not that we as communists give a single shit about "free market competition", there is nothing wrong with a weaker nation using protectionist measures (although we must be clear about the fact that sanctions are not protectionism, they are the polar opposite, they are aggressive economic hybrid warfare) to prevent a stronger one overrunning their economy, but it shows the hypocrisy of their own neoliberal "free trade" mantra.

view more: ‹ prev next ›

cfgaussian

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 3 years ago