Rojava is a decentralized capitalist region with no plans of being socialist/anarchist/etc whose leadership allows the US to use it as a imperialist proxy and military base in the region. Of course the US likes that lmao; the US National Security Council calls it another “israel” in the region.

The Zapatistas are cool comrades who fought off the US and other capitalist forces as all socialist projects have to. Different from most successful socialist revolutions in that it didn’t establish a state (though it was managed centrally by the EZLN), but it has since succumbed to pressure from the government and cartels and has dissolved its municipalities last year — so it’s not quite as successful of a revolution as those that establish a state, some of which have already managed to become nations of millions or global superpowers.

Cuba be SocDem, as was the original intent of the revolutionaries

“Social democracy” back then just meant socialism. The Bolsheviks who established the USSR were also “social democrats”

And your fantasies of the US ever letting a US-backed military dictatorship be overthrown and develop are funny, specially when it’s currently committing a genocide in Palestine and not even letting them get rid of a western colony.

📽📽📽📽📽📽📽📽📽📽📽

As I have expounded on over a dozen times, China is not committing genocide, cultural or otherwise, but I will copypasta some of it nonetheless.

The US’s “Uyghur genocide” disinformation campaign has already been debunked several times over.

• The Xinjiang Genocide Allegations Are Unjustified
• The Uyghur Human Rights Project is a product of the National Endowment for Democracy, which is the American government’s main regime change NGO.
• Uyghur genocide allegations
• US-Funded Uyghur Activists Train as Soldiers of Empire
• A Reddit AMA Claiming To Be A Uyghur Quickly Exposes A CIA Asset Slandering China

.
The blueprint of regime change operations

We see here for example the evolution of public opinion in regards to China. In 2019, the ‘Uyghur genocide’ was broken by the media (Buzzfeed, of all outlets). In this story, we saw the machine I described up until now move in real time. Suddenly, newspapers, TV, websites were all flooded with stories about the ‘genocide’, all day, every day. People whom we’d never heard of before were brought in as experts — Adrian Zenz, to name just one; a man who does not even speak a word of Chinese.

Organizations were suddenly becoming very active and important. The World Uyghur Congress, a very serious-sounding NGO, is actually an NED Front operating out of Germany […]. From their official website, they declare themselves to be the sole legitimate representative of all Uyghurs — presumably not having asked Uyghurs in Xinjiang what they thought about that.

The WUC also has ties to the Grey Wolves, a fascist paramilitary group in Turkey, through the father of their founder, Isa Yusuf Alptekin.

Documents came out from NGOs to further legitimize the media reporting. This is how a report from the very professional-sounding China Human Rights Defenders (CHRD) came to exist. They claimed ‘up to 1.3 million’ Uyghurs were imprisoned in camps. What they didn’t say was how they got this number: they interviewed a total of 10 people from rural Xinjiang and asked them to estimate how many people might have been taken away. They then extrapolated the guesstimates they got and arrived at the 1.3 million figure.

Sanctions were enacted against China — Xinjiang cotton for example had trouble finding buyers after Western companies were pressured into boycotting it. Instead of helping fight against the purported genocide, this act actually made life more difficult for the people of Xinjiang who depend on this trade for their livelihood (as we all do depend on our skills to make a livelihood).

Any attempt China made to defend itself was met with more suspicion. They invited a UN delegation which was blocked by the US. The delegation eventually made it there, but three years later. The Arab League also visited Xinjiang and actually commended China on their policies — aimed at reducing terrorism through education and social integration, not through bombing like we tend to do in the West.

Seriously if that shit happened in the US, the national guard would call in an A-10 gun run on the crowd

Hardly; I’ve never known actual communists who uncritically supported that man. It’s always critical support, at best– which is to say, he may do some things correct, but he’s still an absolute affront to what came before, and honestly a problem Amerika themselves created. Advocating for wanting to kill a man in the midst of denazifying a NATO-backed neighbor, out of self-defense from NATO encirclement though; that’s beyond the pale, as is everything else I’ve found regarding that member’s carriage.

You don’t need to support Putin to be a Marxist, him and Russia are deserving of a lot of criticism, but it’s maybe a little suspicious if someone sees everything happening geopolitically right now and consistently chooses to focus their anger towards Russia.

To be honest when I read Supavillain’s quotes my first reaction was also 'So they don’t like Russia, who cares?", Ukrainian national identify exists, if Russia annexed western Ukraine they wouldn’t be able to erase it. Non-principled populist politicians do always suck. And Russia would’ve loved (I assume this is about) Donetsk PR to have been their puppet.

But then those last two quotes are pretty bad. Killing Putin or even having Putin do a 180 wouldn’t change anything. He’d just be replaced. And the poor countries are no less civilised.

In a word, no. In a few more words, support for Russia (not Putin, as historical materialists don’t subscribe to great man theory) is only a partial, temporary, tactical one, in the context of imperialist liberation. Russia is still a capitalist state, though, so it’s a two part strategy: first liberate colonized bourgeois states from colonizer states, and second revolution within those liberated bourgeois states.

Russia is an interesting case: it has already liberated itself from the post-Soviet “shock therapy” neocolonizers. This occurred during Putin’s administration, which is why he is especially hated by the US. So now the support for Russia is in the context of keeping the colonizers from recolonizing it, and supporting Russia to the extent that it helps other states liberate themselves. But Russia isn’t trying to “liberate” Ukraine, at least not all of Ukraine. It’s trying to resolve the genocidal attacks on the people of the Donbas, and it’s trying to resolve the imperialist military expansion at its border.

• Robert Parry, 2015: The Mess that Nuland Made
• Jeffery Sachs, 2023: The War in Ukraine Was Provoked—and Why That Matters to Achieve Peace

This is a safe space for the colonizers and the colonized

I can just look at your arguments and tell that conversations with you about politics are only allowed in one direction