And now with the Ukraine proxy war the US has destroyed Europe a second time. They blew up our energy infrastructure and we helped them cover it up. And now we compete with each other to show who is the most loyal dog. Absolutely pathetic, deplorable, despicable. We deserve everything that’s coming to us.

Yes, an “independent Europe” should and would do that. Sadly, this “independent Europe” that China speaks of is about as real as the Tooth Fairy…

To understand the weight of Indonesian Defense Minister Prabowo Subianto’s praise for China’s “constant opposition to oppression, imperialism, colonialism, and apartheid”, delivered during Chinese Premier Li Qiang’s visit, it’s important to recall Indonesia’s Cold War history.

The nation began the era as a leader of the Non-Aligned Movement under President Sukarno, who famously hosted the 1955 Bandung Conference advocating a “third way” between U.S. and Soviet blocs. But in 1965-66, General Suharto, Prabowo’s former father-in-law and mentor, seized power in a U.S.-backed coup. Armed with CIA-provided kill lists and Western support, Suharto orchestrated the massacre of 500,000 to over one million suspected communists, leftists, and ethnic Chinese. He then ruled for three decades as Washington’s closest Southeast Asian ally.

This makes Prabowo’s rhetoric striking on two fronts. First, his emphasis on China’s anti-imperialist consistency “even when China was still developing” (i.e., during the Cold War) carries deep irony: Prabowo himself rose through the ranks of a U.S.-trained military apparatus that violently enforced American interests in the region. Second, his explicit framing of China’s pro-Palestine stance as a source of pride “for us all” — delivered by the leader of the world’s largest Muslim-majority nation — underscores the West’s failed attempt to isolate Beijing over Xinjiang.

Where the West is increasingly perceived as an imperialist relic, China has positioned itself as the Global South’s moral standard-bearer. It’s increasingly seen as a “defender of the oppressed” bridging divides between Muslim-majority states and developing nations. Prabowo’s words aren’t just diplomatic theater; they’re a symptom of a geopolitical realignment

Important context. Thank you for adding this.

We can dream…

Reality:

Best case: Belarus

Worst case: Israhell

Who liberated the concentration camps?

Humility is key to learning. Admitting that you can be wrong and don’t know everything. Unfortunately in capitalist society the opposite behavior is encouraged and rewarded.

A fascinating read and a fresh perspective i haven’t heard before, which is rare. I’m not sure i buy the whole theory being laid out here though. I think in some ways it falls into certain idealist traps in the same way that western liberal “end of history” theories do.

I can’t quite put my finger on it yet, i will have to read this over a couple of times and give it some thought before i can really put my thoughts in order and formulate a proper critique, but right off the bat I will say it feels unusually cynical for a Chinese perspective…triumphalist but in an off-putting way that is lacking in materialist grounding. It’s definitely a departure from the usual win-win concepts that we typically hear and into a much more jaded Realpolitik view.

I also worry that the capability for China to use AI in shaping global perceptions, and in fact the capabilities of AI in general are being overestimated here. I may be wrong on this, maybe AI really is the absolutely world-changing tool that its most ardent proponents think it is, but i am not yet fully convinced. AI has its uses and will or already is revolutionizing certain fields but it’s not all-powerful.

I guess what i’m struggling to see here is a grounded dialectical analysis. In particular i think that the idea of being able to arrest certain processes of development and global shifts in industrial power is an illusion. Change is unavoidable. Every system and every society experiences ups and downs. Falling into the trap of believing that you can keep the same position and the same system forever is a big part of why the West is handling its decline so badly.

I’m also not convinced that the three “ideologies” that are being compared here: liberalism, “right-wing accelerationism” (aka fascism) and “center-left accelerationism” (SWCC), are the only choices. In particular “center-left accelerationism”, really is more of a strategy than an ideology. It is not, as it is presented in this article, an end in itself, but a means to an end, that end being still further left: the advanced stage of socialism.

Instead this person appears to believe or want the current intermediate and transitionary stage to be eternal.

These are just my initial thoughts, i’ll see if i can get a more coherent idea of what it is about this that doesn’t quite click with me after i read it again.

Definitely. I have liked the attitude i have seen so far from this person a lot. I think the most important thing is being curious and open to learning. Ignorance is only a sin if it’s willful. Unfortunately, as you pointed out, some other people choose go to great efforts to remain ignorant.

Poland was never part of the Soviet Union. Unless they lived in the USSR and later moved to Poland, they did not “grow up under Soviet rule”.

Listen to the video and form your own opinion.

And yes, communist publication Junge Welt has published articles by this speaker on this very same topic: https://www.jungewelt.de/artikel/487851.propaganda-und-sprache-einsatz-operation-oder-krieg.html

If you prefer reading over listening to a video this article discusses very similar ideas as the video. I personally find i absorb information better and faster when reading and i can go back and work through a text to analyze it in more depth. But everyone has different preferences.

What is the point of attacking the format? Listen to the video and engage in a substantive discussion or stop wasting everyone’s time.

Also, there have been plenty of articles and papers and books written about this stuff. Have you read any of them?

Maybe this is a way to reach a broader audience than discussing these things in niche academic papers that no one reads.

Have you actually listened to the video? Is there anything untrue that was said? Do you have anything substantial to criticize? Could you please engage with the content?

This video is not clickbait and has nothing to do with with the AfD. It is a serious critical discussion of the role of media in fabrication of war propaganda on behalf of western governments. It accurately decribes and analyzes how war propaganda is conveyed through deliberate choices of language, exclusion and marginalization of contrary voices, and how this propaganda has and continues to be produced by the mainstream media to support the government’s official narrative and agenda. The video talks about how the media covered various wars such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yugoslavia, etc.

They are also very racist.

Lol. If we didn’t do that then we would get accused of not including our sources. But i get your point, sometimes we can tend to be overly thorough.

I view this as being a bit like mathematics. The things we say make sense to someone who is already versed in the subject but for someone who doesn’t already understand or agree with certain concepts or ideas we don’t necessarily want to rehash arguments that were already laid out in works a hundred years prior so we just refer back to those in the same way that when you do modern mathematics you don’t need to repeat proofs that were already done in the 19th century. You can just take those theorems as given and if you are really interested in how they were derived you can still go back to the original literature and read up on it.

Of course you can still engage with and understand the more advanced arguments even without going all the way back to the basics but then you need to accept certain things as axiomatic, because it would take too much time to go back and explain them every time.

Let’s say for instance that we are talking about imperialism. To clarify what exactly we mean when we talk about imperialism we may briefly give the Leninist definition of imperialism. You can either accept that this is the definition or you can ask why. Why is it defined that way and why does it make sense? Well for that you would have to go and read Lenin’s work on Imperialism. Which in turn references but does not necessarily thoroughly explain certain concepts about the nature of capitalism that were worked out earlier by Marx.

You see, you can either choose to go down this rabbit hole and invest the time it takes to really go to the basics and build up from there, or you can take it as given that this has already been worked out and you can try and understand how we apply it to the modern day, which saves time and is more practical. Neither is wrong, it just depends on your personal interest.

This is also a good argument in favor of China’s non-interventionist policy.

I remember reading this article last year and i was very impressed then at how well it described and explained the “delusion feedback” mechanism that is causing the imperialist elites to act with such stupidity. The topic of the Georgia protests may not be as relevant as it was last year but the overall analysis still stands.

Putin will only be president for a few more years. Same with Xi Jinping. Both are pretty old now and will eventually retire. Western imperialism is collapsing but it’s not collapsing overnight, this is a long process, and there are also internal processes in Russia that are happening and which will accelerate if and when the stability of the Putin years ends. The broader economic and geopolitical re-alignment of Russia is bigger than just this government, it is increasingly becoming embedded in the Russian society and economy, and this will also continue as it is a process with its own inertia that once it has picked up speed is very hard to stop or reverse.

These factions actively appealed their members to side with Maria Corina Machado, the pro zionist right winger, and called for sabotage the past year.

This is an important point to note, as i’ve seen too many communists criticising the Maduro government on this without looking at who these supposed communists are and what positions they take in Venezuela. Just because a group calls themselves communists does not automatically make them a comrade, as we see in the example of so many Eurocommunist parties in Europe, or the CPI(M) which you highlighted in this post.

Indeed, it has, but i’m saying that the basis of proper ideological education was already there. A less well prepared population might have reacted differently, might have been more confused or demoralized, but it seems that the Chinese people are really rallying together to resist this, and not just the government/party.

I’m seeing a lot of private initiatives from regular citizens who take it upon themselves to do their part in fighting off the economic attack against their country. And most impressive of all is how sophisticated they are, how well they understand what is really happening on a geopolitical level. This speaks to a very high level of historical and materialist education.

This is a stark contrast to the widespread capitulation we saw in Eastern Europe in the 80s by ideologically unprepared and demoralized populations that lacked the same patriotic fervor to resist when their countries came under hybrid attack, or even simply the political education to really understand what was going on.

And yes, i know it’s not exactly one-to-one comparable because this is a more clear external attack whereas then there was a lot of internal betrayal, but even this shows how well China has prepared, how it has largely marginalized its own fifth column so that the country could be united in a time of conflict. Once again they’re proving all those wrong who said that the CPC has taken the capitalist road.