>While Second World communism was suffering from fissures, the Third World was further united by a bit of First World bumbling. After Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal, France and Britain invaded—against Washington’s wishes—to reassert control of the waterway and oust the Egyptian leader. They were joined by the young state of Israel, whose creation had been supported by both Washington and Moscow, but eventually had to back down because of US pressure. Despite Eisenhower’s anger with the new Jewish state, Washington steadily increased support for Israel from the middle of the 1950s for Cold War reasons. It was the nascent alliances between the USSR and radical Arab nationalist regimes, we know now, that formed the basis for a growing US-Israel alliance.6

Is this true? It seems very detached from reality and no sources are given aside from a note that is kinda irrelevant to the question. Since when was the US "angry" about the foundation of Isntreal and since when was the USSR a supporter of it or even neutral to it at all? This feels like bullshit

Breaking news is either some useless nonsense like this, or that China is about to collapse, or that China is doing too good and must chill so that the Western economy survives

Is there any truth to the claim that Yugoslavia slaughtered people from Kosovo or is it just another Uyghur thing?

(Even if relatively true it still doesn't make the bombing of Yugoslavia justified)

I read the tiny Wikipedia article on it but I couldn't draw any conclusions from it and not sure how accurate it is

Shamelessly equating the two, judging from the video one might also say that they say fascism was a little better. It makes sense, fascism doesn't get in the way of what they really stand for which is absolutely not democracy.

Remember to !vote kids, that will keep the Nazis away even if they're already running the European Union.

I'm supposing it was in an effort to challenge the USA and keep them from getting a huge strategic advantage, but I don't know for sure

Communism is when the "free thinking individual" that thinks he lives in a separate universe to the rest gets rewarded immensely while the people who work together get to share the crumbs of mr. Individual between them. _Wait...

!xi-cooking

He is a right leaning lib and heavily anticommunist. Every damn thing capitalists say about communism ends up being a confession, in this case living with many unknown people in an apartment.

>The representative of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Maria Zakharova, responded to the statements of the Prime Minister, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, regarding the Russian attack on Odessa. "He called Russia an enemy of Europe," notes Zakharova in her post on Telegram. "First, we did not terrorize and do not terrorize Greece or anyone else. You won't find a single example. Second, Europe was different. The Third Reich was also Europe. For such a Nazi Europe we will always be an enemy", adds the representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry. And he continues: "Thirdly, in my Soviet/Russian school, in the usual music lesson for each of our students, I went through the works of Mikis Theodorakis. I knew both his music and his fate. He was also an enemy of Europe, of Nazi Europe." M. Zakharova concludes: "Don't betray, Kyriakos, the memory of the Greek Resistance!".

Russia may not be what the USSR ever was and doesn't deserve the credit for it, but this response is probably the best she could have given and shows how the Soviets respected Greek culture more than the Greek government ever will.

He's so brave standing up for Ukraine and Israel, what a hero !billionaire-tears

Ice cream sandwich? I thought you hated capitalism !smuglord

Libs will see these absolute dystopian images and think they're positive without thinking twice about the factors that led to them, but will see Soviet mass housing and say "omg this is so ugly, I'd kill myself if I lived there"

>Widely considered one of the most significant and influential figures of the 20th century, Lenin was the posthumous subject of a pervasive personality cult within the Soviet Union until its dissolution in 1991. He became an ideological figurehead behind Marxism–Leninism and a prominent influence over the international communist movement. A controversial and highly divisive historical figure, Lenin is viewed by his supporters as a champion of socialism, communism, anti-imperialism and the working class, while his critics accuse him of establishing a totalitarian dictatorship that oversaw mass killings and political repression of dissidents.

I was looking for an analysis of Watchmen that isn't filled with "everyone is evil, there's no saving humanity" !brainworms but I couldn't find anything that made much sense.

The obvious remarks are that Veidt is a megalomaniac "self made" bourgeois that has day dreams of being a great emperor/general, idolising the likes of Alexander the Great, Hitler, probably Napoleon even if he wasn't referenced. In his narcissistic view of the world, it's justifiable for him to commit a genocide among other additional crimes in order to achieve a peace that he supposes will be final. He is very similar to a huge CEO, much like Elon, that make the world their play toy and claims that any harm done was for the better good.

Another obvious remark is the critique of superheroes in general, as a concept of superhumans that use their natural superiority to "bring justice" to the world through brute force, when all they end up doing is enforcing the status quo just like the fascists. Their human nature makes them corruptable, strong enough to inflict massive violence on the working class but not that strong against the oppressive power of the bourgeoisie. They have physical power but their view of the world is still that of a human with no consciousness of how the world works, except the Comedian perhaps. Knowing the grim reality of the world, but unable to change it single handedly, he becomes a radical cynic and sees the world as his stage and himself as a puppet. He commits unspeakable crimes with the excuse that he is only playing his part in a dark comedy.

Dr. Manhattan essentially becomes a god, and with the massive power he gains, he also gains the "weakness" of seeing the whole universe in its entirety all at once, losing interest in the miniscule matters of a form of life in a tiny tiny part of it. This could be a way of showing why a god, if any exists, allows so much pain and misery while being powerful enough to stop it. It's because such a being would have no reference at all to the world as we see it, our pain is not more to him than specs of dust floating from one place to another aimlessly.

The working class is largely oblivious to everything going on, observing events unfold around them through the carefully written headlines of newspapers, conditioned to admire people like Veidt as the only remaining hope due to his power and benign facade. Their revolt against masked heroes is an exception that leads to the Keene act being passed, but after that they lose their revolutionary spirit, not seeing that masked heroes were but a large weapon of an already established system that still remains.

Overall I don't know if there's a single moral of the story at the end, it feels like the point of Watchmen is the whole critique done throughout the comic, and that the ending is not meant to lead to some resolution but to provoke thinking instead.

Feel free to add any thoughts

What are the most notable differences between Stalin's and Mao's implementations of socialism?

Many of the differences are likely because of the different state that the two countries existed in before and during the revolution, so I'm more interested on the abstract topics rather than overly specific details.