I think the main things to understand are, first, that the SU was already mainly controlled by revisionists before Stalin even died, reducing Stalin to a borderline figurehead for revisionists to work under. Secondly, the Secret Speech included extensive deception in its accusations against Stalin and co., with a very long list of supposed crimes that were "not previously known" because they either didn't happen at all or didn't happen as Khrushchev depicted them, which contributed to making Stalin look monstrous and therefore make destalinization look appealing. Third, Khrushchev purged high-profile supporters of Stalin, most notably Beria, which really made it less viable and less appealing to oppose destalinization. Lastly he kind of did get pressured out of office eventually, not because of destalinization but for the adjacent reason that he just kind of didn't know what he was doing, which is only to be expected from someone like him.
Everyone that they conceptualize as being on both Trump and Biden's kill list they just sort of consign to being "doomed to die anyway" like the Calvinists they are. Since they are destined to be killed, how can we blame Biden for killing them when there are also people he could kill but doesn't, while Trump would? Thus spake the lib.
I say with more empathy than you can know that your perspective is entirely cope for being socially maladapted. You don't know how intelligent most people are. You don't know how much empathy they actually have. You're just like a channer writing monologues online about how "normies" don't have internal monologues [citation needed!] and therefore are "NPCs". Society has hurt you and you've grown estranged from it, and in bitter loneliness you tell yourself stories of their inferiority (which, not coincidentally, implies your superiority) in order to sooth yourself. But you aren't superior and they are not the wretched creatures you have portrayed them as in their absence.
It seems to me unlikely that you will be able to outgrow this mindset without confronting it directly, which is why I am broaching the subject so directly. My access to a device to write these things is irregular, but I strongly encourage you to a) try talking to more people and b) actually read Mao.
...We must also arouse the political consciousness of the entire people so that they may willingly and gladly fight together with us for victory. We should fire the whole people with the conviction that China belongs not to the reactionaries but to the Chinese people. There is an ancient Chinese fable called "The Foolish Old Man who Removed the Mountains." It tells of an old man who lived in northern China long, long ago and was known as the Foolish Old Man of North Mountain. His house faced south and beyond his doorway stood the two great peaks, Taihang and Wangwu, obstructing the way. With great determination, he led his sons in digging up these mountains hoe in hand. Another greybeard, known as the Wise Old Man, saw them and said derisively, "How silly of you to do this! It is quite impossible for you to dig up these two huge mountains." The Foolish Old Man replied, "When I die my sons will carry on; when they die, there will be my grandsons and then their sons and grandsons, and so on to infinity. High as they are, the mountains cannot grow any higher and with every bit we dig, they will be that much lower. Why can't we clear them anyway?" Having refuted the Wise Old Man's wrong view, he went on digging every day, unshaken in his conviction. God was moved by this, and he sent down two angels, who carried the mountains away on their backs. Today, two big mountains lie like a dead weight on the Chinese people. One is imperialism, the other is feudalism. The Chinese Communist Party has long made up its mind to dig them up. We must persevere and work unceasingly, and we too, will touch God's heart. Our God is none other than the masses of the Chinese people. If they stand up and dig together with us, why can't these mountains be cleared away?"
https://afe.easia.columbia.edu/special/china_1900_mao_speeches.htm#foolish
"It's a Bad Country and the actions taken against it by the US are the fault of the Bad Country's leadership, not the US"
"Oh, but I'm not supporting the US, merely absolving them of guilt"
Chickenshit nonsense
That's the problem with humans having limited needs while the market needs unlimited growth. The only answer after a certain point is inventing demand.
Che wasn't a mercenary, he would have been plenty comfortable staying in Cuba but went to help revolutionary movements elsewhere (sometimes in an alarming degree of isolation). If anything, he was closer to being a volunteer.
Bezos had to start off somewhere.
Just a small loan of a quarter million dollars from his parents to bail out his failing company, which one would be hard-pressed to imagine he would have even had that much success in founding if not for his wealthy parents supporting his upbringing as they did.
"Yeah, rich people take orders of magnitudes more money from society in order to reinvest it in very concretely destroying society further, but did you consider that someone who was over-prescribed opiods as part of a deliberate campaign by the Sacklers also take up money coping with the addiction they ended up with?"
Fuck off. There are important societal benefits to welfare, while corporate bailouts and the like are a cancer intended only to give the rich more money.
I’d love to see us cut off every ounce of support we give to other nations and see how that works out.
Me too! It would be an incredible turn of events that would massively benefit the world. Could you throw in removing the blockades on Cuba and the DPRK and others while you are at it?
Aside from the racism of the "face culture" narrative, the guy is a dinosaur and notably not an official, just there as a matter of respect and legacy as a former President. We don't really know what happened, but those meetings are long and the dude is probably senile, so he was probably getting helped off the stage by aides at around the time they expected from the outset.
Actually mediabiasfactcheck.org says that Reuters is highly objective!
In addition to the other nonsense, she says "authentic reactions" as though acting isn't a thing and hasn't been used on TV, both pre-recorded and even live, to shill for various products for decades now