Norman Champsky

i'm being facetious, sorry. Of course these are all color revolutions. I'm mocking the western left tendency to fall for it again

i mean the symbol is transposed on top of Trump, Clinton, Ben-Gvir, Netanyahu and images of Gaza. It's clear what the context is and that it isn't about "all jews" but specifically about the genocide that Israel is perpetrating.

but it's not a color revolution

ostensibly require them to proactively moderate.

why? Or what? Like I said, laws are made up. They are ignored or arbitrarily and inconsistently applied all the time. Automated tools are getting more advanced, and they don't care about false positives really so they'll just crank the dial of the strictness of the modbots while looking back at the government for approval.

They already censor whatever the US government requests!

Ok so they're already upholding their end of the bargain. Why would they be upset about the government making their monopolies permanent and official and upholding the governments end of the deal?

You're assuming the courts will entertain lawsuits or press charges against the big 5. Why not just give them de facto immunity like they already do with cops, military, banks, etc. where they don't really bother ever enforcing anything? Laws exist to bind one group of people and protect another group of people. The Big 5 will simply be in the protected category that is not subject to law.

Corporations break laws all the time, constantly. They're enforced maybe 1% of the time against them, and usually when another rich person is negatively impacted in some way. Look the the CFPB, they had hundreds of thousands of open cases of corporations breaking consumer protection laws that were all gutted and shut down by the Trump admin 1st term. Nobody is enforcing that stuff anymore. They laws still exist, they didn't go away.

There is probably an unspoken agreement behind the scenes with the big 5 tech companies and the government that they get to retain their monopolies if they strictly censor whatever the US government requests. They will go along with it because no upstart competition can ever happen, so their positions will be secure. This is corporatism and similar to what the fascists did going into WW2, pure private monopoly domination enforced in a top-down manner. The "free market" as it were, is no longer as much of a concern, just pure private profits and corruption.

You understand that next time you have to fight against the western NGOs and not with them right? And by government incompetence you don't mean failure to liquidate these western spies and collaborators and break their comprador class into pieces like Lukashenko did, I'm guessing? Because if we're doing an autopsy on how to prevent this tragic failure and defeat then that's the lesson that should be taken. Decolonialism is not just a phrase. It requires excising certain elements of society from power, it means breaking colonial structures and organization apart. It means taking an axe to the patronage networks.

China showed how to do this in Hong Kong. You suppress the "revolt" and its leaders and destroy all of their money networks.

I did not meant to moralize but meant we should not to blame all of internal and systematic problem to US alone and recognize how liberal democracy was the reason for government failure

There's that word again. Blame. This is idealist mode of thought. Who is "to blame" doesn't matter and is irrelevant. The US was in control of the revolt and thus it should have been opposed. Simple as. Now that the imperialists have their victory, Nepal has a long road of struggle ahead of it to even get back to where they previously were. More likely they will slide into more reaction, more IMF funding traps, more neoliberalism, more western propaganda, more western take-over of instutitions and more anti-China positions. This is how neocolonialism functions, the capture is slow at first and ideological and deeply rooted in the comprador class of society which holds a lot of cultural sway. You are too close to it to see it, you are refusing to look at the facts.

Your "vibe" does not override the billions of dollars in receipts. I'm sorry. I'm a materialist not a vibist. The one who pays is the one in charge. The revolution was paid for, we have the receipts, and we know who was paid and who paid the money.

The government's main source of incompetence is letting these NGOs and infestations build-up to the extent that it did instead of going full Lukashenko and liquidating their little projects. THAT is what the people should have been in the street pushing for, kicking out the colonizers and destroying/expropriating their organizations. Instead this revolt did the opposite, going out on the streets on behalf of western social media and NGOs to encourage deeper penetration into Nepalese society.

The only problem I have with the whole 'Color revolution' theory is the minimization of the government's incompetence.

This sounds like you want to play a moralizing blame game and not determine the best path forward. The question at the precipice was: Do we hand over our sovereignty to western capitalists by going along with their petty bourgie Liberal NED funded and led revolution? Yes or no? There was only one correct answer, and it has nothing to do with the question of "fault" or "blame" in some specific case or incident. Why should the Nepal government acting incompetent mean that the entire population should surrender their sovereignty to western control? One does not follow from the other. The western capitalists having a functioning mechanism of revolt built up within Nepalese society should have been a warning to back off from the edge and try another approach once the communists have the clear upper hand for any turmoil and upheaval.

The working class communist party was not supporting the revolt. That should have been a clear indication of its nature and of the communist parties understanding of their own level of strength.

Assuming that protest is a color revolution and moving forward is still the best bet rather than being blind sided from it later on.

I'm a bit confused, are you agreeing that it was indeed a color revolution? That seems to contradict your previous position at the start of the thread, where you said that this was an organic revolt and that some minor NED money for a couple years, years ago, doesn't make it a color revolution. Have you re-assessed your understanding within this comment chain due to the evidence presented? Because you haven't otherwise addressed any of my specific evidence or arguments but just brushed over them and didn't engage with them. I truly encourage you to watch that Berletic video and wrestle with what he presents. I don't see how a communist and anti-imperialist can come out of that video with any other conclusion

They knew how to make everything. Slogging through Ukraine's urban terrain is a nightmare because it's a million fortified steel structures with bunkers that are placed in strategic defensive locations

i'm not jealous of the latter