What you linked in that tweet is just a short excerpt from the full video. If you haven't seen it yet you should definitely go listen to the whole thing: https://rumble.com/v72tb30-prank-with-amanda-sloat-and-eric-green.html

It's actually incredible how much they admit, like for instance that Minsk was a sham designed to let Ukraine build up its military and integrate its own intelligence services with the West's. Or that the "peace deal" for ending this current conflict should be exactly the same kind of fake peace designed to fool the Russians while continuing to do the same as before.

To any regular person these people sound like complete psychopathic ghouls who have zero empathy or remorse about engineering a conflict that cost hundreds of thousands of lives, and they want to continue doing it.

Anyone who even entertained for a single moment the notion that a plan which includes the idea of gifting 100 billion of Russia's stolen reserves to Ukraine came from the Russians should lose all credibility when it comes to commenting on this conflict. Same with the idea of allowing Ukraine to keep an army of over half a million men, or allowing Ukraine to continue to occupy constitutionally Russian territory. It was clear from the start to anyone with a brain that this half-baked "plan" didn't come from the Russians but from the incompetent jokers in the US administration trying to triangulate some nonsensical "middle ground" between fundamentally incompatible positions.

Might as well ask why Argentinians voted the way they did. The answer is the same. Ben Norton did a good job in the latest Deprogram episode explaining the class roots of reactionary politics in South America.

She was literally on TYT and they were praising her and agreeing with her (it was over the topic of Israel's genocide and Zionist money in US politics, so i can't even say they were wrong).

The politically savvy Republicans are going in the Tucker Carlson populist direction. Economic populism is why the MAGA platform was successful to begin with. They see the writing on the wall about how unpopular Trump's turn toward the mainstream Republican establishment has been with their base, and they know that affordability and staying out of foreign wars are winning talking points.

Don't write these people off, they are more cunning and dangerous than American leftist media gives them credit for, and their talking points will appeal to a lot of Americans precisely because they borrow from the left's critique.

Nepal is too tiny for that to work and not a strategic threat to China in the way Ukraine is to Russia. They have the Himalayas between them which makes for a good barrier.

What they can do is impede connectivity infrastructure projects between China and India going through Nepal. It's a nuisance but it's not existential, and the pendulum will eventually swing the other way because China and India just hold too many cards here. Economically Nepal has to be tied to either India or China's sphere, it cannot sustain itself otherwise.

In fact i think that this causes more issues for India than it does for China, because they are closer culturally and economically to Nepal and have more interests and investments there.

This article omits that sort of discussion because it is not relevant. This article is about Georgia mending its relations with Russia, which is objectively a good thing for both countries and a defeat for the US empire.

Ok, so fucking what? China could have no stock market whatsoever and still have a more productive and valuable economy than the US.

Dialectics teaches us that real systems are never static, that they change over time. The western post-war model of industrial capitalism by the late 1970s had already ceased to be viable and entered into crisis. The tendency of the rate of profit to fall over time, which Marx correctly analyzed, had made it impossible to continue to maintain the high wage industrial economies and welfare states established in the wake of WWII as a means of placating the masses and staving off socialist revolution. There were only two ways out of this predicament: socialism or neoliberalism.

Of course capital picked the latter. And now things have deteriorated even further and even the illusory boom provided by the financialization glut of the 80s and the cannibalization of the industrial base which occured in the 90s has long since evaporated, at least since the great recession of '08 which in many ways is still ongoing. It is impossible to turn back the clock on capitalism and return to the pre-neoliberal model short of a global black swan event like a world war which would destroy much of the existing base of production.

It is very likely that the capitalist ruling class understands this otherwise unsolvable dilemma they are facing and the fact that on the current trajectory their situation will only get worse, and this is precisely why they are so frantically trying to accelerate the timeline for war with Russia, China, Iran, etc. whoever really just so long as they can get a sufficiently big and destructive war before it is too late and even this would no longer save them but only bring about their demise faster.

Unfortunately for them i think that we have already passed that inflection point and they just don't see it yet. Russia is probably the country that understood this first, hence why it dared to launch its SMO. Following that the Axis of Resistance in the Middle East seems to have caught on as well. Now it only remains to see what China does.

And "not adding fuel to the fire" is just a nice way of saying "stop sending them weapons you idiots!".

Unfortunately i think there is a cultural barrier here at play in that the Chinese are used to being very polite in their speech and using symbolism and metaphorical language, whereas the West is too blunt and barbaric to understand that kind of subtlety so they misinterpret it as China being timid and on the fence.

This isn't just a problem when it comes to the Ukraine conflict and China's stance toward it, it also affects how the West perceives China's stance toward the Taiwan issue. Because China is oftentimes being too diplomatic in its language the West looks at that as a sign of weakness and thinks it can continue to push even further up to or beyond China's red lines, which is very dangerous.

Here's where i have to criticize China and say that i think they need to do better in understanding the mentality of the West. I get the impression that sometimes they just can't believe that anyone can be this barbaric and uncivilized, but unfortunately we are.

They assume too much that everyone thinks like them, that their interlocutors understand culturally complex symbolic gestures, and that everyone ultimately will be reasonable and respond to politeness in kind. Things may work that way in Asia but that's not how Europeans are.

When you're dealing with the kinds of racist, genocidal lunatics who are in charge in the West the only thing they understand is naked force, both in rhetoric and in action.

Economists say you're wrong for wanting to be able to afford more stuff, don't you know that's bad for the economy? Economists say you're wrong for wanting to live longer, don't you know that's bad for the economy? Economists say you're wrong for not wanting to be a slave, don't you know that's bad for the economy?

Glenn Greenwald says a lot of cringy libertarian shit but this isn't one of those instances. It doesn't make the truth any less true just because who is saying it has dumb, awful opinions on other things.

Fascists aren't gonna put themselves in gulags.