Illegal and totally unprovoked, invasion of sovereign democratic state of Yemen. Oh wait these are not white europeans. Necessary intervention to prevent spread of antisemitic terrorist rogue state. /s

Yep the war propaganda is far stronger in EU. Nonstop since beginning of the invasion.

Where did you find any Russians in the report?

I second this, only small part actually committed acts of terrorism and have disrwgard for civilians, I believe the al qassam brigades. By trying to argue that all Hamas members are terrorists he just shows his poor understanding.

Hey this reminds me of some history. Did you know that before considering the final solution the initial idea was to deport jewish people to Madagascar. This was all “legal” we are in Germany of course. The Nuremberg laws stripped jews and others of their citizenship, simmilar again. German authorities at the time could not deal with the total number of peoples in need of transportation. So they considered other at the time “legal” options. Oh well.

Aah yes, you were right. I mistakenly thought that you tried to compare the economies by using the arms manufacturing. But you only said the statement about economy size is wrong, which indeed because of ppp it is. I also agree that he uses this for propagandist purposes. Investing heavily into arms production and having more oppressed workforce doesnt sound as good I guess.

But he only talks in real values, why is ppp relevant? Note I dont necessarily share his point, I’m just not sure what you mean.

The book is freely available 😄

Parliamentarism is a joke of a democracy. It does not represent the people or their needs.

I think that your point confuses islamic state with a muslim majority state. While almost all muslim majority states allow women to vote(even though some only quite recently like saudis), islamic state would be different. This is of course same for any fundamentalist state like a jewish one or christian one. They are incompatible with democracy.

Yeah the US clearly has an open southern border. How could you not see that? /s

Alright so if I understand this well: Haiti under the French colonial rule did not have slavery during the times when the imported slave population exceeded some limit when compared to the French population there.

I will continue with a hypothetical: if for example more French came on a trip there and the not slaves would become a minority, there would all of a sudden be slavery there. And of course when they would depart from their holidays, Haiti would again gracefully abandon that heinous practice.

US did not ever have slavery! Because noone was slave there except black people if they were not free.

Some hard hitting facts right there. I betcha you didnt know this.

I dont think that he is particularly upset.

No see if one was to compare his advice take the one to the us planners that they should provide for example loans to the soviets it was completely rejected, as the us chauvinistically did not want to help.

Quote of whom?

First where does security concern equal “standing up to something”. Secondly what exactly do you mean by the concept of rational bias?

edit: do you know that some bolsheviks pragmatically supported capitalist policies as means to help the national economy and as transitional to communism. Your argument crumbles even in this respect.

Calling something by the wrong “name” is not exactly criticism.

The fact that his ideas were mostly not implemented is a matter of observation.

Quite a stretch of the word quote, is this wikipedia?

Well I would say that its precisely that the campism isnt strong when regardless of the fact that he is a capitalist, we can reject dogmatic criticism and ask for at least some rational basis.

Well yeah hes not a commie. He did not invent shock therapy, he considers this naming actually an insult. The soviet privatization is not representative because his advice was largely ignored both by soviets and amies. From your paste is also Ukraine missing.

But I partially agree that he talks diplomatically, so he wont always say exactly what he thinks.

No he typically tries to stabilize economies, thats his expertise. He tried to argue that the US should have helped russia economically. His advice was mostly ignored by soviets and later by Yelstin during the horrendous privatization.

But he is diplomatic, so yes he filters what he says.

Ah sorry I believe that in Germany they call it incitement to hate or something like that, which is criminal.

edit: from a very quick search I found this http://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2024/8/6/german-court-fines-woman-for-from-the-river-to-the-sea-chant which meand that by this judicature it is directly criminal. Also this source https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/international/europe/1699528989-berlin-criminalizes-slogan-from-the-river-to-the-sea-palestine-will-be-free. But here I dont know how reliable this source is

No censorship of speech has always been liberal. /s Also its kidna funny how eastern european countries now have stronger foundations of liberal democracy than germany, since statements like “from the river to the sea” are not criminalized as antisemitic.

Well to his credit he, as of now, still murdered less people than Kissinger.