Tuukka R

Ypu don’t need to be a Cossack to kill a horse and its rider.

…why?!

Why would they do this?

That’s well put, thanks!

I would say much of that also applies to China, and precisely because a country that doesn’t truly exist for its people cannot be socialist, I’d say there has never been a socialist country on this planet yet.

And then, if we choose to say that socialist countries do exist, then socialism stops meaning that the country really cares about asocial issues, and starts meaning a system where all means of production are held by the elite.

Lenin killed socialism and communism by trying to do them the bestial Russian way. (Of course that had to do with Marx’s thinking, but I still Lenin is to blame the most)
Still: if you have a dictatorship, you will inevitably veer far away from being for the people.

At the moment the countries that have come closest to the core point of socialism have been the Nordic countries, in that they’ve put the freedom and welfare of the individual in the middle, but they’ve done that that without socialism, using a strongly regulated capitalism as base instead.
…Plus, spent the last two decades trying to dismantle all that was good here, chasing the neoliberalist dream.

did you assume I wad American?

No, I didn’t.

That’s some serious waste of money… I wonder if something will actually be delivered? Except for the money being delivered to the Russia, of course.

(All that frankly, I don’t think any farm should have 13 000 pigs)

Which is of course because there are so much fewer socialist countries than capitalist countries.

As much as a I despise the penal system of USA, USA has not killed 60 million of its own inhabitants.

You are comparing grapes to grapefruits.

I’ve been wondering how the media could be regulated to not become a populist hellhole.

If the government starts telling what the media can write and what it cannot, we are quickly in a very bad place.
But at the same time, yellow press is a cancer. It seems that people all around prefer interesting newspapers over factual ones. Newspapers that add a bit of extra flavour to their articles sell a lot better than purely factual ones, because they are “less boring”. And then that destroys democracy. I wonder how that should be avoided!

How is NK not socialist by definition?

EDIT: And, thank you for actually answering! This question of mine is a genuine one.

On an international forum. If you’re talking on an international forum, you’re talking to an international audience. Behave that way.

Context is a thing.

Which one of those two is not a socialist country?

It was made on an international forum.

Regardless of how America-centric imperialist the comment was, it was written to everyone because it’s on an international forum without specifying it was for residents of some specific country only.

What happens in the head of the person talking 8s not relevant. What is relevant is what they end up actually saying.

Something in the ballpark of 19 out of 20 people on our planet are other than US residents. It is not okay to write a comment with an assumption that the remaining 95 % don’t exist. There are US-only forums, and you can outright say that you’re addressing US residents only. Everything else is targeting everyone.

It’s not “luxury” if everyone’s enjoying it.

Correct.
In the case of China it’s not enjoyed by everyone, though. A typical Chinese toilet is a huge hole in the ground with some kind of slabs of concrete over them, with a 15 cm wide slit between the slabs. You go stand on the two slabs and poop into the cavity underneath. There is typically a roof overneath. Homes often don’t have anything on the floors. Just bare concrete.

The people living in opulence are not enjoying something everyone there has. They are enjoying something only the richest 0,5 % among their people has. China is a country where wealth is concentrated extremely strongly to the few.

Sure, if you ignore that the Maoist uprising against the landlords was the largest and most comprehensive proletarian revolution in history, and led to almost totally-equal redistribution of land among the peasantry.

That happened long before yesterday, though. If you look at decades such as 1970’s or 1980’s or even later, you’ll notice that whatever Mao was striving for, got eventually all undone.

Not sure, but here are some numbers you might find interesting:

The net loss of Ukrainian land in all of calendar year 2024 was 0.7 % of Ukraine’s total land area. This number completely ignores the existence of areas that Ukrainian forces held inside the Russia. If those were to be taken into account, the loss would be around 0.4 % or so.

A few weeks ago it was said that in the preceding 12 months, Ukraine has lost 0.3 % of its total land area.

Depends on the operation. What kind of operations are you talking about?

Mainly NATOs operations are coördination. If Finland gets attacked, then Sweden and Spain and Latvia and Belgium, etc., will help Finland in defending militarily against the Russia. It’s not NATo helping Finland, it’s Sweden and Spain and Latvia and Belgium, etc., helping Finland. Because of their obligations as being NATO member countries.

Any incursion of a military into another country’s territory without that country’s permission is considered an attack and therefore very carefully avoided by all militaries.

If it happens, it is intentional. (At least if it happens for more than a minute or so. In this case, the planes have been flying in the countries’ territories for about 10 minutes or so. And that’s a long time. And unambiguously intentional.)

He’d be replaced by someone with the same politics, but who would not be absolutely incompetent in anything.

As long as Putin is in power, Ukraine is on the way to victory.

“Stops selling fuel” is one thing, but “sells 95 % less fuel than before” is another. Wonder what the number of stations in that bracket are? One in ten?

Heroiam slava!