∞🏳️‍⚧️Edie [it/its, she/her, fae/faer, love/loves, null/void, des/pair, none/use name, kitty]

If you aren’t one of these, then what are you? I guess there still is reactionary, off to the right of the image.

Do you really need to read volumes of theory to grasp what is fundamentally a rather straightforward concept?

Yes! The three volumes on shitting are essential reads. (/s)

Political theory. Like this intro reading list

Two spaces at the end of a line
Makes a new line

So I checked it out… never directly states where the data is from (“PRC state media and data”, “party documents and data reportedly obtained from local public security bureaus in Xinjiang”, it continues to be this vague never specific throughout), most of the dates end in 2021/2022 (for the latter e.g. “the last date for which authorities have issued such reports”, so that doesn’t show it hasn’t ended in 2021)

The closest thing you have in there is

the continued elevated number of indictments in 2022 suggests that the campaign continues

Are there other, better, sources?

Blahaj.zone ain’t sending their best.

I cannot but defend the authoritarian, nay, the stalinist prohibition on using handcuffs in prisons. It makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside knowing prisoners get what they deserve, to know that they are forced to do what they want to, to know that they have to work if they feel like it.

(This is a sarcasm)

Sure you can.

https://forum.qubes-os.org/t/configuring-a-proxyvm-vpn-gateway/19061

“neutral” as if.

Edit: also oh no! Not the Stalinist… prohibition on using handcuffs?

Remember Stalin and his style of socialism?

No. Cuz I wasn’t alive at that time.

But yea, I did read about it in This Soviet World, Soviet Democracy, Russian Justice, and Blackshirts and Reds

This graph does not say that no-one is corrupt, correct. It does however show that the soviet system had much less inequality than what came before (under the Tsar) and after (capitalism). This is an improvement. This graph does not prove corruption either. Some having more than others is not corruption.

The soviets did not reach communism, they were building socialism.

Under capitalism, the vast majority of people must labour, by getting a job… if they can, to get money to have a house, food, medicine, etc. They take actions in line with how capitalism functions, to the extent they are doing so to survive, this is “human nature”, yes, but I don’t think this is the way that you are using those words. Under socialism, you are guaranteed a job, housing, food, there is free healthcare, etc. The actions the same person would take under socialism are different. So what you call “human nature”, but is just actions taken within context of capitalism, is not actually human nature.

You have three things wrong there:

1. I am not american
2. I am not 16 years old
3. Understanding Marxism is (partially, you also have to… well, understand it, if it makes no sense it hasn’t helped you all that much) reading Marxist theory

Maybe. But you clearly don’t understand it all that well.

When you don’t know anything, keep posting.

You do not understand marxism, and then proceed to dismiss it.

On the southern Kazak steppe an aged yellow-skinned herdsman, dying, sent a last message to his son who had been village president and who was now elected delegate to the All-Union Congress: “All the years of my life were dark with toil and hunger. But I lived to see the new day. Take care of the Soviet power, my son; it is our power, our happiness.”

For a socialist state, the simplest and most basic act of government is the planning by worker-owners of the expansion and improvement of their jointly owned properties. Planning of this type takes place not only in those central institutions of Moscow where the foreign visitor habitually looks for it; it begins simultaneously at the workers’ bench. Production meetings after work discuss shop problems, what holds back production, how much it can be increased, and by what means. These discussions are enlarged on a factory scale; they go from the factory to the central offices of the industrial trusts. Word comes back from the central organizations to the shop that the country needs certain new machines. “Can we make them in our plant?” Delegates from other industries which need the machines arrive, explain, mutually consult. The inventions and suggestions of the local workers thus widen into a nation’s plan.

“The whole working gang is interested in production. The program for next month is discussed with all of us. The foreman calls a meeting and tells us that the administration wants us to put out 3,000 milling tools next month. How shall we do it? We discuss in detail; each of us says what he can do. It all adds up to 4,000. So the foreman goes to the administration and raises the plan to 4,000. […]

https://comlib.encryptionin.space/epubs/this-soviet-world/

Also see https://comlib.encryptionin.space/epubs/soviet-democracy/

an ownership class

???

The owners of something are the owners of that thing.

I think it is possible

All implementations are always twisted to suit the greed of individuals.

So it would be best to live under a system that doesn’t encourage and reward such behavior, no?

Inequality isnt the fault of the system that creates inequality. It just is.