User's banner
Avatar

Star Wars Enjoyer

Farmer_Heck@lemmygrad.ml
Joined
51 posts • 183 comments

One of Lemmygrad’s original admins

Marxist-Leninist

He/Him Firearms, Engineer, Jewish

Direct message

It’s still too early to say whether or not it’s going well, but the Ukrainians have been making decent gains.

I’m assuming the Russian response will come in the coming days or weeks, and the Ukrainian forces will get pushed out. Their stated goal of the operation has already been nullified (and frankly didn’t hold water anyways) so I don’t know if the Ukrainians will invest many of their resources to keeping that front open, but if they do it could have dire consequences to their overall resolve.

Ukraine is already at a serious disadvantage in its manpower and resources, so this operation (at least to me) looks to be an act of desperation. You wouldn’t try something so bold and borderline suicidal if you saw a future otherwise. I won’t say this means the war is ending soon, but I will say that the end of the war may have finally crested the horizon.

permalink
report
parent
reply

the Russian Armed Forces have been making constant gains in the Donesk front, and their dominance on all fronts but the northern Luhansk Oblast operation has inspired Ukraine to launch an invasion into the Kursk region so they can have anything at all to leverage in negotiations.

But sure, it’s an “if” situation… and Russia is totally going to lose.

permalink
report
reply

if somebody has the time and the mental ability to sit through this video, i wanna know what the verdict was.

Obvi, in reality, the USSR was a union. Each of the SRs had their own government, made their own decisions, and had the right to petition to leave the Union at will. But anti-communists hate that the USSR had such a fair system, so HM will probably quote directly from those “historians”.

permalink
report
reply

moving to a reply for a similar story (really it’s a rant) of my own.

My party had a few anarchists in it, they made up something like 10% of the party at a point. A small enough percentage that you can simply ignore them during votes or party motions, but a big enough number that you couldn’t ignore them during discussions.

There was one Anarchist who would volunteer themself to speak on behalf of all Anarchists at every discussion, taking personal issue with anything that could possibly upset an Anarchist. A member of the party might want to simply talk about the great technological innovations that happened in the USSR, and that Anarchist would find a way to steer the discussion towards “USSR bad”. A member might want to discuss the guerrilla fighting in the Cuban revolution, the Anarchist would go on and on about how Cuba is “an authoritarian dictatorship”. This goes so on, and so forth. And every time we tried to bring up the issues that were created by them doing that, the 29 other Anarchists would stand up with them and claim we were trying to make them leave.

Leadership thought it would be a good idea to make them their own wing within the party, so they could be autonomous and have their own discussions apart from the main party discussions. They treated it like we were moving them to the “kiddie’s table” and threatened to start disrupting other party functions. A few members of leadership decided, without consulting all of leadership, to appoint that very vocal Anarchist to a seat within leadership to keep them from complaining as much.

Nobody abused the power of leadership in our party like they did. They would make unilateral decisions without asking anyone else.

Later on, we would find out that the whole thing was an ego trip for them. They liked feeling like they were at odds against any authority, so they’d put themself into positions to be at odds with party leadership. When they were put into leadership, they had no idea how difficult the position actually was, so they simply refused to act within the guidelines.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Reading this made me remember how much I do not miss being a party leader.

There are two good ways to can try to handle this situation, and both may look like hostility if egos are at play.

The first is to simply talk to the Trot directly in private and try to direct them towards better historians and convince them to read ML theory. If they’re receptive, they might shift their ideological position and stop being a nuisance. If it fails, they could claim that you’re trying to “bully” them into being a “Stalinist”.

The second is to talk to either party leadership or fellow party members and try to get them to agree on more rigid party lines. If successful, it’ll become easier to keep conversations on track and productive, as most of your party members will agree that tirades against the USSR aren’t helpful. You can pair this with readings or studies of the USSR to help the less informed members of the party come to a mutual understanding. If it fails, they could accuse you of trying to co-opt the party and get you kicked out.

These are the kinds of murky waters I had to try to navigate daily within my party when it existed, inner-party politics is a hard game to play, and it usually results in battles of egos.

permalink
report
reply

really it’s just the mental gymnastics of Ukraine supporters. Russia is simultaneously both winning and unstoppable, while also being weak and nearing failure. Western governments need to prepare for the war to last 10 years and put plans into place to ensure that Ukraine won’t fall, and Russia is losing the war and will collapse because of it.

permalink
report
parent
reply

love Balkan Mapper.

When I read this earlier today I audibly laughed.

Man back to back said “The Russians are too powerful” then “We will reclaim Crimea from the Russians at any cost”

permalink
report
reply

All I’m seeing is people putting themselves into hysterics talking about it on social media, demanding that it has to be staged and his death would be an objectively good thing. And it’s all just people who don’t know what they’re talking about, but refuse to ever shut up.

The right is going to retaliate for this eventually, but Trump getting off with only a minor injury was the best possible outcome of this. If the injury was serious or fatal, the fascist bandit armies would come out in droves. It would be worse for everyone. Remember a few years ago when the right kept doing terror attacks in progressive spaces? Imagine how much worse that would be if their dear leader was murdered on camera. Liberals really need to stop celebrating the idea of this attempted assassination, all it did was open a door that none of us should want to go through. This is a rallying cry for the right, this is a green light for violence. The far-right will use this event for years to come to justify murders and hate crimes.

permalink
report
parent
reply

I won’t discount the possibility that it’s staged, but this one doesn’t ring that bell for me.

It’s very possible that some liberal with a rifle and a dream thought he’d become a hero. Given the media coverage that Trump gets from the “”“left”“”, it’s most likely that he’s just the victim of someone who lost the mental health battle.

By all accounts, he had to have been actually injured based on the wound and the blood pattern. More than what a razor blade could do. As well, Trump would’ve needed to make the incision himself. It’s extremely unlikely that he would’ve agreed to do something like this while he’s already leading in the polls and doesn’t need a stunt.

His reaction is also normal for someone who has just been grazed by a bullet. The first thing our body will do in an extreme situation is fill our brain with adrenaline, numbing pain. It’s well documented that soldiers could be shot more than once in combat before fully realizing what’s happened, this is even more true for grazes. An injury like this won’t be fatal, and won’t cause any long-term damage. His ear will get patched up, and he’ll be back to normal with nothing but a scar and possible mental anguish.

And I’d like to close with a personal gripe, I’m seeing way too many people who aren’t big into marksmanship not understanding why the shot missed. The head is a target the size of a cantaloupe, and a man like Trump never stops moving. From the noise of the rounds in the footage, I estimate a minimum distance of 150m. That is a damn difficult shot to make, of course it’s going to miss. Then factor in that the shooter took (I counted but could be wrong) three shots. After that first round, it gets significantly harder to keep the rifle on target. The two follow-up shots might as well have been directed at random. Media has made so many people believe that hitting shots like that is easy, but it really isn’t. Please stop with this one.

permalink
report
reply

There’s not a lot that can be done if they’re unwilling to learn.

You could try to explain the lies colonialists told, and the systems of oppression they built. You could try to show them the direct results of colonialism, like the famines, the reservations, etc. But if they’re closed off from accepting that colonialism was an evil system, perpetrated by white supremacists, you won’t be able to fix their issue.

permalink
report
reply