Even if you take the most extreme interpretation of US responsibility possible (eg adding another 1-1.7 million people for “luring” the Soviet Union into attacking Afghanistan), you don’t get to 25 million

Bullshit. One single US (+EU) policy, economic sanctions, has murdered 38 million in the past 50 Years and keeps murdering 500k yearly. One single policy.

Hey Cowbee, I see you often here, commenting on the election results. This will be ignored by liberals because they’re too far into propaganda, so instead I made a little copypaste explaining why there cannot be free and fair elections in Venezuela. Feel free to use any or all of it:

Maduro is not an illegitimate leader. The Bolivarian revolution was widely supported among the people of Venezuela and freed millions from poverty, until USA sanctions demolished their economy. The express purpose of USA sanctioning, according to the US government is to, and I quote, “bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government”. USA+EU sanctions additionally murder half a million innocents per year according to recent serious sociologic and medical studies.

By defending regime change under extreme economic sanctioning, you’re approving the murders of 38 million people over the past 50 years of economic sanctions, and directly supporting the CIA strategy of “impoverish them until they change their minds”.

Maduro being a figurehead isn’t a problem, it’s a good thing. The alternative would be the destabilization of Venezuela and the coup by a Milei-like libertarian who would give every inch of Venezuelan soil to US corpos and destroy worker rights.

Wikipedia is wonderful… for most things.

The main demographic contributing to and editing English Wikipedia are young, highly educated white men from western countries. It will portray on average the bias that most of these people espouse. So it will have racist bias, misogynistic bias and pro-western bias.

That said, it’s still probably less misogynistic and less racist and less pro-western than your average outlet, because it filters out some of the most blatant false narratives and propaganda from conservative sources such as FOX.

That’s your definition. To me, it means essentially “Marxist-Leninist who supports actually existing socialist projects”. I still fail to see what my views on some countries have to do with adventurism.

What do Russia, China or the DPRK have to do with stochastic acts of violence against capitalists?

Tankie here. Marxists-Leninist don’t condone stochastic violent acts during capitalism against Capitalists, the word we use to refer to such tactics is “adventurism”, and it’s criticized heavily.

Care to explain what you mean?

I don’t understand why they are still in place

The US is explicit about this: “every possible means should be undertaken promptly to weaken the economic life of Cuba. If such a policy is adopted, it should be the result of a positive decision which would call forth a line of action which, while as adroit and inconspicuous as possible, makes the greatest inroads in denying money and supplies to Cuba, to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government”

I don’t believe the USA is buddies with Russia, though, they have opposing geopolitical interests. The fact that the USA is pulling out of Ukraine now is not because they’re buddies with Russia, but because Ukraine is a broken toy now that the EU has fully antagonized Russia as a consequence of the invasion and has subserved itself to NATO and agreed to the 5% military expenditure (mostly to buy weapons from the USA military-industrial complex)

Only state violence is actual violence! Kulaks enslaving peasants and starving them to the point that their life expectancy is 28 years of age is just basic economics! /s

Yes, Cuba is a good example

This post is misinformation.

Statistical Communiqué for 2024 on national economics by the National Bureau of Statistics of China:

“In 2024, the per capita disposable income nationwide was 41,314 yuan, an increase of 5.3 percent over that of the previous year or a real increase of 5.1 percent after deducting price factors”

Tell me how growing your disposable income by 5% a year is “not being able to afford anything”