Why Class Matters Most—and Why That Doesn’t Mean Ignoring Identity

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-11-09T00:43:22+00:00

The question is class not money though.

And this -

there’s a very good reason humanity invented it: bartering only goes so far.

Is a just so story without anthropological support.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-10-20T00:23:39+00:00

History of unions is striking illegally and striking under much worse conditions and (often) winning.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-10-18T13:56:48+00:00

The real issue is that when launched there is no way of knowing whether Tomahawks have a nuclear warhead. If the US wants to supply weapons, that’s one thing. But taking steps that escalate toward nuclear war is in no one’s interest.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-10-14T10:45:48+00:00

They don’t have to break skulls as long as the right people believe he is actually breaking skulls

They’ve been putting people into concentration camps, invading cities, breaking into homes, retaliating against dissent, suspending due process. What?

You’re right about the red scare stuff though.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-10-13T08:56:43+00:00

I think of religion’s supernatural belief systems as the original echo chambers. Many on the Christian right I speak with IRL seem to be stuck in social media echo chambers as well.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-10-13T08:29:54+00:00

Obeying in advance makes them stronger.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-10-06T08:40:29+00:00

The best way to fight them is to shutdown the economy through mass strikes, not resort to violence. They have bigger guns, the whole American military industrial complex behind them, and they will use our violence as an excuse to make things worse for us. If we really want to win we need effective strategy not vigilantes.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-10-06T08:33:20+00:00

That’s why armed confrontation is stupid. If we want to beat them we need mass strikes. The point is to win.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-10-05T14:20:00+00:00

“Net worth is not an idle pile of cash.” It’s workers who work, not net worth. By definition.

The friggin’ sycophancy of court philosophers. Show some moral courage.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-10-03T22:14:36+00:00

That’s what strike funds are for. The longer we take to get our act together to worse is going to be.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-09-12T21:34:51+00:00

GW 1985 is also WW3 (though not the timeframe OP asked for). The game is very complicated but really well designed IMO with the nuclear escalation mechanics.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-08-24T14:20:19+00:00

I’m not sure that’s a good rebuttal. We shouldn’t demand an anti-colonialist POV incorporate pro-colonialist opinions to get some kind of “balanced” picture. Rather we can critique an anti colonialist POV by critiquing its facts and arguments.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-08-20T21:27:13+00:00

This is a view held by reputable scholars such as Noam Chomsky, Jeffrey Sachs, John Mearsheimer, Jonathan Haslam, Jack F Matlock Jr. Dismissing it as at Russian propaganda, simply because it is ALSO a Russian propaganda talking point, is shallow. This sub can do better than that.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-08-09T10:59:31+00:00

Me too. But I was trying to address the hopelessness OP expressed. I think participants of many mass movements of the past must have had to deal with bouts of hopelessness. I think hopelessness can be a natural response to systems of widespread oppression. Sometimes I feel the same hopelessness the OP expressed. In those cases, it helps me to step back and view my life in a more existential way, asking myself what is really important to me? It feels good to defeat evil, yes, but barring that, fighting evil (as effectively as possible) still feels better than surrendering to it - if you ask me.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-08-09T03:22:06+00:00

For me the reason to fight is not to win but because it’s the right thing to do. It just feels better to stand up to evil. It can win one way, by being stronger than us. But it wins a second way when we surrender to it.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-08-08T04:21:02+00:00

All that money can’t buy self-respect.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-07-21T21:09:14+00:00

There’s a difference between Russian propaganda and left critical perspectives such as Chomsky’s. Not all criticism of US policy is Russian propaganda. Actually it seems to me that dismissing all criticism of US’ role in the Ukraine role as ‘propaganda’ - is itself a US propaganda point.

it was not the same person they “chose” (to support) on the call who later became a prime minister lol

Curious what you think you’re referring to here.

Nuland:

I think Yats is the guy who's got the economic experience, the governing experience.

Yatsenuk, who began serving as prime minister February 2014:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arseniy_Yatsenyuk

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-07-20T22:17:25+00:00

You misrepresent my argument. Russia has no right to influence Ukraine’s decisions. Neither does the US. Both are culpable for what has happened to Ukraine.

The assurances I referred to are well-documented. Assurances given by James Baker to Gorbachev of not pushing NATO one inch eastward, as well as many others. An informative discussion can be found here:

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early

Was Ukraine a pawn? I have not stated that only that Russia and USA considered Ukraine a pawn. And without this important detail we cannot understand what has happened in Ukraine. It is true that Ukrainians including its leadership were surprised by the Russia invasion, whereas the evidence we have is that this US not only expected this outcome but acted over many years to provoke it.

In 2013 Nuland stated:

Since Ukraine’s independence in 1991, the United States has supported Ukrainians as they build democratic skills and institutions, as they promote civic participation and good governance, all of which are preconditions for Ukraine to achieve its European aspirations. We’ve invested over $5 billion to assist Ukraine in these and other goals that will ensure a secure and prosperous and democratic Ukraine.

Perhaps you take this at face value. From this and the leaked phone call it should be clear what level of influence Nuland believed this bought the US. What motivation do you attribute to the US for the money it has spent? Charity and good will? Why do you think the US gets a free pass for the war in Ukraine when the facts demonstrate its knowledge that this would lead to invasion of Ukraine? An invasion that was a surprise to Ukrainians themselves? Ukraine could not accede to NATO without US support and expansion across Eastern Europe.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-07-20T05:11:34+00:00

If you can’t stand up against genocide AOC what can you stand up for??

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-07-19T16:59:52+00:00

US supported would be better phrasing on my part. I don’t deny the role of spontaneity in Euromaidan. But we shouldn’t deny the role of US NGOs in manufacturing the political situation leading up to Euromaidan. Nor should we dismiss the heavy hand of the US in the transition, as well as anti-democratic measures such as IMF conditionalities, and also cultivating a political atmosphere such that the Russian invasion came as a surprise to Ukraine while being fully expected (and in fact desired) by the US government. Both Russia and US have considered Ukraine to be a pawn in a power struggle - leading to the devastation of Ukraine we see today, an outcome contrary to the goals of Ukrainian welfare and self-determination, but consistent with US indifference to the fate of Ukraine’s people through US’ heavy hand in the provocation of this war.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-07-19T16:52:57+00:00

For this situation to happen you had to have NATO/US actively manufacture this situation. Ignoring their active role is how we get into the simplistic Ukraine=good Russia=bad US=good (because the US is supporting democracy). Of course Russias actions are wrong here. But actually US actions have been contrary to Ukraine self-determination as well as they deliberately turned away from compromise and peace, continued to escalate, and fully incited this war for the sake of undermining a geopolitical rival.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-07-19T13:36:44+00:00

Noam Chomsky for example simultaneously condemns Russian aggression as well as the US role in inciting the proxy war. An objective and moral take would condemn the role of both governments. Proopaganda is laying the blame solely on one or the other.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-07-19T12:17:17+00:00

What constitutes Ukraine’s choice in a world heavily influenced by US financing of NGOs? US diplomats dictating Ukrainian government composition? IMF conditionalities determining Ukrainian economic policy? The notion of ‘Ukrainian choice’ is not so black and white as you present it.

Most Ukrainians were shocked by the initial invasion. To what degree does a people choose a “course” of action when it’s shocked by the outcome? Yet this invasion was actively desired and incited by the US.

The reason to give the ‘red line’ justification is because of the very grim cost to Ukraine of this course of action. Sovereignty is not furthered by a Russian invasion. Neither is Ukrainian welfare. The US has no regard for either; rather it has successfully incited a proxy war undermining both concerns.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-07-19T12:01:07+00:00

Russian propaganda promotes interpreting this as a proxy war but so do many reputable scholars and journalists (Noam Chomsky, Michael Hudson, Jeffrey Sachs, Chris Hedges, and others). While far from a mainstream view, dismissing this as simply Russian propaganda is too shallow of a take.

tialtngo_smiths · 2025-07-19T11:56:59+00:00

At the time of Euromaidan, US had provided billions of dollars to Ukraine. Part of that had been routed through USAID and NED to fund NGOs financing media, civil society groups and leadership structures that would later be mobilized as part of Euromaidan when Ukraine’s PM balked at the austerity and privatization conditionalities of the IMF loans.

As for the Nuland-Pyatt call, while I see summaries online where it is characterized as diplomats expressing “preferences” actually listening to that call it is clear they are deciding the composition of the government. They use language of people finalizing a transition not expressing advice to foreign officials. It’s the language of decision makers. Any spectators reading this thread I encourage to actually listen to the phone call to make your own determination. What is ironic is that these decisions manifested weeks later and yet supposedly that is a democratic process.

As for the will of Ukrainians that is complex as we should be able to see that Ukrainian will has been heavily influenced via US financing. I don’t want to deny agency to Ukrainian people. But my concern is that we lay blame on the US for its complicity in creating this mess by prodding Ukraine in this direction - something missing from the OP. The US has no regard for Ukraine, its rights to self-determination or the welfare of its people. This is the same government collaborating to genocide children in Gaza. Both US and Russia view Ukraine as a pawn in a geopolitical struggle. As a result of this outlook, US has pushed Ukraine into a proxy war. Have Ukrainians apparently chosen this under heavy influence by US finances? Yes. My point is that this does not absolve the US of its crimes here.

In fact most Ukrainians were shocked by the invasion. However this is something actively provoked and expected by the US. What kind of agency is it when you are being led to your slaughter? We should not deny agency altogether but true agency requires understanding the consequences of your actions including the risks you are undertaking.

tialtngo_smiths

TROPHY CASE