Well you definitely aren’t the first to say it on these threads, But always good to repeat this to make sure it’s manifested, for sure!

Phantom missile fetishism: ‘we made up the missiles but give them the power of real missiles over our lives’

There are some complexities, of course, which are either naturally confronted or told to you by a designer/manufacturer who has already experienced the problems. This is true of any work of engineering. They probably don’t have the exact materials needed for some component and so will have to start a new production for even small amounts. They likely will have some integration problems that were unforseen. Otherwise, only a Fatwa and the threat of destruction have been between Iran and a nuke.

I, at least, don’t believe that nuke designs are near secret enough to actually prevent other countries from learning the general design. It’s the specifics that are likely complicated

Sounds like something from Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy or from Terry Pratchet lol

Got a bit off topic, but yeah, people saying the “you’re a treatlerite” online are hurting us and should be either reformed or somehow separated and isolated

I am 100% sure it’s true. It’s very important to the ruling class, and we have to be better at it. Hexbear is not the example (it’s hardly a public square and more an alley we use to talk about the public square). I’ve have said it before, but Roderic Day tried for years to treat Twitter like Lenin would’ve (in this analogy of public squares). It eventually failed (X turned shit, Roderic quit or something) but it was a serious attempt. Prole wiki tried to make an information source, and still could be more useful. I have no great ideas, personally, but know we need to do better

Well I’m also of a pretty strong opinion that we can’t just give ground to the enemy in the public square, which nowadays is located squarely in the online platforms. So people on Twitter getting attention for saying it has to be taken seruously, because we are judged by their faults anyways. So yeah, I’ve only seen people do it online, but that’s just as important as the public squares were in Lenin’s time. I say this all with a heavy heart because I wish it weren’t so. Ive had people in real life act like all leftists thought that, so we have to treat it as a real movement to be struggled against

We agree entirely! I just think we don’t really disagree with dirt owl either, or at least, we wouldn’t if we all understood that these perspectives are complementary. In fact, I think dirt owl is making a useful point (don’t just go around yelling that the US is labor aristocrats who have no revolutionary position). I just agree that this doesn’t mean that the analysis of labor aristocracy is wrong, just the lazy application of it

Agreed, and I think the major disagreement that i see in this discussion generally (and you and OP are good examples) is twofold.

1. Talking about labour aristocracy and the treats of empire does not mean that nobody has a hard life in the empire. It’s an analysis that the benefits of imperialism will be lost if it’s overthrown, and westerners are aware of this. And that’s why they often choose fascism as the option to maintain at least that benefit to themselves. It’s a real incentive structure which we need to account for in our analyses.

2. We have to be strategic and tactical, which means throwing this in the face of people occupying both the labor aristocracy class and the proletariat class is not the best idea. At least not in the unstrategic way that some do: “you’re a treatlerite and that’s why you don’t love China.” It’s just not useful in that way. It must be a pillar of western theory, but with the goal of finding the positive message we can bring forth: “yes, it’s a net positive to you in the short term if we let Libyans be enslaved for empire, but you get a much larger benefit of more free time, more meaningful work, and less poverty destroying your towns if we choose the other way”. Many forget to say anything like the last part in any tangible, believable way.

Is this vague posting or am I the one at fault for not understanding?

Also thought I recognized it as the Fat Man bomb… but who the hell is making infographics about that now and releasing it on social media? lol

I regret my comment, lol, because I was focussing on finding a way that the numbers are manipulated by capitalistic forces instead of focussing on what matters:

More important than distribution as GINI would measure is the amount of GDP which is reinvested in concrete means of production vs staying in the financial realm. No idea if there is any easy to find research about this though! It’s not the short term win of ‘all the money to the people directly’ but it’s the long term win that capitalism refuses to offer

What the hell? I have no idea what I should conclude about this

And what if distribution of the product is taken into account (I would suspect Chinese workers benefit more than US and European workers)?

Well I guess that’s what we get for being housed in Langley

Damn I’ve been refreshing like once a hour and this time it popped up. Your comment in 21 seconds old so I likely timed it perfect. The feds get the servers or something?

I thought it was pretty good! But same situation, not my dialect, and a few really hard to hear words

I saw this video but have no idea what I’m seeing. Is the smoke supposed to tell me something? Or am I missing a fire somewhere?

Sure, but the Iranian calculation also needs to account for how much egfort/energy/resources are needed for both options. And if it’s more efficient to just damage it slightly each time, they’ll do that. It also takes the risk of the US learning each time, of course, but I think Iran knows that the west has no appetite for this in any prolonged fashion

My analysis is similar to how you analyze injured VS dead soldiers. Mines and bombs designed to only knock off a leg are more effective in modern war because of the logistical energy needed to save them/remove them from battle and then support their medical help etc.

Why sink the aircraft carrier when you can make the thing unusable without unacceptable risks (just hurt the runway a tiny bit, or make it rock too hard for safe takeoffs) and you’ve created a huge liability that needs protected, brought home, things transferred from it, etc. Yeah, the US keeps the jets, but for at least a week or 2 they are unusable but still need maintained. Do that every time and you’re better off than sinking it