Yes, but there are limits, if you tried to use it to reconstitute the USSR it would just default to heart attack. But you could 100% use it to deliver beans, as long as you’re ok with the person dying afterwards. I think there’s a time limit to how long you can control a person’s actions before they die but I don’t remember how long.
Hypothetically, I’d be willing to negotiate and find a compromise between factions but the central point that the war needs to end, immediately, is non-negotiable. We gotta turn off the meat grinder. Otherwise, what was even the point? I get the feeling that that point would have me wind up aligning with the Bolshevists in practice (which is what I got), but that’s probably why I wound up a little to their right.
Uhh I’m gonna be real, idk wtf “the swift convocation of the constituent assembly” means so I just put neutral on a bunch of these.
The straight path is tyranny
On April 24, 1953, Mahmoud Afshartous, Iranian general, chief of police, and right hand man of the prime minister, is invited to the home of a member of the social democratic party. As he approaches, he announces that the building is surrounded and that everyone inside is under arrest for treason. He had received a tip that the social democrats were collaborating with foreign intelligence and that they were luring him there with the intent to abduct him, probably to torture him to death and leave his body in the streets to get him out of the way and destabilize the government or something like that. A firefight ensues, and searching the building provides Afshartous with more intelligence, leading him to launch an immediate raid on the hotel room of one Kermit Roosevelt, which leads to his arrest and the uncovering of incontrovertible proof that the Americans are plotting to overthrow the government and install the shah as an absolute ruler, through the newly formed Central Intelligence Agency.
This provokes a major international scandal. President Eisenhower denies all foreknowledge of the plot and blames the CIA, leading to the dismissal of Allen Dulles. He proceeds to declassify certain documents related to the plot - documents that also implicate MI6, damaging relations with the UK (along with screwing up and abandoning the plot in the first place). Attempting to please everyone, he ends up pleasing no one.
Prime Minister Mossadegh is outraged, and is convinced to shut down the American embassy and to pursue an alliance with the USSR. Iran’s Marxist-Leninist party, Tudeh, rises in popularity, but only comes to power after Mossadegh steps down.
Tensions between Western powers and increased anti-colonial sentiment result in Korea being unified under the DPRK.
People all around the world become more cautious of US-backed regime change, but with the failure of the “proof of concept” coup in Iran, the US becomes much more hesitant to deploy such strategies. But the red scare is still a thing, with the events in Iran and Korea kicking it into high gear. But the US approach is much more overt and mask-off.
That’s all I got, so far.
Of course there will be elections. Everywhere has elections, even if they’re obviously undemocratic (which the US elections always were). There’s zero reason to change that, and elections are a very useful tool for influencing and controlling the public.
Also, who establishes a dictatorship in their 80’s? He’s gonna die soon anyway.
This is one of those things where it’s less about reality and more about what it signals. Libs are signalling how important they consider elections to be, and trying to either scare people into voting or get them to appreciate being able to vote.
Someone get this man a Twitch channel.
deleted by creator
life back then mustv been crazy people just thought whatever
People still just think whatever tho.
And it’s down along the Falls Road is where I long to be
Lying in the dark with the provo company
A comrade on me left, and another one on me right
And a clip of ammunition for my little Armalight
You’ll get further with humanitarian aid and a multinational navy escort than you will with just humanitatian aid
In America they have so many guns in schools and sometimes children will find one and take it apart to get rid of it but then they will be expelled for committing an act of violence against the gun
The idea that Trump was strongly opposed to the war in Ukraine was always an exaggerated lib fantasy/scaremongering. Trump bragged about being the one to send them weapons before the war, while Obama only sent them, “pillows and blankets.”
When he was insufficiently deferential to the notion that US foreign policy is driven by benevolence, libs lost their shit over it and leapt at the opportunity to attack him for not being patriotic enough and being a “foreign asset,” rather than criticizing him from any kind of leftist position. Trump was happy to not disavow this fantasy, because it was a fucking stupid and self-defeating line of attack that helped him immensely by allowing him to distance himself from failed lib foreign policy. Without even having to really do or say anything he was easily able to triangulate to appeal to all sorts of alternative foreign policy perspectives, because the libs were so confident that their position was objectively correct and anyone who disagreed for any reason was a Bad Person so they massively overcommitted to their position.
Of course, this sort of the thing is par for the course. Even when American politicians say that they’ll be anti-war, it’s a lie. Because they can just do that with no consequence, and the military-industrial complex has no shortage of bribe money. What’s been happening in recent years is that they don’t even bother to lie anymore. Like Trump technically lied saying he would “end the conflict on day 1” but that was obviously ridiculous bravado that didn’t even say what he’d do to end it.
This is just a reversion to the mean. He’s an American politician, and like every other American politician, he’s a servent of Khorne who will always seek to spread blood and death and collect skulls for the skull throne, because that’s what they fucking do. We will never be given the option to vote for anything different.
The reason that there was an alliance to be formed at all was that the communists existed as their own, separate political party.
The relationship between Mao and the nationalists, and the lessons we can take from it, are more complex than this “always capitulate to the lesser evil” nonsense. There were several times when the two sides formed a united front and several times that such agreements fell apart or were betrayed. If the lesson from Mao is simply capitulation to the lesser evil, Mao would have just joined the KMT and abandoned any sort of radical positions to that might have caused contention.
Of course, accelerationism is stupid nonsense as it always has been.
Edit to add a thought: the communists at that time had just endured the long march, and the leadership was tested and battle-hardened. When they said “revolution later” they meant “revolution later.” In contrast, in Europe, there were a bunch of nominally socialist parties and when they said “revolution later,” they meant, “revolution never,” because they were full of opportunists. Imagine if the SDP in Germany was like, “Well, it finally happened, the conditions are right for revolution so we’re doing a revolution now.” No, if you want a temporary alliance with the Democrats, it needs to be actually temporary, with a clearly set objective and end conditions. Otherwise it’s just liberalism with extra steps.
I never said anything about “supporting” Biden or Harris.
Telling people to vote for someone is like the dictionary definition of support. I legitimately don’t understand what y’all think “support” means. Wanting to suck them off? Treating everything they say as gospel? Thinking they’ll go to heaven in the afterlife?
I genuinely don’t know, because in my book, supporting someone is when you provide them with, you know, support. For example, in the form of a vote or in the form of trying to convince others to vote for them.
Liberals believe that their values are objectively correct, or to be more precise, they seem to believe that they don’t hold values at all, that all of their political beliefs are extremely straightforward and indisputable conclusions based solely on facts. But people do disagree with them. The only way this is even conceivable is if those people are wrong about the facts. If leftists don’t want to fall in line behind the lesser evil, the only possible explanation is that they don’t appreciate the threat posed by the right.
The reality is that we do appreciate that threat. We just don’t fly into a panic and abandon all other priorities, because we realize that doing so means we’ve already lost all hope of defeating the right. People will only put up with that conservative “stay the course” platform for so long before they start looking at alternatives, especially during a broad period of decline. And “lesser evilism,” as I call it, is not “objectively correct” and is in fact a specific ideology and value system - one that is a proven failure at that. They can’t see those things because they simply don’t want to see them.
She turning on my point til I, uhhh help me out here
Not likely lol 
Remember what they took from you