Yup. It’s actually crazy how anticommunist propaganda creates so many people who are so confidently wrong about things that are so easy to investigate.

It’s called LTSC IoT, but it’s normal windows. Actually much better because it doesn’t automatically install so much bloat.

The guy you’re responding to is a liberal doing a piss poor parody of a ML.

You can’t do a good parody if you get angry before the punchline, or don’t understand the thing you’re parodying in the first place.

Lemmitors downvoting you because actually learning about the case conflicts with their “cHiNa BaD” circlejerk.

Windows 10 LTSC is supported until 2032, and is free to pirate.

It is an observation of historical facts, I am not prescribing any particular action.

Running in the woods and trying to wage a protracted people’s war against the local police didn’t put the nazis in their place either, so who exactly would I be calling to arms?

American asylums weren’t exactly shining beacons of human rights during that period either. JFK’s sister had her frontal lobe scraped until she could no longer repeat the lyrics of a song because she said problematic things as a woman.

To be clear, screaming on rooftops didn’t put the nazis in their place, communists with guns did.

Germany and the Soviets had agreed a boundary between the lands they both wanted to conquer

And France and Britain agreed to boundaries in Czechoslovakia. You wouldn’t call the Munich Agreement an alliance though.

They then exploited it when Operation Barbarossa commenced and continued pushing the soviets back. Finally, once that was done

Except the USSR ended up with the territory they had demanded at the start of the winter war, in response to Finland aligning with Nazi Germany. Finland’s willingness to switch sides was due to them seeing the writing on the wall.

Practical.

jk though, most people are in that position; in Cuba, Vietnam, China, Russia, etc before the revolution, the masses didn’t read a bunch of books, decide communism sounded like the best way to run things, then overthrow their oppressors.

Though it’s important to understand the effects capitalism has had on society though are inherent to capitalism, not bad individuals doing capitalism wrong. That is the framing fascists use, since they’ve been privileged by the system, they need to invent reasons for its failing that don’t change it structurally. So you get wild conspiracies, foreigners, or whatever else is easy to believe.

If you don’t support capitalism, you aren’t a liberal.

I wouldn’t say that’s entirely wrong, fascism being a failure mode of liberalism. The phrase “scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds” or Trotsky’s “Not every exasperated petite bourgeois could have become Hitler, but a particle of Hitler is lodged in every exasperated petite bourgeois” come to mind.

Is Canada planning to go to war with China if they annex Taiwan?

You’re just describing the IMF’s model and pretending China is doing it. When countries were unable to pay back the loans, China has refinanced or forgiven them.

Having good relations and a country that isn’t dependent on the west benefits China a lot more than slightly reduced costs to transport goods to a country, that every other country also reaps when a port or railroad is built.

Not really, it’s more that liberalism contains contradictions between various freedoms it supports, and even contradictions between how the same “freedom” is practiced by different groups, and when those contradictions become unsustainable, the right to property by the dominant group always takes precedence.

It’s important to understand any political philosophy as not an idea floating in a vacuum but as a social tool used by a group in society; liberalism is the philosophy the bourgeoisie use to justify their power.

I mean kinda since fascism is a tool used to buttress capitalism when it’s own contradictions become unsustainable, but that’s not really in the book.

The quality can’t be that much worse than the plane that can’t fly in the rain and has a risk of decapitating pilots on ejection. It’s not as good at killing American soldiers as the Osprey, but it’s not exactly the epitome of quality.

In any case, Chinese manufacturing builds to specification. The reason they’re perceived as low quality is that you’re buying goods designed to be literally as cheap as possible, both in the development and manufacturing costs, and companies wouldn’t make a profit outsourcing if they spent the same amount manufacturing the product in China.

When your cheap electronic fails because a .5 cent capacitor explodes after a month, it’s not because the country with the biggest manufacturing sector didn’t have access to 5 cent capacitors or the country with the most engineers didn’t have the engineering man-hours available to design it correctly.

China has shown its intent in other parts of the world with its ‘belt and road’ initiative

That intent being mutual development so other countries are less dependent on China’s enemy and their economies can’t be leveraged against China?

The USSR never allied with the Germans, it was a non-aggression pact, made after the USSR failed to get Britain, France, or Poland to support them in invading Germany in response to Czechoslovakia. Instead Britain, France, and Poland signed the Munich Agreement, dividing Czechoslovakia between Germany and Poland.

To be clear, even after the invasion of Poland in 1940, the western powers intended to support Germany against the USSR, Britain even tried to send troops to support Germany’s ally, Finland in the winter war, after the invasion of Poland, and was only prevented when it ended too quickly.

Here’s a work going through every major liberal philosopher and what liberalism meant to them, and how they dealt with the contradictions. It’s the same definition used in every serious work for the last 200 years or so.

This confuses a lot of Americans whose political understanding is largely dictated by cable news, because since 1980 or so, conservatives started using liberal to mean “far left” as a pejorative due to Reagan calling Carter’s policy too liberal. Later on, the American “left”, social democrats, started using it to mean the same thing, but in a positive context.

Let me simplify this for you: Shooting communist protesters trying to reform the system is bad. Shooting fascists lynching people in the street is good and necessary.