Laith Marouf is one of the most active Palestinian-Lebanese journalists out there, if you watch the anti-war channels on Youtube you would see him often
and he is explicit about "OK, for those people who don't care about Palestinians per se, how do we get them on board the Palestinian cause?"
Whereas all these US content creators will never say that out loud.
"The most influential English-language playwright since Shakespeare", although I haven't read his stuff.
He famously was a huge admirer of both Stalin and Hitler at the same time, if you can wrap your head around it.
I'd call it the "reverse Snyder". (Timothy Snyder is one of the biggest pro-Ukraine liberals in the USA - at one point his Youtube lectures for Yale University were heavily pushed by the algorithm. He famously wrote a book denouncing both Hitler and Stalin.)
It reminds me of something I heard from Jimmy Dore a long time ago, when he had a voice actor pretending to be Matthew McConaughey phoning into the show. "Maybe abortion can be both legal and illegal at the same time! I dunno, I ain't a lawyer."
Chess player means anything from grandmaster to using the chess.com app on the toilet.
I have to use the tag "capitalist decay" because that's what chess has undergone, like every sport dependent on sponsors. All the top players are corporate. Magnus Carlsen by the way raised a lot of money from Peter Thiel to start his new company Take Take Take.
Use this thread to:
AOC tweeted about the NYPD's response to threats made on Palestinian activist Nerdeen Kiswani.
Ana Kasparian of TYT replied to that tweet challenging her to give more money to Israel like she always does.
AOC calls Ana an untalented liar for it.
Ana then replies with the evidence.
Notice that both AOC and Ana make arguments that appeal to a sense by Murikans that "it is a waste of money". Ana not only uses the terms "Americans are forced to bankroll", but she just had to include in her retort to AOC the fact that when AOC changed her vote to Present on the Iron Dome funding (which if you follow US infighting was a viral political moment), Israel was enjoying an economic surplus and the US an economic deficit. Ironically these are the same things that AOC goes back to when trying to represent "Netanyahu's own position" on this; see this Badempanada video.
I don't know, you tell me.
Context for non-Murikans: ActBlue is the official small-donor fundraiser for the Democratic Party. The monetary figures are telling.
https://peoplesdispatch.org/2026/05/06/regional-elections-in-india-and-the-growing-myth-of-gen-z/
You can tell, he pretty much believes whatever his friends at the CPIM leadership tell him. He only gives what is surely their perspective, ki "bhai we have done so much development work, there is no reason for the voters to remove us, but they did". The piece doesn't give a single explanation for the vote. This is a total disconnection from the masses, which is to be expected from socdem parties.
Also, funny to call DMK and TMC "progressive governments".
Toh bhashan ke baad kisi ne savaal poocha ki Soviet economy kyon fail ho gaya. Unka javab tha too much centralisation, aur unhonne yah bhi kaha ki us tarah ka centralised system Marx ke azaadi-project ke khilaaf thee. (Vaise bhi, chahe aapko centralisation model pasand ya apasand ho, Soviet Sangathan kee giraee is kaaran se nahin, balki Khrushchevite revisionism matlab bureaucratic consolidation ke kaaran.)
Phir, doosre log ne Kerala ke baare mein savaal poocha. Aur jab Patnaik ne apna prastav bataaya, meri hansi chhut gai. Unhonne kaha ki jab Ambani yahaan aata hai factory ke banaane ke liye toh Kerala sarkar ko pakka karna chaahie ki har panchayat Ambani kee equity ka ek hissa haasil karti hai. This is so bloody delusional. Agar aap Ambani se aisi maang karte, toh aata hi nahin. In that case, you have to explain how to industrialise without any external capitalist support. Which is fine, but he refuses to state this in a clear manner, and one has to wonder why.
My background was, as a child and teenager, one of being forced to learn classical musical instruments for career advancement. This is rather common among Professional-Managerial Class types in first-world countries. I therefore have a lot of experience with the great composers, Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Chopin etc.
I only became a Marxist several years post-college. Now, as I become more and more serious about working-class liberation, I suddenly find classical music to be very oppressively and indulgently bourgeois, pretentious and un-suitable for the masses.
I haven't had time to explore classical music policy under the Soviet Union, but is this roughly why Shostakovich was demoted under Stalin? For divorcing himself from politics?
I believe high culture does have a place for mass artistic viewing, but all this classical music ain't it.
I'm going on gut feeling for this, hoping that someone on this sub has actually studied Stalin's artistic policies and can report back. So that I can check that this gut feeling is more than just my personal history.