I’m Don Draper in the elevator with that guy, the guy is 196 and I’m saying “I don’t think about you at all”

I literally don’t know what 196 is tbh

I don’t know who this is :chad:

This guy are sick

“First they came for the Twitter shitlibs, and I did not speak out, because I hated those assholes”

Eastern front of WWII was pretty scary for the fash :wholesome:

Imagine tweeting “i I have no empathy” and taking 46 words to do it

I really wish this game was better. Got very repetitive and shallow very quickly and the RPG elements weren’t amazing. I really like that they went so openly anti-capitalist, even that’s presented in a pretty low-hanging-fruit “every single capitalist operator is extremely blatantly evil” kind of a way

Honestly impressive when artists can do that. I saw the cure three or four years ago, Robert Smith sounds exactly like he did in the 80s. Meanwhile I saw Oasis like fifteen years ago and Liam Gallagher already sounded like shit lol

Tbf she’s like 1,000 years old I’m surprised she can muster up the energy to verbalise

I assumed the title implied 5am to 9pm lmao

There is a lot of controversy around “Lenin’s last testament” which you mention. Besides, as much as I enjoy Lenin why should he get to arbitrarily pick his successor in between having strokes lol.

Their ideological differences aside, by all accounts Trotsky was and always had been a huge asshole with a superiority complex (not to say he wasn’t actually a very intelligent guy, but y’know how some people are assholes about it?), and Stalin was just better at schmoozing people. So when it came down to it, he was better at politicking his way into power, while Trotsky would alienate people.

Now, after Trotsky was no longer involved in running the USSR, my personal thought are that he basically just became dogmatically against whatever was happening in Russia under Stalin, because of personal grievance. And keep in mind that it’s much easier to sit on the sidelines, criticising everything, than to be involved in the actual running of a nation trying to establish socialism for the first time.

There’s also a materialist argument to be made that if the power struggle had gone the other way, and Stalin got exiled, things in the USSR would have gone pretty similarly under Trotsky - or that someone else would have taken over earlier than 1953, because, again, everyone personally thought Trotsky was an asshole who was annoying to work with, lol.

This isn’t to say everything Trotsky ever did is poison, and that he should be completely disregarded. He has some good writings, and we’re talking about a guy who led the Petrograd Soviet and then the Red Army during the civil war. He was definitely smart and a true revolutionary. But I think after his ousting from power he became very embittered (perhaps understandably), and became the kind of socialist we criticise today, sitting on the sidelines in a capitalist country and constantly attacking AES.

TROTSKYISTS on the other hand are pretty insufferable lmao, because you can pretty much discard the first half of my previous paragraph, and just apply the second half to them.

It’s an infantile disorder tbf

They already ruined the term “social democratic”, isn’t that enough? Lenin would be spinning in his grave, if we hadn’t turned him into a freaky madame tussauds attraction

Haha, I like em, and maybe they were influential or whatever, but they have a lot of garbage in their catalogue for sure. The white album for example could easily be cut in half, didn’t need to be a double album.

I think Rubber Soul is their best album, after that a lot of their stuff went way too far up its own ass, I don’t need to listen to a bunch of white dudes playing the sitar tbh.

Also my “hot take” (and amongst a certain crowd it is definitely a hot take) is that the Rolling Stones are better than Beatles - sure the Beatles were better for like, four years in the 60s, but the stones have another 50 years of material after that. The stones didn’t even release some of their best albums until after the Beatles were broken up. So over the course of their whole output I much prefer the stones.

I reckon (and it’s the same thing I believe about 9/11), it’s a mixture of incompetence/complacency on behalf of US intelligence.

Think about how many concurrent tips/investigations into threats against the president the feds must deal with at any one time. I think, like 9/11, they probably had knowledge of a potential plot and failed to stop it, without being “involved”.

I’m sure theres a good chance the CIA/feds had their hands in it financially somewhere, in the sense that they’re always paying/arming groups all around the world - again, similar to 9/11 imo.

But did a bunch of agents sit down in a smoky room and decide to waste Kennedy? I doubt it. Maybe it was some kind of CIA asset they lost control of - “hey if we create a credible threat against the president maybe he will give us more license to attack Cuba” or whatever.