I suppose, if you want to frame the working classes protecting and upholding socialism to be “terrorism,” then I think this is a good use of terrorism. I would say that using such a loaded term as “terrorism” is clearly a subjectivist argument and not a practical one, though, as the goal is to rhetorically tie it with senseless and unnecessary measures.

As for Cuban prisoners, no, they aren’t all imperialists. Many are landlords, many are former slavers, and many are workers that have genuinely committed violent crimes or otherwise attacked their fellow Cubans. As we all know, the embargo has been incredibly brutal, and crime rates are most closely linked to economic desparation, made even worse by the current oil blockade. The good news is that these prisons are actually very humane compared to capitalist prisons, and are focused on reform over punishment:

When we drove up to the facility, I kept looking for what I was used to here: high stone walls, lots of barbed wire, guard towers, guards with assault weapons. And I didn’t see any of that. We pulled up to a building that looked similar to a large elementary school, and when we entered the building, there was no metal detector, which was something else I wasn’t used to. And no one was checking my bag to look for weapons or contraband, and there was no sign-in book; none of the things that I was used to experiencing when I entered a prison in the United States.

And then our guide announced that we would have, say, maybe two or three hours at the facility, and we could take a tour with him but we were not restricted to staying on the guided tour. So I wandered off with a couple of other people from the Guild, and we just went around the prison and sat in people’s rooms on their bunk beds and talked with them and literally went wherever we wanted, and that was totally different from any experience that I have had in the United States. Even as the executive director of the Correctional Association now, with legislative authority to monitor prison conditions and go inside the facilities in New York, we don’t take unguided tours of any facility. It’s very scripted where we go, and we are always accompanied by prison staff for the entire visit.

The following year, I went to a women’s prison in Cuba, and they put on a cabaret. I remember sitting in this huge auditorium with hundreds of people, and there were prison staff, people from the community, and people who were incarcerated all on the stage performing together in costumes. Nobody was in a uniform except the superintendent of the facility.

So what got my brain racing was that those two experiences—the physical layout of the prisons, the fact nobody was in uniform, the intersection between the people from the community, the staff, and the people who are doing time—spoke to what I ultimately learned was a completely different view about people who have been convicted of crimes. You don’t have this demonization and stereotyping that we have here, where incarcerated people are so ostracized they’re like the untouchables.

The entire article this came from is fantastic at explaining the Cuban perspective on incarceration. Even if you would take an abolitionist stance, it’s certainly more progressive than the vast majority of prisons. This is the kind of human-centric policy a government run by and for the people, genuinely, can implement, and they are gradually improving all the time.

Regarding the bit where I tagged you, you don’t really need to respond. You certainly could have, if you wanted, or you could do so here. It was more to point out the dishonesty of MeanwhileOnGrad and the people who regularly stalk accounts and post there. I’m not really expecting a response from you regarding how I personally view the usage of the word tankie, nor are you obligated to give me one.

I don’t see where I did that.

Body shaming isn’t cool.

Good on Cuba. Solidarity with the Cuban revolution and the Cuban people against the imperialists.

You’re genuinely equating the working classes running and controlling a socialist state with the brutal terrorism of groups like ICE? What would Cuba do without police and a military, especially with the US Empire on its doorstep? I can agree that as a state, it’s a monopoly of violence, but this monopoly of violence is used against landlords, capitalists, fascists, and the imperialists right on their doorstep. Meanwhile, the working classes get excellent healthcare, run administration, and help provide medical care abroad.

There’s tons of emulation handhelds produced in the PRC. The android-based ones tend to have nicer ARM chips and decent screens, and Valve is working on ARM support for SteamOS. This gets you a less powerful but more efficient SteamOS handheld, which allows you to play tons of pirated games or emulated games. You can also stick with android and use native emulation software, including windows emulation for PC games.

Steam Deck is too expensive now, IMO, to recommend over these devices.

I’d argue SWCCfaNE is closer to classical Marxist economics than the Gang of Four era. Marketization of underdeveloped industries helps socialize production, which can be kept in check through proletarian state ownership of the commanding heights of industry, finance, etc. This accelerates the transition between capitalism and communism, towards collectivized production and distribution.

In our hearts…

That’s a valid way of viewing him. He’s absolutely a vital figure, and probably the one I recommend the most for liberals due to his unique skills as an orator and in conveying Marxist ideas. My point was more that I don’t see him as I see Losurdo, for example, nor one of the actual revolutionaries in AES countries (who are less purely scholars and more theoreticians and practicians).

Zizek is more of a Hegelian by his own admission, and is essentially an “imperialist from the left.”

As much as I love Parenti (may he rest in peace), I wouldn’t classify him as a Marxist scholar, more of a “pro-Marxist.”

I’m a fan of Cheng Enfu and Roland Boer. If you asked a few years ago I would have added Domenico Losurdo, but sadly he has passed.

If you’ve never studied socialism, Blackshirts and Reds is a fantastic intro to the USSR. Better yet, just listening to the author’s 1986 Lecture is phenomenal.

Marxism-Leninism is an ideological framework. Essentially, it fronts dialectical materialism, the materialist conception of history, and Marxist political economy as correct. There is no one “Marxist-Leninist form of governance,” just as in real life there is no one universally correct form of governance. However, all of the component parts of Marxism-Leninism are correct, including dialectical materialism, which is the basis of correct scientific analysis and interpretation. It is not a replacement for the scientific method, but a way we understand the world.

What you describe is broadly empiricism. The limits of pure empiricism are that, if we are being truly pure, we do not draw connections between linked phenomena. In other words, we do not assume gravity will be the same tomorrow as it is today, because we have not yet tested it. As the world is constantly changing on both a micro and macro scale, this means each test is in fact fresh, with fresh conditions. Empiricism, taken to the extreme, denies this understanding.

Dialectical materialism expands upon empiricism by recognizing the interconnection of everything, and that knowledge is something continuous. As we test the world, we gain a better understanding of it, and therefore the world is always changing so our knowledge is always becoming outdated as long as we are not continuously testing and practicing. Through practice, we gain better knowledge, with which we can better predict what will happen.

There’s nothing spiritual about Marxism-Leninism. Knowledge comes from practice, of course it does. However, without acknowledging that we all have a world outlook, this solidifies what might be incorrect, such as idealism or metaphysics, as has often happened in the field of science.

I already said Marxism-Leninism is not a “form of governance.” The fact that you repeat this claim leads me to believe that you aren’t actually reading what I’m writing.

Phikosophy, our world outlook, is already before science. The way we see the world and understand it determines how we view science and perform it. This is why vulgar materialists, as opposed to dialectical materialists, tried to prove race theory correct and thus advocate for eugenics. Science is not neutral. The world around us, the material world, does not care how we interpret it beyond how we change it. However, there is no such thing as a perfectly neutral observer, we all have preconceived biases.

Marxism-Leninism is already scientific, the scientific method is a tool employed by it already. You’re trying to remove science from the context it exists in.

You’re still treating science like it’s not a process gone through by humans. Science once posited that race science was correct in order to justify eugenics. We need to be aware of our world outlook and correct it before we begin to use science, otherwise we come to incorrect conclusions and incorrect propositions. That’s my point.

Marxism-Leninism is correct not because it is a “form of governance” (it isn’t) but because it’s a living social science grounded in scientific understanding of the world.

Science is not independent of philosophy. There’s idealist science, metaphysical science, etc, all of which are wrong. There is no such thing as science without philosophy, because science is an attempt by humans to understand the world. Humans are all philosophers, as we all have a world outlook. By rejecting study of philosophy as it relates to science, you are ignoring preconcieved biases, rather than acknowledging them and correcting the misconceptions.

This is why Marxism-Leninism is correct, and why all science must be done from a dialectical materialist standpoint.

Marxism-Leninism is already heavily based on science, and takes the stance of dialectical materialism as the basis for science and analysis. What’s wrong with scientific socialism as it already exists, in your eyes?

Incredible self-own on your part.

You don’t need to be a mod to check the modlog, it’s public information unless the admin or moderator deems the content to be worthy of permanently purging, like CSAM links. In that regard, it would make no sense for me to “create a false narrative,” anyone that wishes to can see what you wrote by checking the moderation history of your comment. Just click the 3 dots on a comment and you can find it.

Either way, calling people “dick riders” and telling them to “shove it up their asses” is only insulting by nature of drawing on social shame towards homosexuality. You can insult people, call them sycophants, etc. without resorting to homophobia and throwing queer people under the bus.

You also seem to be a fan of racism and ableism, going by your other removed comments. Lovely.