marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-9/mswv9_81.htm

for the dialogues with the red guards

found something amusing with his needs to defend rebels he does the same thing in his interview with his nephew or niece where he start lecturing her for not breaking the rules

marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-9/mswv9_87.htm

this show was the goat

Same stock sound as Jimmy Dore show

man I need to rewatch Xavier lol

crazy ass s***

SCHIZOWARSFUR trying to post tweets about Afghanistan and Iran in the Meg/Tory thread

Deadass?

i saw that and thought i was hallucinating

Convinced him and that other dude are regime bots paid to pose as diaspora to make the opposition seem as annoying and idiotic as possible

I refuse to believe that’s not also Franquito

maybe we're all Franquito

Gramsci notes on italian history really got me interested in reading about the history of the development of capitalism now

Never heard of this guy but just looked him up and these prison notebooks sound incredible

Yeah I'm a Centrist

Are there any people worse than the british? Even Americans aren't this deranged

the frogs are up there with them as well

what was the ideology of Imperial Japan, especially during WW2? i can somewhat understand the ideology of the Nazis, and their motivation behind WW2, as well as the justifications they made for the holocaust. same thing with italy more broadly. but i have no idea what the ideology of Japan was, or how the war and wicked atrocities were viewed by Japanese society

also, do you think the CPC was correct in uniting with the KMT to fight Japan? more broadly, should Communists unite with the ruling class army to fight against an invading imperial power? you could apply this to the war in Ukraine, as in should Ukrainian Communists engage in struggle against Russia or should they save the lives of their members and focus on antagonizing the people? i think theirs also a difference between supporting war efforts and going all out/putting all your troops on the front line. so like while the CPC supported the KMT against Japanese invaders, they weren't throwing away the lives of their members en masse. because even if they beat japan their party would be weak af and lose the ensuing civil war

We do not and never have put all wars on the same plane. Marx and Engels supported the revolutionary struggle of the Irish against Great Britain, of the Poles against the tsar, even though in these two nationalist wars the leaders were, for the most part, members of the bourgeoisie and even at times of the feudal aristocracy ... at all events, Catholic reactionaries.

In the Far East we have a classic example. China is a semicolonial country which Japan is transforming, under our very eyes, into a colonial country. Japan’s struggle is imperialist and reactionary. China’s struggle is emancipatory and progressive.

But Chiang Kai-shek? We need have no illusions about Chiang Kai-shek, his party, or the whole ruling class of China, just as Marx and Engels had no illusions about the ruling classes of Ireland and Poland. Chiang Kai-shek is the executioner of the Chinese workers and peasants. But today he is forced, despite himself, to struggle against Japan for the remainder of the independence of China. Tomorrow he may again betray. It is possible. It is probable. It is even inevitable. But today he is struggling. Only cowards, scoundrels, or complete imbeciles can refuse to participate in that struggle.

marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1937/10/sino.htm

• "KMT are bent on destroying us." Quite true, they are always trying to destroy us. I fully admit the soundness of this appraisal, and indeed one would have to be fast asleep to overlook the point. But the question is whether there has been any change in the way they are trying to destroy us. I think there has been. The change is from war and massacre to reform and deceit, from a tough policy to a soft one, from a military to a political policy. Why has there been such a change? Confronted with Japanese imperialism, the bourgeoisie and the Kuomintang are temporarily forced to seek an ally in the proletariat, just as we are seeking an ally in the bourgeoisie. We should take this as our point of departure in considering the question. Internationally, for a similar reason, the French government has changed from hostility towards the Soviet Union to alliance with it. Our domestic task has changed from a military to a political one. We for our part have no use for plotting or scheming; our aim is to defeat Japanese imperialism in a common effort by uniting with all those members of the bourgeoisie and the Kuomintang who favour resistance.

marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-1/mswv1_15.htm

mao is the f***ing🐐 man, no one has a better writing style

To reject the participation of the bourgeoisie in the revolution on the ground that it can only be temporary and to describe the alliance with anti-Japanese sections of the bourgeoisie (in a semi-colonial country) as capitulation is a Trotskyite approach, with which we cannot agree. Today such an alliance is in fact a necessary bridge on the way to socialism.*

this is funny tho cuz the trotsky article i linked in my last post agreed with Mao's a***ysis

I mean you can’t just say you’ll never use it it ruins the whole point