why would the U.S coup the gov twice in a 2 year span? makes no sense

The article is about the US benevolently refusing a coup and sanctioning the people who did. Sounds like a much needed headline to me. Of course, the details of how that came about are unknown to us and sanctions usually just affect the civilian population.

Also, the US has couped a lot more than two countries in one year.

i think the state dept. knew what was gonna happen (forewarned by the general himself) but didn’t act

some intel agency, american or not, is happy about this

I wonder how Russia is feeling about this, but I feel like they will go along with it, considering they supported the nation after the 2019 coup which took out their guy

They signed some treaty with the now-former government in 2020 allowing warships to be in port,

We will have to see if this new leader objects to renewal

The question is what role the US actually played in it. Wouldn’t trust the headline or responsive measures. The US gave Saddam passive approval to invade Kuwait as pretext for intervention in the region. That’s in their toolkit.

My question is what roles do all of the large imperialist nation-states play in Africa, considering they like to ravage it all the name in the name of proxy wars. I wonder what the Sudan coup plays in this situation, and whose interests are aligned with who, especially in the interests of capitol, which is honestly all of them.

I don't like to take a U.S-centric perspective, which I'd argue is the reductive inverse of American exceptionalism. It would be a foolish mistake to play off one imperialism over the other.

The one thing America actually has proven that it is exceptional at is its national security state and international subterfuge. The budgets and historical record make that pretty clear. Trying to woke your way around that is pretty difficult.

I agree, I am not trying to "woke" my way out of it. I just don't agree with campism, as it leads to incompatible views and projecting a "good and evil" morality onto nation-states will lead you to negate class struggle.

The greatest obstacle for class struggle is the US empire. Not recognizing that is foolish.

All empires. This is a basic Marxist polemic of imperialist states, and is even referred in concept by Lenin. How self-proclaimed "Marxists" can't understand this is beyond me, and I'm not even one.

Let us suppose that a Japanese condemns the annexation of the Philippines by the Americans. The question is: will many believe that he does so because he has a horror of annexations as such, and not because he himself has a desire to annex the Philippines? And shall we not be constrained to admit that the “fight” the Japanese is waging against annexations can be regarded as being sincere and politically honest only if he fights against the annexation of Korea by Japan, and urges freedom for Korea to secede from Japan? - Vladimir Lenin

That’s great and all on a conceptual level, but Lenin would accurately recognize the consolidation of power in the US as the economy globalized. The US has actively snuffed out nationalist reforms and socialist regimes across the globe. It is a strategic imperative for that mechanism to fail in order for class struggle anywhere to succeed. I mean seriously, using the myth of American exceptionalism to obscure that point isn’t doing anyone any favors.

Also Japan and especially Korea have been US assets for a long time. Japan followed in the footsteps of the US industrialization in the 18th century. They even colonized Korea before the US eventually invaded and have used both as bulwarks against China. Special exceptions the US granted Korea were the reasons they destabilized other regions in the periphery. In this context it would seem obvious US empire was made on the bones of the conflict Lenin is describing and has reoriented them into a class hierarchy it approves of. It’s mutualism sure, but the power dynamic was and remains clear.

How much of that is mindful or subject to autonomous forces is a separate issue. The political struggle must be waged on all fronts and crippling US empire makes that far more realistic. Pacifism is popular and an easily understandable principle through which you can back door class struggle.

You seem to be intentionally misunderstanding what I am saying, I am not arguing for American intervention, I am just saying viewing statecraft as myopic and schizophrenic anti-Americanism will lead you nowhere, and it's internally contradictory to basic leftist thought and non-principled.

I mean we could support every reactionary movement under the sun if we want to be anti-American for a "class struggle imperative", the rightoids/nazbols don't like America because they think it's ran by a occupying ZOG government and that America is being destroyed by multiculturalism and s***. DPRK has ties to very fringe American pro-DPRK white supremacist movements, so that's kinda funny.

I’m an American. In this context it should be obvious that I’m referring to the US capitalists and the political/military body attached to that. I’ve even framed the entire discussion from the inner perspective of a citizen of America.

Nazbols are largely fraudulent and irrelevant fringes or puppets of the feds or neocon institutions. More obfuscation. I’ve never accused you of being an interventionist. I just reject the idea that your theory translates to a feasible political struggle to be waged. Truisms about “other nations have capitalist classes not just the US” skirt the point entirely.

Look at the historical record I have just described. The US is the Michael Jordan of couping and destabilizing and orienting class hierarchies globally. Surplus capital from everywhere floods it. I don’t know how mindfully you can assist its erosion, but its withdrawal is a prerequisite for change. It’s also a much taller order with far more resources at its disposal than Lenin or Mao faced.

speaking of maoists, is it true they're running around Austin, Texas again?

apparently they ambushed some DSA meeting in Austin last night by throwing smoke bombs and paint and putting out flyers

what a funny bunch

Wasnt he kind of a lib back then?

Crayz he turned antivax now lol

Kwame Ture was actually a genius

He's antivax??

Yeah from what he been tweeting definitely looks like it

Its not directly implied and i havent read his early work but from videos where he’s grilling Ralph Nader and getting bombarded at AIPAC he had to have been a dem soc at the least

And nah he’s not antivax he’s just working from the jimmy dore playbook