@BynarsAreOk
@hexbear.netYeah when we look at the narrative around Putin. Its unironic great man theory as if he is behind all the reactionary and conservative aspects. The worst part being the liberal fetish for color revolutions. The idea there is some liberal hero being oppressed and would be ready to replace him if only we support them. They tried that shit with Navalny even though nobody anywhere even knows him and not realizing he was just as racist and a nazi shit as everyone else.
Putin would be coup by the kind of people that think the war is embarrassing and would be ready to do a full mobilization(an additional 1 million or so) and actualy start bombing and destroying Ukraine indiscriminately.
This whole idea of a slow paced war of a attrition is not without its shaky moments(the Moskva,Kherson retreat, the Moscow attack etc). Nobody pretends the war is without cost, but Russia is managing this cost because they're being very conscious and smart about e.g building the military industry, making sure to transfer more wealth to workers even if just government subsidies etc.
Of course none of this is to say Putin deserves any praise but he was willing to admit to his previous mistake of being naive and willing to bring Russia closer to the west. His replacement in a coup would be someone even more resentful not less, someone even more agressive towards Ukraine not less.
The mythical "western values" loving Russian? That was quite literaly Putin 25 years ago lol.
Yeah I was going to reply this, indeed this shit only works when you're not literaly the lowest approval in history Yes the mass hate candidate sure.
His respnse is now "but the polls are wrong" lol they're both unironically 99% vs 100% Trump.
Support them when they do good things, criticize when they do bad things. It goes for any country. Feels like its 2022 again and people are relearning what "critical support" means.
They embrace the institutions because they know exactly how much they control it. In this sense Trump's politics realy doesn't do much for them and lacks any appeal.
There is a fair bit of reactionary tribalism. They don't want Trump and his clearly less "refined" clan encroaching in their circles, they certainly couldn't give a shit about the current MAGA base. The (70-80s) Reagan era is quite literally the turning point of the greatest attack on the American working class since WW2.
Meanwhile MAGA at least pretends to care about working class whites. Of course in the end Trump comes through with massive advantages for the richest capitalists(literally bigger tax cuts than Bush) too, but in the end I guess that "populist" optics is just too much.
Yeah I mentioned Tropico because its the closest contemporary to the old Sim City games. Workers is definitely better in many ways.
Trump's actions are often just attempts to satisfy his ego through positive media and supporter reaction. The issue with Iran if you recall is that his main supporter at the time, Fox news had a mixed reaction, with Tucker Carlson being extremely critical, something obviously like hell freezing over.
You can go and check back on the entire Carlson arc back then but here for example Fox's Tucker Carlson slammed conservatives for pushing Trump to go to war: 'About 20 minutes ago we were denouncing these very people as the deep state'
His base didn't particularly like that idea, he was MAGA and isolationist and yet he was about to put the US into a war with a nobody-country that wasn't a threat at the time. It wasn't Bush post 9/11 even though he thought that was an easy win.
As soon as the base consolidated into the neutral/negative camp which he didn't expect, he backed off. Right now his base is very much positive towards ending "Biden's war" so he is very likely to do it.
But his base also doesn't like China so that will be the next target.
You fucking lost. But you will never, ever, ever acknowledge it. If any one of you got into a fight that ended with you getting shot in the head, you’d be posting “I’ve won, actually, and here’s why” as you’re floating up up and away from your mangled corpse.
The sun never sets on the British empire.
I haven't played Tropico in a long time but even if that game is very on the nose with the "some are more equal than others" communism, I think in general in that game you have to build all the housing yourself.
Without reading the article the key feature of Sim City clones is the RCI(residential, commerce, industry) demand meter which as it says, the higher each bar the more zoning is necessary. There is a direct relationship between them too as one is meant to drive the others. The point is you just "follow the market demand" and the city grows naturaly with no real planning, just the market tells you what is best to do next.
If you compare to real world Chinese real state development for example, where they build entire towns years in anticipation of real demand, in Sim city clones the most you can do is plan some roads and zones and hope for the best. This is the dev's design intention obviously I think a good player can make good looking stuff too.
I think Cities skylines got a little more control given all the DLC stuff, but clearly the DNA is from the free market ideal presented here. Land value dictates what kind of building model.
I think in all these games land value is seen as the higher the better, with none of the real world downsides let alone the real mechanisms that drive land value up in the first place, its explicitly higher = better. These valuations tend to be realy naive like "oh got all basic needs? Got crime down? Got a few parks? Great now see land value go brrr"
Again maybe CS is a bit better because there are so many laws and government stuff there compared to Sim City. I haven't played in a long time too but again in a game like Tropico usually its not quite the same as that with some exceptions like maybe the best places to place tourist related buildings etc.
If that wasn't the intention they would have considered @shipwreck@hexbear.net 's points before hand.
The problem is currency swapping, China effectively put more money into circulation in their economy and assuming a standard capitalist economy that leads to inflation etc. As that money circulates, some of it will sit on banks, may earn interest which will have to be paid in that currency etc.
It obviously isn't a malicious act, it just that China can't realy understand or act outside the current mainstream economic principles or perhaps they simply thought this wouldn't be an issue. Its entirely possible both countries agreed a currency which the borrower has easier access to is better, perhaps that was even Burkina Faso's request we don't know.
I think the best solution would've been for China to directly build whatever is necessary through its own funds and hand over the project once its finished. It would still create local currency(local economy would be involved) but not a massive cash injection, they would repay via direct trading instead.
In the end if Burkina Faso may request to pay in yuan, doubt it though, mainstream economics is omnipresent.
What the fuck do state dinners have to do with genocide other than moral positioning? What the fuck does Blinken's home have to with genocide other than moral positioning? You think seizing Blinken's home in Beijing has a causal linkage to impacting the genocide? Or are you just expressing MORAL OUTRAGE?
Blinken is the fucking Secretary of state or are you like the other dipshit I blocked that think he "some random dude"? He is literaly one of the most powerful people on the planet. Stop trying to pretend he is some guy, its embarrassing. The online left is hilarious. People here constantly cry about how the US is run by absolute demons and ghouls, nazis.
But also these ghouls? Nah just some random dude with no power at all.
Imagine the year is 1939 and you're having state dinners with Goebells. "Actualy that was perfectly fine" no communist would ever dare say with a straight face, specialy not during the hollocaust.
The relationship between Xi meeting with Biden/Blinken, is it not obvious to you? Israel/Palestine is never on the agenda.
Vijay is taking up an important space in the discourse and creating pressure at the international level. You are arguing on the Internet that China's other efforts in anti-imperialism and the development of socialism are to be questioned because they don't meet a standard you have declared isn't morally based but have not actually justified materially. And you think I'm punching left?
You literaly dismissed him as a fucking pundit. Now you backtrack "oh but actualy he is doing important work". Is that because you had to google his name lol.
You seem to think that if China doesn't meet your foreign policy standards then that means clearly they are not up to your standards but you fail to identify those things as moral standards.
That is the point of an ideology and omg you actualy think its a gotcha? You actualy think communism is not a moral ideology? The irony of you trying to embarrass me for having a principled position that maybe compromising with Nazis commiting genocide is not okay.
You bother me.
Yes and? I did not ask for your reply and my initial reply was not to you. This is not your stance.
I initialy admitted China does good things.
But even that is not enough for this garbage Chinese chauvinistic/nationalist stance some people have. You tell me "i have it all figured out" even though its you coming with the novel and power point presentation on why China can't even look at Israel funny otherwise 1.4 billion people will die.
I'll stand with the rest of the global south denouncing nazis and their collaborators. China compromise where they shouldn't and this is costing us.
Yes its a moral stance, but it is also ideological. There is no reason to believe fascists wont turn on you just because you signed a deal. And yes China's lack of action does hurt. I pointed you to a literal global south Marxist making this point and you dismissed him as a fucking pundit.
I am not anti-China but I do prefer when communists don't compromise with Nazis. Its a moral standard. Oh no the horror.