For me, it kept a lot of the worst of the idiots away from places like reddit.

As soon as xitter got bad, lots of them left. You see, those kinds of weaponsied, unhigned right wingers are so repulsive to be around, they can’t even stand each other. More so, they dont even want to have a conversation or an exchange of ideas. They literally just want to rant at people, parroting the lines they read somewhere else at anyone they think disagrees with them.

If everyone agrees with you, you have no one to rant at.

Facsism is just capitalism when you try to say no.

Understandably, workers didn’t like capitalism. So, when they found out about socialism, many of them grouped up and tried to say no. After which, facsism was made to counter this.

So, I mean literally fascism is just capitalism when you try to say no. You only get mercan staal neo classical economics because you say yes.

Outside of small city states, capitalism came from merchantislism.

Specifically, at the intersection where merchantislism and mass dispossession/theft of people’s land meet.

The only meaningful change is that the assets are now, mostly, intangible and you’re allowed to move to a different parish.

If only there was some kind of proven road map where countries who has been dominated by their ruling elite using the two party trick went on to form a kind of labour movement that forced a third choice on the ruling class…

I see a fair amount of online adverts that use them. Usually the kind you might get orbiting an article of some kind, just using AI images as their hook.

They call countries banana republics, from what could be described as oil and banking republics with just a small modification or two, without a hint of irony.

Honestly, i think the reason is that just the right amount of alcohol dependency is amazing for capitalism. Dont get me wrong, I’m not judging anyone. I understand and I enjoy a drink myself. I just think we need to be honest with ourselves about it.

It keeps you consuming and it makes you forget all the bullshit you had to put up with all day. It dulls your your problem solving, your creativity and (most importantly) your empathy, so supervisors, middle managers, department managers and execs are less disinclined not to beat down on those below them.

I’m not saying its some grand conspiracy. I’m saying, those in power have known exactly the right drugs to administer to the masses in order to placate them. The Romans knew to give wine and not cannabis. The British army knew to give rum & brandy but not weed.

In fact, all of them were legal. Then, capitalism really took off and, totally unrelated in sure, every drug other than alcohol suddenly became illegal.

And it ain’t what it ain’t.

“Well, that’s just how it is”

Person attempting to justify an injustice they also suffer, without even a thought about whether it being “how it is” might actually be connected to all the people saying dumb stuff like “Well, that’s just how it is.”

After that, things get more complicated.

Nope, come on man are you kidding me (?) and disagree again.

I agree that maybe you can’t but that doesn’t make it true or not. The last Conservative government of great Britain showed themselves to be utterly corrupted by greed and capitalism. They didn’t even have to pretend not to rip the entire country off during the covid pandemic.

Even then, its not “more” or less than the US. My point is just that capitalism corrupts all governments, to one extent or another, because its incompatible with democracy.

If there is a top, in terms of money or having things etc., then it isn’t communism.

Please name which country in Europe has a government thats hasn’t been bought and paid off.

Of course, no one can. Unfortunately, that’s because capitalism is incompatible with actual democracy. Theres isn’t a country in the world whos democratic process and systems of governance hasn’t been utterly corrupted by capitalism and all that it brings with it.

If there’s a top that someone could rise to, it isn’t communism.

Fair enough, that makes way more sense.

I think they meant front line cavalry which, tbf, they should have specified.

For sure, I think horses, donkys and mules are still the best way to carry large supplies for fighting deep in jungles too. Well, outside of helicopters but they’re not ad good at hiding under the jungle canopy. So, I 100% agree. I was just letting you know.

I don’t think I explained it very well.

They dont look to own the country when they overthrow it. Thats old school colonialism. Its expensive to maintain and people will dislike you for it. Neo colonialism has them pay for their colonisation from the start.

It’ll be for access to specific resources. Say they had, oh I dunno, oil. You install a puppet government thats 100% dependent on you, who knows they’ll be killed if they lost US backing, and you force them sell you their oil fields for a fraction of their worth.

Then, any revolution or even democratic vote that tries to take them back, despite how wrong and unlawfully they were obtained, would be seen as breaking international law and have them cut off from the rest of the world. Cuba was and still is meant as a warning to the rest of the Americas.

You don’t need the rest of the country to be prosperous for that. In fact, that would just push up the labour costs.

Its strange, you reply with the appearance of disagreeing but then say things that don’t refute anything I’ve said and that I broadly agree with.

For sure and even before machine guns, there’s examples of that like the seige of Badajoz which, for its time, was brutal (Napoleonic - like 5k in an hour or something).

To me though, and apologies if you know already, at the Battle of the somme the British army believed the germans to already be dread after days of shelling. As well as this, the many of the british troops were so poorly trained that they ordered mass sections to literally March, with their arms locked out in front of them with the barrel of their rifle pointing upwards, right at German machine guns hoping to charge at the end. Thats literally napoleonic tactics, only they were all “rifles” or light infantry, so they formed skirmishers lines instead of columns. The British artillery stopped shooting for the advance, so that they didn’t shoot their own troops.

By the end of the war, soldiers huddled behind tanks advancing behind a rolling barage. The germans just did it on mass and had the armour more concentrated. One of the reasons they jumped so far ahead is the hard lessons they had suffered towards the end of the war. I mean, it was still a blood bath for everyone but for them it was an even worse blood bath. So, I agree very much with what you’re saying.

My only point I’m making about the speed of change in warfare, to my understanding, is even greater still in ww1.

I don’t disagree with anything you’re saying. However, I think the reason it’s not sitting right with you is your assumption of good faith on their part.

What if they never cared if the country is more profitable generally and they just wanted to rip them off as much as possible before they realise what’s going on?

To me, their actions make far more sense if I presume that was what they really intended to do. More so, any assumption of good faith, as you point out, makes their behaviour seem, at best, bizzare.

Most historians I’ve read consider ww1 to have had a far greater evolution, starting with napoleonic tactics and ending with rolling artillery barrages and tanks.

However, I’m not sure of the point you’re looking to make here. I mean, the polish army sending cavalry against the germans was an act of wild desperation. I think thats the point they were making there.

Not against tanks which would be why the royal dragoons switched to tanks.

100%. People only think them failures or the CIA as incompetent as they presume the CIAs illegal actions, in those instances, to have been done in good faith, despite the contradiction.

As always, the intended outcome was access to that particular country’s resources, for a very small group of wildly wealthy people, at regime-change prices.

When it comes to that, the CIA are amazing at what they do.