indicating you believe that Marxism does call for a DotP

Obviously? Here it is, right from the horse’s mouth:

What I did that was new was to prove: (1) that the existence of classes is only bound up with particular historical phases in the development of production (historische Entwicklungsphasen der Production), (2) that the class struggle necessarily leads to the dictatorship of the proletariat,[1] (3) that this dictatorship itself only constitutes the transition to the abolition of all classes and to a classless society .

And of course so was Lenin, decrying “Bernsteinism”:

Denied was the fact of growing impoverishment, the process of proletarisation, and the intensification of capitalist contradictions; the very concept, “ultimate aim”, was declared to be unsound, and the idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat was completely rejected. Denied was the antithesis in principle between liberalism and socialism. Denied was the theory of the class struggle, on the alleged grounds that it could not be applied to a strictly democratic society governed according to the will of the majority, etc.

I don’t even get ypur objection here. Are you implying Marx did not call for DOTP or are you claiming I wasn’t sufficiently clear about saying Marx also called for DOTP? My point was that both call for DOTP but Lenin’s version of it was the only one that was realized, that it turned out to be rather brutal, and that tankies (like you just did!) don’t even distance themselves from it but embrace it. Which was the entire point in the OP.

Marxism is not the same as Marxism-Leninism. Marx might have had Paris commune as his idea of dictatorship of the proletariat, though it was all theoretical. Lenin’s take was the first implementation of the idea which was way more hardline (Red Terror) as seen in incidents like the purge of the Left SRs.

Whether Lenin’s actions were justified it’s a different matter (and tankies will certainly say they were) but ironically Tankies typically won’t dispute that Lenin was dictatorial. Rather, often they will point to talking points taken out of What is to be done? to justify why those actions were needed (i.e. the official CPSU party line).

Marxist-Leninist ideology explicitly calls for the dictatorship of the proletariat. I wouldn’t want it either, but this is basically like going to a religious forum and advocating atheism (i.e. pointless).

Heh, lot of good that did you in the USSR/Mao era China

*contingent on a symmetric intelligence distribution

Your occupation government demanded Germans to outlaw this type of speech in the postwar constitution.

It’s a lie.

Tory shadow justice secretary Nick Timothy said on Friday that he had been aware of such an incident when he was chief of staff to Prime Minister Theresa May. “When I was in No 10, somebody failed developed vetting before their proposed appointment to a sensitive post. We were told immediately, and were advised — correctly — that this person could not be appointed. Who gave that advice? Sue Gray — later Starmer’s chief of staff,” Timothy said on X.

Allies of Olly Robbins defend handling of Mandelson vetting - https://www.ft.com/content/58c01bc9-12bf-440c-9a91-01c130a6a9c1?shareType=nongift via @FT

Plenty of countries declared IRGC, part of Iran’s military, a terrorist organization including US, EU, Australia. Clearly not a blocker.

Go’s val, err := maybeDoThing() pattern isn’t the same thing because it’s not a discriminated union like Rust’s Result or C++'s std::expected or the Typescript example in the article. Moreover, due to restrictions in Go’s generics, it’s impossible to implement what is imo the most attractive pattern enabled by the discriminated union Result types - monadic operations.

Holocaust story you shared is sad but has nothing to do with this specific change. I find it really disturbing that you cheapen the unique suffering of holocaust victims to score points here. Holocaust victims, or indeed anyone genuinely needing asylum, would not have waited over a year to apply.

There has to be a cutoff for any change. I think there is a genuine argument to be made from a rule of law perspective that no law should have retroactive effect. However, considering your posts in this thread I have a feeling you wouldn’t be satisfied with making this law not retroactive anyway.

Did you even read the article? There is a process and the changes outlined in the article are a change to the process to make it less game-able by economic migrants posing as refugees. Namely

anyone who first arrived in Canada after June 24, 2020, will not be allowed to make a refugee claim after one year

Which makes a lot of sense, because it impacts approximately 0 genuine refugees (they either get refugee visas before arrival or tend to apply as soon as they arrive) and cuts out lots of economic migrants posing as refugees (who tend to arrive on a temporary work permit or student visa and want to extend their stay).

The article is NOT about abolishing the right to apply for asylum.

The UN human rights declaration’s right to asylum was built with political asylum in mind, to protect people who are genuine victims of oppression and war. It was not built for economic migrants. The abuse of the system by opportunists killed it for everyone.

Traders love doing this

Thls ls why crypto was invented

Assad got a full Russian air force deployment to flatten Idlib and still lost. There’s a limit to everything.

M2 money supply actually had not increased for a while and only recently surpassed the previous peak in 2022. Meanwhile US debt and debt to GDP ratio increased modestly (and is in fact down from the COVID era peak ‘thanks’ to inflation) meaning that it’s mostly the treasuries market that was funding the new debt (i.e. borrowing)

Post in OP says “conspiracy of…Christian men” which certainly does NOT describe Epstein, the person at the epicentre of all this

Doesn’t mean he’s living paycheck to paycheck. People often don’t leave a lot of money in checking accounts from which they pay mortgages because checking accounts often offer 0% interest. So if the landlord usually has close to 0 money in his checking account expecting rent to come ahead of the mortgage paynent despite having millions in a brokerage account he’ll still go into overdraft.

EU wants phones to be locked down so they can then make Google implement mass surveillance for “national security” reasons

One big practical criticism is that it requires a different compiler which is supported on far fewer platforms than GCC