politics

22212 readers
25 users here now

Protests, dual power, and even electoralism.

Labour and union posts go to !labour@www.hexbear.net.

Take the dunks to /c/strugglesession or !the_dunk_tank@www.hexbear.net.

!chapotraphouse@www.hexbear.net is good for shitposting.

Do not post direct links to reactionary sites.

Off topic posts will be removed.

Follow the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember we're all comrades here.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
626
627
628
 
 

First, a practical explanation of what happened after the sanctions were imposed:

Best quote of his explanation: "This is a situation in which the sanctions were imposed by one important sector of the world economy which then cut itself off from resources that it needs - and that's particularly true of Western Europe - in return for cutting Russia off from various things that Russia doesn't really need."

Second best quote: "If you go back to the period before the introduction of the sanctions [...] the Russian economy was very heavily colonized by Western firms. That was true in automobiles, it was true in aircrafts, it was true in everything from fast food restaurants to big box stores. Western firms were present all throughout the Russian economy. A great many of them [...] either chose to exit Russia or were pressured to exit Russia after early 2022. So on what terms did they leave? Well, they were required, if they were leaving permanently, to sell their capital equipment, their factories and so forth, to let's say a Russian business which would get a loan from Russian banks or maybe have other sources of financing, at a very favorable price for the Russians. So effectively a lot of capital wealth, which was partly owned by the West, has been transferred to Russian ownership. And you now have an economy which is moving forward and has the advantage compared to Europe of relatively low resource costs because Russia is a great producer of resources, oil and gas and fertilizer and food stuff and so forth. And so while the Europeans are paying maybe twice in Germany what they were paying for energy, the Russians are not, they're paying perhaps less than they were paying before the war. So again I characterize the effect of the sanctions, in fact as being in certain respects a gift to the Russian economy. And this is, I think, quite different from what the authors of the sanctions expected. [...] And the essence of the situation is this would not have happened without the sanctions. You could have had the war, and it would have gone pretty much as it has gone. But the Russian government in 2022 was in no position to force the exit of Western firms. It didn't want to, wouldn't have done that. It was in no position to force its oligarchs to choose between Russia and the West. It didn't wish to do that. These choices were imposed by the West, and the results were actually, in many respects, favorable to the long-term independent development of the Russian Federation's economy."

Here’s the link to the tweet with the quotes. It has a 12 min video interview with the economist in question too, but you might want to watch that in YouTube instead.

A good potential secondary objective of the sanctions: making Europe dependent on the US:

But what if the purpose of the sanctions was actually not to damage the Russian economy but to damage the European economy, to remove the latter as an economic competitor for the United States and to make it dependent on US energy?

Link to the OG tweet that asked the question.

Second, a theoretical explanation of the modern Russian state by Samir Amin.

In one of his last books, Russia and the Long Transition from Capitalism to Socialism, the great Marxist thinker Samir Amin posed a prescient question.

He saw that the Putin-era Russian state balanced two contradictory economic tendencies. On one hand, it introduced vicious neoliberal reforms, which served exclusively the powerful Western-oriented comprador elites. On the other, it vigorously sought to bolster the country's economic sovereignty. Which tendency would prevail?

"[I]f the comprador fraction of the Russian ruling classes... ends up gaining the upper hand," Amin wrote, "then the 'sanctions' with which Europe is intimidating Russia could bear fruit. The comprador segments are still disposed to capitulate to preserve their portion of the spoils from the pillaging of their country.” (This, by the way, was the strategy of figures like Alexey Navalny, who hoped against hope that he could effect regime change by striking a bargain with Russia's pro-Western elites.)

Amin did not live to see the sanctions package introduced against Russia. But I suspect that his insights would have echoed Galbraith's. By effectively dismantling the Russian comprador class, the sanctions have resolved a central contradiction within the post-Soviet Russian state — in favor of the imperative of sovereign development.

This is precisely the opposite of the intended effect and is deeply revealing of the hubris and analytical poverty of Western imperial policy.

Link to the first Samir Amin explanation and the LibGen link to the book.

Someone, in response, talks of Russian oligarchs and Amin engaging in wishful thinking. A response that goes further into Amin’s theory:

If we take seriously Amin's notion of a world dominated by the collective imperialism of the Triad — a central thesis of his political thought — and the idea that the present moment is characterized by a new wave of "emergence" from the domination of these centers, then I struggle see any wishful thinking here.

We have a state which, as Galbraith says, has been "heavily colonized by Western firms". Now, by force of historical necessity, it is advancing across technological, food, medical, informational, and financial sovereignty — Amin's very definition of an "emergent" state. This is not a qualitative judgment. It is a quantitative observation about the degree of a state's economic separation from the imperialist centers.

A lot hinges on the analysis of the material basis of the national bourgeoisie versus the comprador bourgeoisie, a distinction that Amin and others have made very clearly. Much of the last great wave of "emergence" (e.g., the Bandung era) was also led by national bourgeois projects. In the long run, neoliberal policies open the state to foreign capital penetration in ways that subordinate it to the domination of the main capitalist centers and undermine the national bourgeoisie, foreclosing pathways to "emergence".

Whether we see the sanctions as punishment for war or punishment for disobedience with the diktats of empire, they had the opposite of their intended effect — and Amin, like Galbraith, give us a framework that helps explain why. There is a lot more to say — indeed, books have been dedicated to these questions! — but I don't think it serves us well to dismiss these analytical currents.

The final response

629
630
631
632
 
 

https://youtu.be/nHlNJXcBOFg?si=S-B8TY7NUO1JcTa5

Op is 2023, this one is 2021

Now the question is do you take the man’s words at face value?

I struggle to see how you can call a unified coalition of armed groups fighting to depose the government “gang members”

Who the heck knows what’s going on here but the rhetoric speaks for itself, and CIA arming and funding of opposition militias would definitely not be unheard of.

I don’t know anything about the last pres who got assassinated before Henry (who is resigning today) took over in an “interim” capacity 3 or 4 years ago…

There is more to this story for sure imo, this is one to watch

633
634
635
 
 

He was interested in politics at a very young age

636
 
 

It's a long-form article so here's an excerpt of the first part:


Baltimore is often maligned as a shrinking city beset by crime and intractable poverty. But take a walk down President Street just south of Little Italy on a Friday night, and you will enter a world that appears far removed from the idea of a city that is terminally in decay.

Past the empty pavilions of the Inner Harbor and east of the city’s increasingly troubled downtown business district, a cluster of towering high-rises emerges from the harbor like a defiant mountain range of concrete.

A cobblestone boulevard leads to a European-style thoroughfare dotted with a dazzling array of upscale restaurants and outdoor dining patios. Lines of traffic spill onto the side streets as eager tourists vie for hard-to-find parking spots.

The outdoor bars and retail shops thrum with activity while the upscale Four Seasons Hotel sits astride panoramic views of the tranquil harbor. Stories of luxury condominiums extend into a swanky dance club, which perches atop the building like a palatial penthouse. An express elevator operated by a top hat-wearing attendant delivers partygoers to an often-packed dance floor.

It’s a world unto itself, seemingly far removed from the David Simon-conjured Wire-fied landscape of a failed city beset by corruption, drug dealing, and over policing: An upscale bubble that offers a gleaming rebuke to the naysayers who deem Baltimore a dysfunctional city of a dwindling population and violent crime.

But it’s a success story that comes with a hefty, less obviously apparent, asterisk. Harbor East is, in some sense, a taxpayer-bolstered paradise.

Based on the findings of our nearly year-long investigation into how Harbor East came to be, this shining city within the city is a success story heavily dependent upon public subsidies to an extent that has not previously been reported. It is a waterfront oasis fueled by dozens of tax breaks and incentives, built and sustained by tens of millions of dollars in city money.

How these tax subsidies have both defined and transformed Harbor East is a story entangled in the city that surrounds it. As our ongoing investigation Tax Broke has revealed, it is a tale of how a community walled off from its affluent suburban neighbors turned to tax incentives to reverse years of decay and population loss. But it’s also an example of the secrecy that obscures the details of how much this policy costs and who it really benefits.

As this spreadsheet illustrates, records obtained by TRNN reveal that, between 2012 and 2022, Harbor East received roughly $115.8 million in tax relief from the city through various subsidies and incentives.

However, despite numerous Maryland Public Information Act requests, city officials would release only a limited range of data from 2013–2022 pertaining to Harbor East tax records. They also would not release separate tax bills regarding a series of PILOTs—payment in lieu of taxes—granted to buildings within the development, which led to additional tax savings for developers.

Still, what we were able to obtain paints a picture of a luxury development built upon a foundation of public subsidies.

The most lucrative of these incentives went to the Marriott Waterfront Hotel. To date, $57 million in property tax has been abated, part of a 25-year PILOT that requires a tax payment of $1 per year.

But the city has also granted tax relief to a variety of other buildings.

Roughly 75% of the additional Harbor East properties garnered subsidies worth approximately $58 million in just under a decade. The bulk of the tax breaks were PILOTs, given to at least seven properties comprising the waterfront development.

PILOTs offer fairly straightforward tax relief: Property taxes are phased in over time on a sliding scale, from a small percentage of the actual tax bill to a greater share of what would actually be owed. A ten-year PILOT, for example, might require the property to pay 5% of the entire tax bill for the first three years, then 20% for the next four, and, finally, 80% for the remaining two. But the city has been opaque about the tax savings from individual PILOTs, removing the data from online tax records and ignoring our requests for additional data.

But some properties were granted more than one tax break.

The pricey office tower built to house the Legg Mason investment firm benefited from both an Enterprise Zone credit and a PILOT. The subsidies were intended to maintain 600 jobs and keep the firm’s headquarters in the city.

Legg Mason was acquired by California-based investment firm Franklin Templeton in 2020. The name is currently off the building, but the subsidies remain. Records show the owners of the building have not been required to pay full city property tax since 2018.

In addition to the PILOTs, multiple other buildings within the same development also received Enterprise Zone tax credits and abatements under the Brownfields incentive program. Each forgives a percentage of property taxes ranging from 50% to 75% of the entire tax bill for five to ten years, depending on a variety of criteria.

The Enterprise Zone credit is designed to spur commercial development in poor neighborhoods but was expanded over time to include the entire city. The Brownfields credit incentivizes developers to remediate contaminated properties and offers a similarly generous 75% reduction in tax bills for five to ten years.

The Four Seasons Hotel and Private Residences used a Brownfield credit to save roughly $10.6 million in taxes over the past decade. This incentive included nearly $6 million for the luxury condos that sit atop the hotel.

The $115 million figure does not paint a full picture of the taxpayer tab for Harbor East. The scope of our calculations is limited by the fact that many of the tax credits granted to these developments were in effect prior to 2013—records that were not available, according to city finance officials.

The lack of transparency is, in part, due to how the city bills properties that receive tax subsidies.

Special credits like Brownfields and Enterprise Zones are not detailed online. Instead, we had to ask the city for copies of the separate paper bills it mails annually to developers, which list the value of the credit. From the paper bills, we calculated the 10-year figure for taxes abated through Brownfields and Enterprise Zone tax credits that contribute to the $115 million taxpayer tab.

Even the taxes abated via PILOTs were challenging to calculate. The city told us tax bills for PILOTs are mailed separately from ordinary tax bills, including special credits. We asked for copies of the separate PILOT bills, but the city would not release them, again without explanation or response to our request.

To work around the lack of data, we obtained two decades’ worth of property assessments for all the parcels that comprise Harbor East. We used the value of the buildings to calculate the property taxes owed in any given year. Then, we applied the formulas outlined in council legislation, which authorized several of the Harbor East PILOTs to estimate the tax savings for a given PILOT to arrive at the approximate figure.


Anyone else live in Baltimore or Maryland?

What do you think of all this?

637
638
639
640
641
642
 
 

As some of you may have heard, Sahra Wegenknect is a first generation Iranian-German MP and splitter from Linke in her own party known as Bündnis Sahra Wagenknecht (yes, its her own name). In the 90s, she was part of the successor party to the SED in its left faction known as Communist Platform. Unfortunately, she has yet to remove her brain from the mainstream 90s communist movement and has yet to advance on social issues. This has been glossed over on by many liberal commenters without any quotes from the devil-we-know, and I am going to discuss her most horrendous takes in depth here.

I will also be comparing her stance with Linke. Most quotes are from her own book 2021 Die Selbstgerechten: Mein Gegenprogramm - für Gemeinsinn und Zusammenhalt. (The Self-Righteous: My Counter-Program - for Community Spirit and Cohesion). It should be noted her book is not published for free online, which is suspicious for an alleged socialist. Other quotes are from her party, MP, or personal websites.

CW: Transphobia, Racism.


On Queer, Transgender, and Racial Issues

It should be noted that Sahra Wegenknect has in the past supported LGB rights. In 2017, she supported the gay marriage vote in Germany.

Excerpt 1:

New fashion words are constantly emerging, which of course one should know and use oneself as quickly as possible. In recent times, the terms "misogyny" and "cis-women" for female citizens who are not transgender have been added to the left-liberal vocabulary. Anyone who wants to participate in lifestyle-left discussions without being criticized therefore needs one thing above all: enough free time to stay up-to-date on questions of correct expression.

The typical lifestyle-left person lives in a big city or at least a chic university town, and rarely in places like Bitterfeld or Gelsenkirchen. He or she is studying or has a university degree and good foreign language skills, advocates for a post-growth economy and pays attention to biologically sound nutrition. Discount meat eaters, diesel car drivers and cheap Mallorca air travelers are anathema to him.

This does not mean that he himself does not drive a car or never gets on an airplane. He or she even loves to travel - with the exception of Corona times - and usually flies particularly far, because mobility and cosmopolitanism are part of his or her DNA. But these are not about Ballermann tourism, but about educational trips that help to get to know other cultures, to visit the last remaining wild orangutans or to get closer to the inner self in an Ayurveda hotel.

The fact that inner-city journeys are often made by bicycle or electric second car makes it easier on the conscience.

In the next excerpt, we can see a supposed socialist coming to the defense of a billionaire for the purpose of shitting on transgender people.

Excerpt 2:

One does not have to think conservatively, express oneself on migration problems, or defend the social survival of one's home region in order to become the target of vehement attacks. Even the thesis that there are natural differences between women and men, and not just social role models, can lead to a veritable shitstorm, as Harry Potter author Joanne K. Rowling had to experience. To understand the background of the campaign, one must know that left-liberal gender theory seriously denies the existence of a biological sex. In the meantime, Rowling has even been wished death for alleged transphobia, and her latest book has not only been ostracized by the Twitter mob, but publicly burned, an act whose dark history did not seem to bother the actors in the least.

The way we deal with the no longer existing genders has also become more complicated. A well-intentioned compliment, addressed to the wrong person, can quickly make a man the object of rude accusations of sexism. The number of commandments and rules of conduct is growing at a pace that ordinary citizens - i.e. people who spend their days with other things than discursive awareness - have no chance of keeping up with. In the end, it is best for them to simply say nothing more. The fact that, according to a survey from 2019, more than half of German citizens are worried about expressing their opinions freely outside of their circle of friends, in light of the increasing intolerance with which such debates are conducted, is not surprising.

Not wanting to make anyone feel left out, she has decided to defend black face.

Excerpt 3:

Who is allowed to play Othello?

According to the guidelines of identity politics, it is now considered sacrilege in theaters, for example, for Shakespeare's Othello, a black man, to be played by a white man. This follows from the aforementioned thesis that a member of the majority society is unable to empathize with the inner life of a member of a minority. If he tries to do so anyway, even as an actor, this aggressive act of appropriation must be rejected by all means of public campaigning.

For the same reason, the well-known American-Danish actress Scarlett Johansson received a fierce Twitter tirade when she announced her intention to play the role of pimp Dante "Tex" Gill in a movie. Gill is not only a Mafioso, but was initially a woman and later paid for his sex change with the money he earned in brothels. Such a role should definitely only be played by a transgender person, was the accusation, i.e. a man who was once a woman, or vice versa. In the end, Johansson apologetically canceled the role and publicly apologized. Nothing has been heard of the film project since then.

Even ordinary people can be guilty of cultural appropriation if, for example, they wear the typical hairstyle or clothing of a minority. If you are white and decorate your head with dreadlocks, you should better not get too close to the campus of some universities. Identity-political zeal also brought a kindergarten in Hamburg into the national headlines because it recommended to parents not to dress their children up as Indians for carnival anymore. For most people, such debates are likely to trigger exactly two reactions: astonishment and bewilderment.**

The debate over cultural appropriation is a complex one, and there are no easy answers. On the one hand, it is important to be respectful of other cultures and to avoid appropriating their traditions and symbols without understanding their significance. On the other hand, it is also important to be able to appreciate and learn from other cultures without being accused of appropriation.

Ultimately, it is up to each individual to decide what they feel comfortable with. If you are unsure about whether or not it is appropriate for you to wear a particular piece of clothing or participate in a particular activity, it is always best to err on the side of caution and avoid doing so.


On Palestine, Foreign Policy

Here, she is actually somewhat decent. She supports a hands off approach to Ukraine and Palestine. It should be noted that she has a myopic view of events here, the war started in 2014, but she says its been 3 years.

Excerpt 1, Ukraine, Published on JungeWelt:

The war in Ukraine is entering its third year. Every day, young men are killed or mutilated on the front lines, and large swaths of Ukraine are devastated. The World Bank estimates the damage to Ukraine at around 500 billion US dollars. But our future is also at stake in this proxy war, which has already cost us more than 200 billion euros in prosperity, according to German economic institutes.

The strategy of economically ruining Russia through sanctions and militarily defeating it through arms exports to Ukraine has failed miserably. The Russian military is on the offensive, while Ukraine is running out of soldiers. 600,000 Ukrainian men of military age have fled to the West because they do not want to be burned up in a preventable war that could have ended in a negotiated peace after a few weeks if the West had not interfered in a fatal way and nourished the false hope of a Ukrainian Siegfried.

Will we finally come to our senses and try to negotiate a ceasefire with Russia? There is no alternative - except for a total escalation with incalculable consequences. But not only the Union, but also large parts of the Greens and the FDP are beating the drum for the delivery of rockets with a range that reaches Moscow. "I am surprised that some people do not even think about whether it could lead to war participation by what we are doing" - with these words, Olaf Scholz has rejected the delivery of "TAURUS". But can one rely on a chancellor who has previously drawn red lines and then crossed them, and whose olive green and "liberal" partners are already partly looking at a coalition with the Union?

The "TAURUS" missiles would not be a game changer either. In order to force Russia to withdraw militarily from the occupied territories, it would need a multiple of ammunition and ultimately also soldiers from NATO countries to fill the gaps in the ranks of the Ukrainian army. Following this fatal logic, French President Macron has now brought the deployment of ground troops into play. At the latest, this would set in motion a spiral that could lead to a third world war with the use of nuclear weapons.

"He who says A does not have to say B. He can also recognize that A was wrong," Bertolt Brecht once said. Since neither the traffic light nor the Union can bring themselves to admit their own mistakes, all reasonable forces are called upon to increase public pressure and spread the realization: There is no military solution to this conflict! Whoever wants to carry the war to Russia with German weapons is carrying the war to Germany and is thereby recklessly gambling away our greatest asset: a life in freedom, peace and security.

Excerpt 2: Palestine

Linke Comment on Palestine:

The chairman of the Die Linke (the Left party) parliamentary group in the German Bundestag, Dietmar Bartsch, criticised this immediately, saying: “I distance myself in the strongest possible terms from the term ‘open-air prison’ used to describe the Gaza Strip at the Wagenknecht press conference.”

source: https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/f/meltdown-die-linke

Sahra on Palestine:

I strongly condemn the barbaric attacks on Israel, it is a big crime. Nevertheless, there is a need to de-escalate the situation now, one cannot do this with military means

The Middle East conflict cannot be resolved militarily, and of course, this conflict has a history. Gaza has been an open-air prison for many years

The Middle East conflict is again an example that shows that weapons and military actions will not bring calm to the tensions. On the contrary, there is a danger that many people will die, making the whole Middle East into a powder keg,


Summaries on the rest of her platform

I have also skimmed over the rest, and they are fairly well known. She does have some leftist stances on how to handle the economy, and has an anti-immigration platform, which could be construed as left wing in its framing (re: visas are ways to get what amounts to slave labor until citizenship). If there is further interest, I can do a deeper dive on this, but her social issues leave a lot to be desired and I feel people should be made more aware of that. I am currently trying to find her stances on homelessness, but all I can find are critiques of what leads to homelessness, not sponsorships of policies like Housing First.

Is critical support warranted? Maybe, if you are in a strongly AfD district. Her party is much better on foreign policy than almost any other german party, as they are balls deep on supporting Israel. But it should be known that she is strongly transphobic and has racist tendencies.

643
644
645
646
647
648
 
 

During the 2020 primaries, he was sleepy and not with it in all the debates, but when it came time for the one-on-one debate with Bernie, all of a sudden he was "fiery" Joe.

The same thing happened at the state of the union. They literally hide him whenever they can, even to the point of him declining a pre-superbowl interview. And then all of a sudden he's "fiery" Joe again during the state of the union.

I have to believe that they are giving him some kind of concoction or drug or something, and I don't think it's conspiratorial to speculate that this is the case.

So to any biology/pharmacy/medical experts out there, what the hell is going on?

649
 
 

brandon

650
 
 

IMO: Sleepy Joe looked about as good as he could up there. His brain left his body a couple of times but nothing that couldn’t be papered over, no McConnell freezes etc.

Overall the speech was the same liberal pablum we’ve been receiving for the last 20 years. He cited Reagan positively lol.

Biggest flop imo was he went hard right on the border, at one point calling for the president to have the ability to shut the border down if the number of migrants gets too large. At one point he talked about some girl who was killed by “an illegal.” Very bad look overall.

He also called for a two state solution which I guess has been the official policy or whatever for a while now. They’re going to build a temporary pier to land aid in Gaza. Time will tell how that goes. It will take a few weeks to build, many will starve by then, and there still need to be roads etc for aid to actually reach people.

Other topics covered that I can remember is a bunch of Lucy football shit; banning assault rifles and high capacity magazines, lowering prescription drug prices, protecting roe, raising the minimum wage and increasing taxes on the wealthy and corporations— you know, all the type of shit the dems could have done while in full control of the government but didn’t because manchin or the parliamentarian or whatever the fuck.

At any rate I think what he needed was to go out there and talk for an hour without having his brain leak out of his ears. Mission accomplished.

Whats your take?

view more: ‹ prev next ›