Riverside

How many of those now? By all means, tell us how many leftists stayed home and made Trump win the elections.

BBC is a terrorist organization covering up the genocide in Palestine by the Zionist entity, of course it sides with the press release info by the fascists.

American: sees something american happening americanly in America:

"What are we, a bunch of ASIANS???!!!!"

You should organize locally, not necessarily in Minneapolis. This is a country-wide problem, and while this particular incident happened 1300 miles away from you, there are undoubtedly people being terrorized by ICE much closer to you. You could join the closest PSL chapter, unionize your workplace, and join mutual aid organizations and mutual defense orgs close to you. Don't feel alienated by the calls to action, feel included, everyone can help

Emergency powers are also constitutional. The 49.3 is an article from the 1960s when there were many parties in parliament and it was a mess trying to pass any law, this time it was CLEARLY used to skip the democratic will of the people, the vast majority of whom don't want increased retirement age. I don't care how technically constitutional or not it is, it's authoritarian, antidemocratic, regressive and immoral. Ask yourself why you're siding with the people destroying welfare.

Great job ignoring the healthy populational growth during socialism in Romania followed by demographic catastrophe since 1990. Let's see what happened to Romanian GDP per capita during socialism and after (Source):

Oh, it turns out that GDP per capita grew sixfold (600%) during communism, and in the ten years following, it fell by 15%. Between 1950 and 1990, this gives an average GDP per capita growth of 4.5% per year. Let's check the data for capitalist Romania:

That's a growth of 250% over 34 years, or a meager 2.7% yearly growth. And that's without taking into account that the number of people has actually dropped since 1990 and it was growing between 1950 and 1990. Damn, not looking so good for the capitalist European model, is it?

You're being dishonest by cherrypicking year 2000, the 1990s in Romania were horrifying due to the debt given by the IMF (western-aligned organization) in order to crush the welfare state in Romania and adopt austerity policy as I discussed. You cherrypicked the year 2000 because that's more or less when the super high inflation of the 1990s started to balance, and you're talking in Euros and not in the local currency because exchange rates were astonishingly low due to currency devaluation. Let's see how well Romania fared in the 1990s during capitalism!

From 5% yearly inflation during communism to 250% during capitalism. This is EXACTLY what I mean by the European betrayal: Romanians were promised wealth comparable to western Europe, and instead were met with deindustrialization, destruction of welfare, horrifying levels of inflation, and sudden unimaginable unemployment after half a century without unemployment. It's literally western-funded loans in the 1980s that started to crash the Romanian economy. You cherrypick two convenient dates, ignore the millions of lives lost and emigrated, and say "look, more Euro is better" ignoring that people literally have to flee the country due to the terrible economy. As of today, Bulgaria and Romania are the two EU countries with highest poverty rates, 30% and 28% respectively. You could also directly ask the population, most of whom support communism and Ceaucescu and claim that life was better during socialism. They also poll saying it was a safer country and less corrupt. Tell me again how Europe hasn't betrayed those countries.

If you also wanna discuss Spain that's wonderful, I happen to be a Spaniard. I have seen nothing in my life but economic downturn, stagnation, reductions of real wages, and housing becoming increasingly unaffordable. Let's go to the Spanish National Institute of Statistics to check the consumption per person:

So, the 20% poorest in Spain used to spend 4612€ per year in 2006. By 2023 it went up to 5443€... but inflation in this period was 38.7%, meaning that to maintain equal consumption capability they should be spending 6396€. Real expenditure, hence, has dropped by 15% for the poorest 20%.

Running the numbers for the following 20% poorest, who spent 7220€ in 2006, they should spend 10014€ to maintain consumer power, but it's only risen to 9009€, so a 10% reduction in purchase power.

For the following 20%, meaning the 20% of people with the earnings closest to the mean (10% below and 10% above) it's gone from 9551 to 12122, it should have gone to 13247€ per year, so an 8% reduction in purchase power for the average Spaniard over the past 20 years.

Now explain me how relevant your "average salary increases in Spain" are if the mean Spaniard has suffered not just stagnation. but a progressive worsening of purchase power. Tell me again how fucking wonderful this European model is.

Romania and Bulgaria are rich? I'm Spanish, a country by no means rich, and we have tons of Romanian immigrants because the working conditions there are extremely hard, and they suffered similar issues:

This is especially true for Bulgaria, they lost like a freaking third of the population since 1990 (from 9mn to 6.4mn in 2024). By what metric are they rich? GDP per capita? How about access to housing, to healthcare, to quality education, the ability to stay in rural areas with non-decrepit infrastructure...

Regarding Poland, the country may be richer as a whole (again, using GDP per capita as metric), but are the people faring better? Look at the share of national income by the bottom 50% of the people:

The real winner of WW2 is the Soviet Union, which saved tens of millions of lives from Nazi extermination and destroyed Nazism all the way to Berlin.

Laws can be broken too

It's even more structural than that. You can control functionally all editors by controlling the academia and media. Wikipedia is necessarily a reflection of the biases of the editors and the sources they peruse. Misogynistic bias in your society, media and academia will lead to a misogynistic Wikipedia. Racist bias in your society, media and academia will lead to a racist Wikipedia. Anticommunist bias in your society, media and academia will lead to an anticommunist Wikipedia.

For example, western Wikipedia editors have been quick to deprecate Chinese state media sources such as CGTN or Russian such as RT (not complaining about the latter), but even after the horrifying complacency in genocide in Gaza, the BBC is still widely accepted.

All good, buddy! Clarified who I meant :)

I meant Skiluros, not you, hence me referencing the $2800bn figure they made up