Azerbaijan's state oil company to invest $7bn in Turkey
Azerbaijan’s state oil company Socar plans to invest an additional $7bn in Turkey's energy sector in the coming years, a company executive revealed during a press briefing on Monday.
Socar also recently faced criticism following revelations by rights and transparency groups that Azerbaijani oil continues to be sold to Israeli buyers despite the ongoing war in Gaza.
Azerbaijan's state oil company to invest $7bn in Turkey
Azerbaijan’s state oil company Socar plans to invest an additional $7bn in Turkey's energy sector in the coming years, a company executive revealed during a press briefing on Monday.Ragip Soylu (Middle East Eye)
Many ways, but a good way to start is joining an org near you, like PSL or FRSO, or even the DSA with the intention of joining with Red Star Caucus (all US based orgs). Unionizing can be great as well, as long as you combine it with reading theory (I have an Introductory Marxist Reading List if you want somewhere to start).
Studying the history of worker organization and revolution helps teach us what we need to do, and can help guide us in analyzing how our conditions are similar and different to find a correct strategy.
You can't organize the working class with a "Marxist" reading list, maga was already told they don't like that word. Speak the ideology of unionization while avoiding the things that can be associated with Marxism, communism, socialism, while remembering they don't understand those things, they just have a trigger words they know to hate.
As an aside when speaking to maga, don't let the conversation ever be Dem vs GOP, always frame is as workers vs elites. In the former we are divided, in the later we have solidarity.
Edit: My response to many responses, I just said dont say marxism or communism because a huge percent of the population are literal sheep who have already been told thats bad, just make a new label, or better yet, just avoid giving it a label, keep it down to "we need to stop the elites/ruling class". Regardless, if you get a bunch of people to fall in line with this ideologically they can label it whatever they want at that point, sheep don't change their minds, so when they villanize the new label, or assign it to a preexisting label, you would hopefully already have enough on board outside of modern left/right bubbles that it can spread through traditional grass roots methods.
What you're saying is exactly the discourse COINTELPRO promoted in US organizations in the 60s and 70s (when they weren't outright murdering the party members).
How'd that one work out?
It's easy to deflect workers off the path of real, lasting change when even the organizers only try to do sloganeering instead of education.
You can’t organize the working class with a “Marxist” reading list
If you don't read theory, you're going to have a hard time with praxis.
I just said dont say marxism or communism because a huge percent of the population are literal sheep who have already been told thats bad
I tend to find that labeling things is a lot of wasted effort, but shrugging and owning the label other people give you is a powerful method of reclaiming the language.
If you're an affable, compassionate, well-organized, and appealing organizer, and someone comes around calling you a Far-Left Sicko Commie, then that's actually pretty great for Far-Left Sicko Commies everywhere.
The struggle I see, more often than not, is with individuals who come into an organization dogmatically adhering to a party line that lacks a party. The dogmatism in the name of Marxist Theory (or Anarchist Theory or Liberal Theory or whatever personal staunchly held belief you've decided to cling to) is what ends up wrecking an organization. Theories can only inform your actions, but at the end of the day you need to tackle your problems practically and make your case materially.
People bickering over the ideological underpinnings of the Spanish Civil War, then spiraling into calling one another Tankies and Scratched Liberals and such... not terribly helpful in the long run.
I don't understand how saying we should avoid labels and stick to ideologies is a bad thing. I just don't see a route for people to organize working class folks under a banner when all the banners have already been tarnished for 60-70% of the people, it seems that route is a more uphill battle with no determinable advantage to just organizing under the idea that we the working class are being robbed endlessly by the elite ruling class and it has to change.
As to your point about theory only going so far, yes I 100% agree. But i was speaking about our current state, specifically because this is the first time in recent history that division among left/right working class folks has ever traveled closer to each other, if only a little bit.
Am i using the word ideology wrong maybe? Because it seems a few people are at issue with what im saying, while saying the same thing rephrased. There might be some sort of nuance to the word I'm missing. I mean ideology as purely just theory and reasoning on why a thing is or isn't; in this circumstance as a stand-in for something loosely close to "We the people are no longer represented by government, and billionaires run the country". Id worry if you expand it beyond that you lose a lot of support. But you obviously should go beyond that at some point, and you have to have a gameplan, but as mentioned before that feels like a conversation for down the road.
I just don’t see a route for people to organize working class folks under a banner when all the banners have already been tarnished for 60-70% of the people
I don't see the problem of banners being tarnished nearly so much as the Right Wing Wurlitzer media blinding and defeaning its audience at a scale no small community outreach organization can compete with. It's less that anyone has an entrenched view of as dirty and more that - at any moment - a talk radio host can unload a shotgun full of sloppy diarrhea in any direction.
we the working class are being robbed endlessly by the elite ruling class and it has to change
At some point, people do need to understand that they control the means of production in a very literal sense. Their hands are on the rudder and it is their collective effort that moves the ship. But building that class consciousness is hard. At some level, you aren't trying to build a giant ideological social movement. What you're trying to build is a network of people around you who like and trust one another.
That's significantly more impervious to shotgun blasts of feces from a national media organ, because its no longer a contest between Army of Loud Mouths and Guy You've Never Heard Of.
Id worry if you expand it beyond that you lose a lot of support.
I think you have a large deficit of trust, generally speaking. There is no Perfect Messaging Strategy you can use to shape discourse. There is only the sheer volume of discourse blasted out over a wide audience. YouTube filling up with random right-wing hacks doesn't happen because the hacks are incredibly good at their job. It entirely because the billionaire donor class is willing to spend enormous amounts of money to spew this message everywhere.
You, personally, can't do anything about that. But you can build up a local group of friends and neighbors who like one another. Having a community around you who like and trust one another is the best defense against this kind of aimless hate. Sticking up for one another at every opportunity builds trust and confidence. Finding new opportunities to make new friends and expand your circle is all you can really do.
I don’t see the problem of banners being tarnished nearly so much as the Right Wing...
I did not mean actually tarnished, I mean figuratively tarnished in the minds of a large group of people that are required to affect change.
At some point, people do need to understand that they control the means of production in a very literal sense.
Agreed, but I dont think you can begin to teach that lesson until the working class has solidified more, or you risk breaking momentum when one of them goes "Boy i swear i heard this from the radio man i let control my opinions as something i dont like"
I think you have a large deficit of trust
100% true. I've seen a majority of the country get swayed by the literal lowest common denominator of conman ive ever seen. I know the reason for this is because of the influence of the media and their own personal bubbles, but it does prove that they are incapable of forming their own opinions.
You, personally, can’t do anything about that
Yeah i know, so i just try to speak about the path forward that makes sense to me and hope it resonates with people.
You can start by height. If that doesn't work you can try favorite ice cream flavor.
And no, boot leather isn't actually an ice cream flavor. There seems to have been some confusion about that amongst us workers lately.
You're right. Perhaps I need to touch grass. My "is this commenter worth actually expending energy" meter may be off.
And to be clear, there was no jab at marxists. There was a jab at the lack of working class solidarity and wealth cult that exists within my everyday context in the US. Which you aren't necessarily aware of and I wasn't explicit about.
Marxist and Anarchist end goals really aren't so different that it makes sense to foster any leftist infighting. We all ultimately want things to be better for everyone, especially the working class.
Another part of the problem is that Obama promised fundamental changes, made only some minor improvements, then the party took a significant rightward turn (especially in foreign policy). His signature domestic policy achievement was so minor that healthcare was the biggest issue in the next two Democratic primaries. His two biggest foreign policy achievements (the nuclear deal with Iran, beginning to normalize relations with Cuba) were immediately undone by Trump, and Biden took no steps to revive them.
He overpromised and way, way underdelivered, often with a notable lack of trying. You can't sell people on incremental change if you build only small things the other guys can immediately break, and if you don't even try that hard to do better.
I probably hate Joe Biden more than most Republicans do. Unlike them, I actually know some of his policies.
Every day I get down on my knees and pray to the Sweet Baby Jesus that we get the kind of Far-Left Super-Woke Anti-Imperial Anti-Racist-Baby Red Diaper LGBTQ Sicko Pinko Communist that the average FOX News Republican keep insisting Democrats elected.
My dad: You and your best friend Obama.
Me: For the hundredth time, I hate Obama. I probably hate Obama more than you.
My dad: Yeah, you love Obama.
They started saying it because neolibs were trying to get the red MAGAs banned from communities and platforms for bad language, or just getting the algorithm to suppress it from feeds. Then when they switched, neolibs got pissed the red MAGAs were working around the algorithm filtering, and started posting this stupid meme.
Watching Red & Blue MAGA bicker is like watching toddlers argue.
Naw our brains do that shit all the time - you don't hear someone quite right, and instead of recognizing that you didn't get the info, your noggin just fills in the blanks on its own. She very well may have clearly heard "Let's go Brandon!"
Perception is reality.
Trumpists: "We did it! We won! Trump is President! What's the first step to Making America Great Again?"
Elon: "I think we're going to increase the number of H1-B visas."
Vivek: "Definitely more East Asian immigration. That's what this country needs more than anything."
Trump: "Sounds good to me."
Trumpists: "... wtf?"
Don't forget massive cuts to Social Security and a hit on any pension money the organization can get its hands on.
Trumper shocked Pikachu.
It means 'fuck Joe biden', there was some NASCAR thing where people were chanting 'fuck Joe Biden'. It was being reported on and the reporter relayed it as 'lets go brandon' and it became a meme on the right.
The meme in this thread is about how American conservatives completely miss the nuance of why people on the left actually oppose both them and centrist Democrats. It's easier to do childish shit and just assume that everyone to their left is some form of liberal who loves Joe Biden. The good news is they're not getting younger.
I remember starting counter-chants in the student section when redcap shitters would try it at games.
An instant "shut the fuck uh-up" or "watch the damn gay-aym" quieted them down real quick every time.
How does one person change the "vibes" for millions upon millions of people? It's not by running the government efficiently, even though that's what is needed. Truth is, it's more about being bold and doing things that let people feel good about the people in charge.
Anyway, there is no way the Dems could change the perception that things were getting better, and not just upholding the status quo, without having messaging that makes it very clear.
The Greatest Lie about the Red Scare is that it Ended
why would EVERYONE be trying to leave Communist countries like Russia and the rest of Eastern Europe???
China is empty. Russia is empty. Cuba is empty. Vietnam is empty. South Africa is empty. They've all been hollowed out by the scourge of Communism. That's why nobody lives there anymore.
Meanwhile, the US is the most populous country on Earth. We have the densest cities. We have the largest apartment towers. We have the most-used transit systems. Our nation is full to bursting thanks to all of the people who want to live here. And the more traditionally conservative, the more flagrantly capitalist, the more Christian and Based and Traditional, the larger the US State. That's right, folks. West Virginia, South Dakota, Utah, and Idaho are the four most densely populated corners of the planet.
Self-defeating, oh yes via spending billiins of dollars funding coups & sanctioning & bombing them in the name of Freeeeeeedom
socialism has had huge positive impacts where it's been tried and massive negative consequences when it's been replaced with capitalism.
what's your evidence that "pure unregulated capitalism" is worth trying? glassing the entire surface of the earth with nuclear weapons hasn't been tried yet either but that doesn't make it a good idea.
(E.g: Selling your personal information)
I didnt know i was living in a communist country
Its also strange that there are anti-communist stickers in a communist country
Every single form of socialism has been tried?
Even Christian anarchism? Even Posadism? Even Queer anarchism?
Also, your answer is anarcho-capitalism?
I think our definitions of social might be the disconnect here, as it seems you're meaning it in a personal or conversational manner. I acknowledge that by those standards, your point would be correct!
I just think that the term "social" when used in a political context does not carry the same connotation. When you say socialism is the farthest thing from being left alone, it seems you mean that in the sense that you don't want people bothering you about more than is necessary for you to function as an individual (hence the soliciting or DMV example given). In this case, I don't think that a more socialist structure would infringe on that at all actually.
Your day to day life would likely not change drastically. It's not like the government would suddenly be knocking on your door monthly saying "hello would you like to give me your documented monthly contribution to society? Here is your monthly allowance". In the day to day it would function as it was currently and the government would basically "leave you alone" as much as they already do. The government currently does already take taxes after all on property, income, sales, capital, even gifts! They also require you documents for many things such as driving a car or owning property or getting healthcare.
To continue your point made based on the definition you gave, though: People may have "no soliciting" signs posted, and hate going to the DMV. Yet, I know of MORE people who upon encountering an automated system to reduce the social interaction to be done for government transactions, complain that they "hate these stupid robots and want to just talk to a real person".
A distinction between personal and private property needs to be made where one is used to generate capital in exchange for wages and the other is your dildo
That's always the definition. It is well defined, the problem is that there are national propaganda machines outright lying to the people.
If we can simply help Americans understand small-s socialism from small-c communism, we'd be in much better shape.
Because yes, my healthcare is already paid in advance by me and everyone else from our taxes; and my buddy's emergency Sunday morning quintuple stent install after the widowmaker heart attack and two ambulances and a bed in one hospital before transfer (a third bus) to the regional trauma/cardiac center for the operation and 2 weeks of aftercare was free to him that day -- and his only concern was not dying. And that's not just normal but that's the general expectation. No monthly subscription, no premium cost, no user fee, just paid-parking and vendor-machine food for visitors not coming in via the train.
Our upcoming election will gut that, though. Being bankrupt, losing retirement savings and mortgaged to the hilt at 61 is the American dream mr Polievre has for all Canadian plebes.
Its also strange that there are anti-communist stickers in a communist country
No it isn't. Revolution isn't the rapture. Fascists and liberals don't just cease to exist.
Capitalism sucks because of oligarchs and kleptocrats, and socialism also sucks because of oligarchs and kleptocrats.
Remember Stalin and his style of socialism? Just because one hell sucks doesn’t mean another hell is better.
The only type of socialism which has made any kind of sense in recent times is the Nordic Model.
Edit let’s not kid ourselves about the “greatness” of socialist
countries when China has 50% poverty rate
worldpopulationreview.com/coun…
Here’s also a great article on how everyday life was like in the Soviet Union, shs.cairn.info/article/E_ANNA_…
Remember Stalin and his style of socialism?
No. Cuz I wasn't alive at that time.
But yea, I did read about it in This Soviet World, Soviet Democracy, Russian Justice, and Blackshirts and Reds
Cool, also read about it on neutral sources
"neutral" as if.
Edit: also oh no! Not the Stalinist... prohibition on using handcuffs?
::: spoiler Chapter X, Russian Justice
But the idea was there in the minds of those who were to define the penal policy and the Code of 1922, and set down the principle that punishment was not for the purpose of revenge and might not have for its purpose the infliction of physical pain. With this beginning there was a steady progress toward the removing of those indignities that tend to degrade a man, until the Correctional Labor Code of 1933 completed the process. In the meantime various amendments have prohibited torture, the use of handcuffs, solitary confinement, deprivation of food, or any other measure that would have the effect of degradation or do physical harm to the person.
:::
Which ranks of his people were put to death?
Even in Stalin's time there was collective leadership. The Western idea of a dictator within the Communist setup is exaggerated. Misunderstandings on that subject are caused by lack of comprehension of the real nature and organization of the Communist power structure. Stalin, although holding wide powers, was merely the captain of a team and it seems obvious that Khrushchev will be the new captain.
A lot of the cold war propaganda about Stalin turned out to be bullshit, as contemporary Western academic historians will tell you.
Please stop trying to fool people with your revisionist and rose colored glasses historical fiction. Cherry picking some out of context quote is just disingenuous, and doesn’t make sense for me to continue discussing this then.
Now do excess mortality in Tsarist Russia and excess mortality in Russia after the collapse of the USSR.
Also, fucking hilarious to look at excess mortality in a period where world war 2 happened, lol.
Nazis and Kulaks weren’t “ranks” of “Stalin’s people,” they were fascists and leeches on the masses of the peasantry, respectively. And Wikipedia gets its “excess” mortality numbers from garbage sources the like fascist propaganda The Black Book of Communism.
You can’t help but refer to Wikipedia, can you, when this whole thread was about Wikipedia’s questionable reliability on topics that relate to Western imperialist talking points?
- discomfiting.medium.com/debunk…
- iskrabooks.org/stalin-history-…
It must be so easy being a reactionary ultra-nationalist like you: you Just assume anything that confirms your pre-existing beliefs is true and anything that challenges them are "bias lies".
It's a perfectly closed circle of reasoning.
I’ll read them all the same because it’s nice to know the kind of lies other people like to believe
If this isn’t a tell that OP herself is extremely biased against anything that goes against hegemonic imperial core ideology, I don’t know what is.
- The primary editor of Wikipedia is a fascist named Steven Pruitt. Steven currently works for the Dept. of Customs and Border Protection, where he's been for four years, and the 8 years before that he worked for TSA and ICE.
- CIA and FBI computers used for Wikipedia edits
- Facebook, Axios And NBC Paid This Guy To Whitewash Wikipedia Pages
- Wikipedia’s Intentional Distortion of the History of the Holocaust
Capitalism doesn't suck because of individual bad actors, but systemic issues. Competition naturally results in monopolization and the death of competition, and rising disparity. In addition, the tendency for the rate of profit to fall results in businesses and corporations seeking to move production abroad, to over-exploit and under-develop countries in the Global South by paying poverty wages. This extends to IMF loans, as well.
Socialism doesn't have these same problems. No, it isn't some perfect system, such a claim would be absurd. However, collectivization of Capital and producing with the aim of fulfilling needs, rather than pursuit of profit, helps to eliminate the excesses of Capitalist exploitation. In addition to the reduction in exploitation, central planning is very efficient once competition stagnates.
It's funny that you bring up the Nordic model, Nordic countries are seeing withering safety nets, (and are Capitalist, not Socialist) which in turn are generally funded from the same hyper-exploitation of the Global South in the form of brutal IMF loans and unequal exchange. The Safety Nets themselves came as concessions towards strong internal labor organization and the strong safety nets of the neighboring USSR, who had free high quality healthcare, education, and more. Now that the USSR is gone, the safety nets have been withering.
I wouldn't say decaying Imperialist ethno states are a "good" model to look towards.
I mean, every country to date has been an ethnostate of one type or another, with the exception of what America wanted or purported to be. I’d add Canada and Australia to that as well. Have a look at these socialists states, which one isn’t centered around a dominant ethnicity? en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o… So I don’t think using the label of “ethnostate” to disparage democratic counties is justified.
Second, I agree that the global south is heavily exploited, but that seriously discounts successful countries in BRICS or East Asia. We need to understand why those countries succeeded, and others could not, and a lot of the failures of global south actors have to do with corruption and lack of solidarity with each other. Granted, imperial powers instigated instability in every continent, but it didn’t work many times, especially in East Asia. Africa is a great example of failing to realize its potential, a unionized Africa would be a force to reckon with. The “global south” needs to stop blaming convenient scapegoats for many of its own problems. You can’t be like, oh once we fix greed everything will be okay! How do you ever propose to fix greed? Even if the whole world agrees to be socialist, examples like Stalins USSR show us that greed exists to corrupt any economic and political model. It’s disingenuous to say otherwise.
I am not saying we have to be capitalist, I am saying it’s disingenuous to say that greed occurs because of capitalism, and not the other way around. You don’t have to dismantle the whole world to start taxing wealthy people at a higher rate, and start using those funds in a sensible way like they do in the Nordic model.
The Nordic countries are pretty clearly among the most ethnically homogenous and at a state level quite hostile to foreigners and immigrants. This is pretty clear cut and dry. The US, Australia, etc are more Settler-Colonial. The Nordics certainly have stronger labor organization, which helps, but ultimately rely on Imperialism and again, are decaying like the rest of the Global North.
As for the Glonal South, I think you're vastly misanalyzing the situation. BRICS is successful despite the Imperialist countries, the blame should not be on the oppressed but the oppressors. Such a blame is akin to Macron's recent statement that African countries should be greatful to the French for colonizing them and making them "sovereign nations." The Imperialists aren't merely a convenient scapegoat, but regularly exploiting them. Countries like Burkina Faso and Algeria became the extreme targets of Empire for daring to go against the Imperialist countries, it isn't like countries can just "say no" to Imperialism.
As for the USSR, while it certainly had very real problems, ultimately the Socialist system was a dramatic improvement on the Tsarist regime and was far superior to modern Capitalism. It's pretty unquestionable that the working class had far more power back then, with some of the best education and healthcare in the world provided entirely free. The Soviets were advancing science and global healthcare. It's worth listening to Dr. Michael Parenti's 1986 speech, affectionately titled "Yellow Parenti." Socialism may not be perfect, but that doesn't mean it is equally bad to Capitalism, and to pretend "greed" impacts all economic systems equally is a failed form of logic without doing the legwork of proving that.
Circling back to the Nordics, the model only "works" inasmuch as the Nordic Countries currently function as global parasites on the labor of the Global South, like the rest of the Global North, their model depends on this, and as the tendency for the rate of profit persists they are introducing more austerity measures and weakening the safety nets, disparity is rising, and worker protections are falling. Higher unionization rates slow this process, but can't stop it, Capitalism must be replaced with Socialism. The Nordic Model is not "sensible," it's dying.
You don't have to dismantle the world, it has prepared the foundations for moving beyond the current system into a Socialist one. Centralization and monopolization of markets paves the way for public ownership and central planning to be a smooth transition. Socialists don't want to tear down the system, but to move beyond it to the next Mode of Production via erasure of the Capitalist state and replacing with a Proletarian one.
I didn’t misunderstand anything about BRICS, I said exactly what you’re saying, that these countries succeeded because they were more unified in their approach to outside instigators. Corruption (greed) and lack of unity has been the bane of the failure examples you’re citing.
Please spare me the oppression politics slogans. You can’t live your life on other people’s charity anymore than you can run a country on the good will of others. People will always be assholes to each others, and it’s the responsibility of leaders in a country to give a shit and figure out how to make their country survive. Look at the history of Singapore, and how much outside influence tried to destabilize it. The point is that the root cause of failure in many nations is within, not without.
As for the USSR, while it certainly had very real problems, ultimately the Socialist system was a dramatic improvement on the Tsarist regime and was far superior to modern Capitalism.
I don’t know, this is questionable. A lot of science and tech achievements were more related to competition with capitalists nations. It’s hard to say at this point, nothing happened in a vacuum.
Capitalism must be replaced with Socialism. The Nordic Model is not “sensible,” it’s dying.
The Nordic Model is socialism, it just co-exists with a regulated capitalism. You’re wrong about any death of this model, if you look at GDP growth nordicstatistics.org/news/nord… It has its issues, but it’s a far better alternative to becoming subjugated by Stalin-like overlords and/or having everyone be equally poor.
You’re just going to have to live with the fact that some people will always reject the centralized proletariat control of production because 1) people, even in socialist systems, will always be greedy and cannot be trusted, and 2) people desire individuality and autonomy. A persons life is finite, they’re not here to be a slave for capitalist or to be a bee in the hive mind, there needs to be a system which lets someone exercise their individuality and autonomy without creating social ruin.
The Nordic Model is socialism
It is not socialism. I already went over this upthread:
First sentence from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialis… :
Socialism is an economic and political philosophy encompassing diverse economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production, as opposed to private ownership.The social safety nets in the imperial core—which are built on the backs of the neocolonized—are not socialism.
You legitimately are arguing that it is the fault of Imperialized countries for being Imperialized? I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, here, this is what it sounds like you are saying to me. The leaders of a country, especially those in Imperialized countries, do not necessarily have the best interests of their populace in mind and frequently sell out the populace for money to Imperialists, and are placed in said positions by said Imperialists.
It is not questionable that Socialism was better for the Soviets than Tsarism or Capitalism. This is an established fact, as life expectancy doubled, literacy rates over tripled to over 99% (more than any western country), science and technology dramatically improved, wealth disparity lowered and total wealth raised dramatically. The return of Capitalism caused 7 million excess deaths.
The Nordic model is not Socialism. The Nordic model is Capitalism, though with more generous social safety nets than most Capitalist countries. GDP growth is not what I am referring to, I am talking about a declining Rate of Profit and the erosion of safety nets. It is not better than Socialism, which democratizes the economy and uplifts the working class.
As for the idea that "individualism" is punished in Socialism, the reality is that individualism can better flourish under it. There is no need to have Capitalists dictate production and exchange, rather than the whole of society. I think it would benefit you greatly to read some basic theory and history of AES countries if you want to bat against them in service of something else.
Some leaders of a country indeed do not have its best interests in mind because they’re self-interested. This is why it helps to have an educated public, and a democratic system of governance. When I look at all the countries subjugated by imperialists, I notice that each one of them has its own reasons for failing and succeeding, that’s all I am saying. It’s easy to distract your citizens by saying that all your problems are the fault of those greedy capitalists.
It is not questionable that Socialism was better for the Soviets than Tsarism or Capitalism. This is an established fact, as life expectancy doubled, literacy rates over tripled to over 99% (more than any western country), science and technology dramatically improved, wealth disparity lowered and total wealth raised dramatically. The return of Capitalism caused 7 million excess deaths.
You’re whitewashing history. Yes, when you go from relatively less to relatively more, you’ll experience improvements like life expectancy and child height. But that doesn’t mean anything when compared to the bigger picture of a failing and disingenuous social and economic model. There have been many analyses on the quality of life under the Soviet Union, and I’ll specifically mention only these sources since you’re so intent on painting a picture of harmony and glory
learnliberty.org/blog/myths-ab…
I am not interested in “winning” for one economic tool or another. What I don’t like is someone pretending the bad stuff didn’t happen, or blaming all the bad stuff on someone else. It’s childish and disingenuous.
As for the idea that “individualism” is punished in Socialism, the reality is that individualism can better flourish under it. There is no need to have Capitalists dictate production and exchange, rather than the whole of society. I think it would benefit you greatly to read some basic theory and history of AES countries if you want to bat against them in service of something else.
No, this is just rose glasses idealism and isn’t backed by any facts or history. What is backed by facts is that humans are greedy, self-interested and self-preserving in any scenario.
From a source (linked below):
As the 1990s progressed, the Stalinist period and the first half of the twentieth century in general increasingly retained the attention of scholars interested in the Soviet Union. Everyday Soviet life was seen as a history of repression, rationing, privation, famine, “survival strategies,” control, and social stratification. It was intimately tied to the campaign for Soviet culturedness (kul’turnost’), meaning the inculcation of proper manners and taste, which began in the second half of the 1930s. In these years, the regime recognized the legitimacy of consumption, notably through slogans proclaiming that life “became better and gayer” with the introduction of luxury consumer goods (Soviet champagne, caviar, chocolate, perfume, etc.), which were nonetheless accessible only to groups that the regime considered privileged.Indeed, the distribution of objects as rewards was central to the social policies of Communist countries. Following the October Revolution, the distribution of noble and bourgeois property among workers and Bolshevik leaders at all levels, which was part of an urban campaign for housing redistribution, lent concrete meaning to the reversal of social hierarchies and confirmed the right of the neediest citizens to oppress those who were once the most privileged within the latter’s own apartments, which were now transformed into communal residences.
shs.cairn.info/article/E_ANNA_…
One more for reference:
Soviet beggars found themselves in an ambivalent situation. The authorities wanted to exclude them from the future Communist society, but, incapable of solving the begging problem, they simply concealed it from the 1930s until the mid-1950s so as not to contradict the USSR’s image as a prosperous state —even as they made it impossible to devise any form of welfare policy towards them. The launch of a program aimed at solving the begging problem in the second half of the 1950s led to a debate in the press, which exposed the contradictions between the official discourse and social reality.
The Nordic model isn’t a socialism model which works for socialism purists, but it makes the most sense for those who don’t want to be subjected to oppression from one source or another.
Yes, when you go from relatively less to relatively more, you’ll experience improvements like life expectancy and child height. But that doesn’t mean anything when compared to the bigger picture of a failing and disingenuous social and economic model.
What bigger picture is there than improvements in material quality of life conditions, like calories available and infant mortality rates and life expectancy and literacy levels and gender equality and and and? And what is that but the socioeconomic conditions? Before the revolution this was an preindustrial, illiterate, feudal state of desperately precarious peasants. And after the revolution it was war-torn, and continuously threatened by imperialist states, and then, not long after, invaded by the WWII Axis powers. And still the material conditions of the masses improved by leaps & bounds compared to their starting position.
The Nordic model isn’t a socialism model which works for socialism purists, but it makes the most sense for those who don’t want to be subjected to oppression from one source or another.
Again, the “Nordic model” has been predicated on spoils of neocolonialism. How do the neocolonized feel about their subjugation and oppression? And under decades of grinding neoliberalism, the social safety nets have been eroding all over the imperial core, and the bourgeoisie aren’t going to give them back even if they could (which they can’t, especially now that the empire is deteriorating). These are bourgeois democracies, they’re not proletarian ones.
The countries aren't necessarily underdeveloped, they are over-exploited. The absolute vast majority of the resources and value they creste is taken for the Global North, the fact that the United States and other Western Powers regularly commit regime change isn't somehow the fault of the Imperialized. This is a monstrous view of the world you have, which is why I asked you to clarify yourself several times. You claim it a lack of education, and yet don't see the connection between that and all of the Socialist and post-Socialist countries having the highest literacy rates in the world? Under-education is the tool by which Imperialists keep Imperialized countries docile, and when they start to take control of their own resources like Burkina Faso under Sankara, they pull regime change.
Secondly, the USSR. They didn't go from "relatively little" to "less little," they went from a semi-feudal backwater to the second largest economy in the world, and did so while under constant siege. Again, life expectancy doubled literacy rates over tripled, they managed to take on the vast majority of the Nazis (80% of Nazi deaths were on the Eastern Front) and took Berlin, healthcare and education was free, working hours were shorter than the US with greater vacation days, all with rapid economic growth and low inequality. Linking right-wing think tanks designed to massage narratives can't erase the numerical facts.
You were linked many extensive primary and scholarly sources by people like @Edie@lemmy.ml and you return with right-wing think tanks, which is rude at best and shows a lack of care. The bare minimum you could do is read Anticommunism & Wonderland, which is a subset of Blackshirts and Reds, though you really should read any of the books provided.
Finally, again, the Nordic Model is not Socialism. The Working Class is oppressed by the bourgeoisie within the countries, and the Nordic Countries heavily exploit the Global South. Not everyone can copy the Nordic Model because it requires mass international exploitation, which you argued is the fault of the Imperialized in an earlier section, so I guess that clarifies your worldview a bit. In short: brutal expropriation and Imperialism is a good thing, more should do it even harder, and it's the fault of the Imperialized for not picking them up by their bootstraps (despite them picking up the Global North by its bootstraps, and the Global North acting like they earned the riches they stole).
Try to reread this comment section, and legitimately ask yourself if half-assed right-wing think tank articles are better than Primary and Scholarly secondary sources, and if you want to be that dedicated to justifying brutal exploitation and encouraging more of it.
Some of those countries don’t even have plumbing.
Second, the best way to understand your weak spots is through your ideological opponents. I don’t care for capitalism or socialism per se, I just hate disingenuous propaganda.
The so-called right wing platforms are simply stating historical facts from primary sources.
Depending on countries to "overcome incredible odds," ie violently eject colonizers and imperialists, and tacitly supporting said system of Imperialism makes little sense. Their success happened because of violently ejecting Imperialists.
Secondly, I am not talking about exploitation within Imperialized countries, but by Imperialist countries. Shacking up countries in debt traps and using loopholes to sieze infrastructure like ports and natural resources is how the Global North violently steals from the Global South, and maintains this with many military bases to prevent resistance.
If you don’t want to admit that some of these countries are wholly disinterested in their own people, then don’t. Countries like those in BRIC, minus S, and only including the name-only ones are great examples of the kind of countries which overcame possible exploitation.
So no, it’s not just an outside baddie exploitation problem. Do those countries have their own issues, yes. Do they have the best systems, no. Does any country? Not necessarily.
Let’s be honest, a lot of political games make fools of us all, and it’s hard to judiciously determine the optimal system for economic development or social development outside of the context of history. Nothing has happened in a vacuum, and everything is tainted by history. The only thing we can hope for is fairness, justice and equity for everyone as best as we can provide, while not sacrificing the self-actualization of others. What really triggers me though is how people say disingenuous things about their ideology of choice, and that just makes me want to say the counterpoint, even if I agree on some aspects.
Countries are made up of people. People care about their fellow countrymen, the difference here is that Africa and Latin America have been utterly looted and colonized for centuries, the colonizers setting up skeleton states to maintain imperialism and neocolonialism. This is not a culture issue, a race issue, or a moral failing, but an economic problem caused by centuries of looting and pillaging.
As for BRICS? China had a Communist revolution to throw out the Imperialists, same as Russia (who re-nationalized after the West swooped in during the fall of the USSR, now resulting in Nationalist Capitalism), India largely has had an incomplete overthrow of Imperialists and as such has seen further impoverishment, and more.
You actually agree with us and with Chinese Communists, who believe everyone's path to a better society will be different. However, where we differ is that we have spent the time studying history, theory new and old, and have come to the conclusion that all of these different solutions will come in the form of Socialism with various Characteristics. Additionally, we don't blame victims, but oppressors.
It's worth responding to your edit in a separate comment.
First, China. That data shows 45% living under $10 a day, and has no data provided on the "poverty rate" column. Not only are you misreporting by 11%, but you are conveniently reporting the wrong data. Essentially, you reported the wrong quantity for the wrong quality. Furthermore, this data is half a decade old, when we know 3 years ago China completed a mass poverty aleviation campaign and over the course of around a decade uplifted 800 million people out of poverty.
Furthermore, 10 dollars gets you far more in different parts of China than the wealthier coastal cities, who were the first to be developed more thoroughly. Given that a century ago China was among the poorest countries in the world, its progress has been astounding overall, and in the more rural inland areas have been a major focus in the last decade. Unlike more developed countries, China is still a developing country, and as such despite its rapid improvement has a long way to go before every area is like one of the more developed tier 1 cities.
Secondly, the USSR. Not only is this article from a Private Christian College, it does't contradict that, again, wealth disparity shrank to one of the lowest in the world while maintaining some of the highest rates of economic growth in the world, free, high quality education and healthcare were provided, literacy rates more than tripled to the highest in the world, science, technology, culture, and even sports flourished. Life expectancy doubled, and despite having much of their housing destroyed by the Nazi invasion in WWII, they quickly built the now stereotyped "soviet bloc" housing to house as many people as possible.
All the article really seems to say, therefore, is that society wasn't perfect, which nobody here has said. It does not make the case that the Socialist system was worse than the semi-feudalism of before or the Capitalism it is today, rather, it just said some degree of corruption existed but in a way that was far less than it was before or after Socialism.
The fact that you are either intentionally or unintentionally reporting wrong numbers for wrong metrics that are already outdated as some "gotcha" for countries that began as some of the poorest on the planet, and use the fact that the aren't like the Nordic Countries, that have spend centuries pillaging and looting the Global South and had centuries longer to develop, is dishonest and ill-informed. I suggest reading Super Imperialism by Hudson if you want to take a modern (2021 is the latest revision) look at the way the Global North, and specifically the US, rob and loot the world.
I'm not really knowledgeable enough to contribute to the discussion going on here.
I just wanted to say I've seen you engaging in good faith discussion all over Lemmy, and I really, really, appreciate that. Whenever socialism, communism, Marxism and the like come up, people are quick to jump to ad hominem and flinging shit-covered sarcasm at each other, and you consistently engage thoughtfully in the discussion, even when your interlocutors don't. Thank you.
I dissuade Party members from putting down people who do not understand. Even people who are unenlightened and seemingly bourgeois should be answered in a polite way. Things should be explained to them as fully as possible. I was turned off by a person who did not want to talk to me because I was not important enough. Maurice just wanted to preach to the converted, who already agreed with him. I try to be cordial, because that way you win people over. You cannot win them over by drawing the line of demarcation, saying you are on this side and I am on the other; that shows a lack of consciousness. After the Black Panther Party was formed, I nearly fell into this error. I could not understand why people were blind to what I saw so clearly. Then I realized that their understanding had to be developed.
Humans are brainwashed into thinking it's "Human nature" to be greedy and self-centered, so when someone comes offering help those stuck in this condition can't help but think "What's the catch?"
And the clearer it is that the person has good intent, the more dangerous the catch must be.
End of story.
Time to change.
It had everything to do with human greed.
As long as there is the suggestion or possibility, no matter how remote that anyone of us can become enormously wealthy, we won't want to change the system.
"If the USSR still existed/won the Cold War" is my absolute favourite kind of alt history. (Well, I also like hate reading/watching "if Germany won WWII" crap because it's all so hilariously implausible.) God, that'd be the dream. If only we had gotten the Cold War good ending. I wish the USSR had won both the scientific and military tech races and the cultural dominance game. I wish I lived in a world where it was normal and commonplace across the world to celebrate the anniversary of the Great October Revolution. I wish socialism had won before I was born and the existence of capitalism was just a chapter in my primary school history textbooks.
But that didn't happen, so we the Western Left have to learn from the Soviets' successes and failures, and keep fighting to build socialism in our own land.
It'll never be the same, but that makes me feel hopeful, funnily enough. I know that restoring the USSR isn't a magic bullet that'll bring back the entire 1916-23 revolutionary wave and make it actually work how Lenin predicted this time around, and I'm not even old enough to be the type of washed up old Cold War era Comintern type who thinks of the USSR as a necessary and key guiding star of global socialism that makes our movements all stronger through its own existence, and yet, I still think that reconstructing it will somehow help the Western left. Or at least make having Opinions on the Cold War a little fun and a little scary again.
I think a lot of what Western leftists miss the USSR over... is not anything that will automatically return if Russia becomes a socialist state again. And yet, I still want the USSR back anyway.
Yep, that's a very good point. The USSR was a boogeyman for Western governments that created the rise of modern social democracy. Which does reduce material harm... but I'd prefer for us to do a fucking revolution already and have real socialism instead.
I'm just not entirely convinced that Russia alone would have the resources and impact that the old USSR had before Gorbachev wrecked everything. The October Revolution was a very unique and complicated set of material conditions, and the Great Patriotic War was an important factor for all parties involved. There was a lot to the Cold War that relied on the Warsaw Pact as a geopolitical reality, that a socialist modern Russia simply wouldn't have to the same power levels.
All that said, it is truly none of our business, and it is great that they even still have a communist party at all, and that that party is even a shadow of what the CPSU was.
Canada PM Trudeau is likely to announce resignation, source says
OTTAWA, Jan 5 (Reuters) - Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is increasingly likely to announce he intends to step down, though he has not made a final decision, a source familiar with Trudeau's thinking said on Sunday.
The source spoke to Reuters after the Globe and Mail reported that Trudeau was expected to announce as early as Monday that he would quit as leader of Canada's ruling Liberal Party after nine years in office.
Ukraine launches surprise operation in Russia’s Kursk region
Ukrainian armed forces began a surprise offensive in Russia’s Kursk region on Sunday, in an apparent attempt to regain the initiative on the battlefield before Donald Trump’s imminent return to the White House.
Video showed Ukrainian armoured columns advancing across snowy fields towards the village of Bolshoe Soldatskoe, north-east of the Ukrainian-held Russian town of Sudzha. Vehicles could also be seen driving through empty rustic settlements.
Ukrainian officials confirmed a substantial operation was taking place. Russian military bloggers reported fierce fighting. Ukraine’s general staff said 42 combat clashes took place on Sunday in the Kursk area, with 12 continuing.
Ukraine launches surprise operation in Russia’s Kursk region
Footage purports to show Ukrainian armoured columns advancing towards village of Bolshoe SoldatskoeLuke Harding (The Guardian)
And that's without mentioning Boeing...
like this
Oofnik and Dessalines like this.
I think op understands that. The meme is calling out people who assume the new J36 must be shit quality simply because it's Chinese made, when America's own f35 is itself extremely unreliable.
OP's mention of boeing is simply pointing out another area of American manufacturing that is currently embroiled in it's own quality issues. Maybe the "China builds low quality" claim is out of date and needs to be retired.
Hope that clears things up Langley.
like this
Dessalines likes this.
Temu quality
Everything i ordered from Temu so far has been completely acceptable in terms of quality. I didn't ordered jet fighters though, maybe US Air Force should try, who knows, maybe they would be pleasantly surprised compared to F-35.
Underwater Volcano Off Oregon Will Erupt This Year, Scientists Predict
Underwater Volcano Off Oregon Will Erupt This Year, Scientists Predict
The Axial Seamount is gonna blow, scientists say. The only question is when.Isaac Schultz (Gizmodo)
like this
Nakoichi [they/them], 1024_Kibibytes, radio_free_asgarthr [he/him, comrade/them], glimmer_twin [he/him], BlueLineBae, davel, TheTux, just some guy, Laura, Maiq, OprahsedCreature, culpritus [any], tomcatt360, Thrife, linkshandig, Lucy :3, Ghyste, Cowbee [he/they], CascadeOfLight [he/him], will_a113, SmokeInFog, FnordPrefect [comrade/them, he/him], Curious Canid, ikilledtheradiostar [comrade/them, love/loves], TH1NKTHRICE and leanleft like this.
catloaf doesn't like this.
like this
just some guy, OprahsedCreature, MelodiousFunk, Ghyste, ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆, will_a113 and Morphit like this.
catloaf doesn't like this.
Etihad Boeing 787 Tire Bursted Amid Rejected Take-off at Melbourne
Etihad Boeing 787 Tire Bursted Amid Rejected Take-off at Melbourne
Etihad Airways (EY) Boeing 787 experienced a critical safety incident during takeoff at Melbourne Airport (MEL), forcing emergency proceduresBhavya Velani (Aviation A2Z)
It's weird that this report focuses on reporting the tyres rather than the reason for the rejected take off. It even goes on to discuss other unrelated aviation tyre events for no particularly apparent reason.
It's like saying that the coffee cup spilled coffee when it was dropped onto the ground .. duh.
And as a surprise to nobody, except perhaps the "author" of the original article the aborted takeoff had nothing to do with tyres.
"The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) says a gauge indicated the temperature of exhaust gases in the plane's right engine was too high."
"The ATSB said the rejected take-off was conducted in line with standard operating procedures."
Source: abc.net.au/news/2025-01-07/eti…
It’s Impossible to Get Rid of a Tesla Cybertruck. I Want to Cut My Losses and Move On, but I Can't Give This Thing Away. I’ve Lost So Much Money Already; Help.
It’s Impossible to Get Rid of a Tesla Cybertruck. I Want to Cut My Losses and Move On, but I Can't Give This Thing Away. I’ve Lost So Much Money Already; Help!
A Cybertruck owner shares his frustration following multiple failed attempts to sell his truck. After losing more than $20,000 in 2,800 miles, the owner says, “I want to cut my losses and move on, but I can't give this thing away.”Tinsae Aregay (Torque News)
Does made in Mexico mean made by China?
Does made in Mexico mean made by China?
Donald Trump believes Mexico is a trojan horse for Chinese mercantilismThe Economist
This was legal because the handle was indeed made in the USA, but it was advertised on the packaging in a way that implied the whole thing was made in the USA when it reality it was just the plastic grip.
I thought of it. Now it is your problem. 🎶Let it go🎶
cross-posted from: midwest.social/post/21395696
Chinese Sixth Generation Fighters Poised to Cut Pentagon Demand For F-35s: Lockheed Martin Stock Drops After New Jets’ Unveiling
Chinese Sixth Generation Fighters Poised to Cut Pentagon Demand For F-35s: Lockheed Martin Stock Drops After New Jets’ Unveiling
Stock of the United States’ largest defence contractor Lockheed Martin was downgraded to Hold from Buy at Deutsche Bank by 14.5 percent, with a price target of $523Military Watch Magazine
like this
timlyo likes this.
No, I mean the one that took down nearly the entirety of Irans air defenses with less than 100 weapons.
Producing literally hundreds of a single type of airplane with orders for the next decade or so isn't exactly "nothing to show for".
And even if you discount the actual sales, getting billions in development budget from the US government is pretty good for business.
I'm not big into airframes but i think it's a dieing artform making these jets. Some drone strapped to a pulse rocket will eventually make them all obsolete.
The same can be said for small arms I guess.
Opposed to the Chinese corporations which are famously basically charity organizations?
What exactly is your point? Your moving goalposts to completely different planets.
don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
You think Iran would release videos of that?
I have a UK generals quotes. Not as good as video, but better than nothing. I think you have just Irans public stance? With that I'd say mine has more evidence.
don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
He just straight up doesn't know what he's talking about. The only thing you'll ever get out of him is west bad, China, Russia & North Korea good.
Can just as well name his post lockheed stock drops after kindergarten teacher drinks water and it would be equally accurate.
The only one referring to vague vibes here is you bud. The disaster that is F22 is very well documented
On the other hand, China has consistently shown the ability to produce things that actually work.
Sources alluding to what exactly?
That the F-35 had had problems? Every single jet platform has had problems.
While the F-35 has problems of its own, its no secret that China is yet to manage to develop anything that can rival or beat their RAM.
Prototypes are nothing short of speculations and wishful thinking until it starts to hit production.
And I'm not even a fan of US jets. As a Swede I will admit my bias for our own platforms. But the F-35 does fill a role that our fighters doesn't. And it does fill that specific role quite well. It's not an all purpose aircraft.
taking pause to look around when new things are revealed, which is sensible. doesn't mean what you think it means.
I remember the hype about Chinas new submarines. Oh they were gonna be so good and so stealthy. Turns out they didn't make it far out of the Harbour before sinking.
So what was that you said about China producing things that "actually work"? Or maybe you excluded their sinking sub in that statement. I must have missed the asterisk
Hard to think of another modern jet built outside Yankeestan that has problems that come even close to those that F35 flying cybertruck is having.
While the F-35 has problems of its own, its no secret that China is yet to manage to develop anything that can rival or beat their RAM.
[citation needed]
While the F-35 has problems of its own, its no secret that China is yet to manage to develop anything that can rival or beat their RAM.
The prototype China is making is for a jet a generation after F35, they already have an answer to F35 in production and it hasn't cost over a trillion dollars to make. In fact, Chinese military budget overall is only a fraction of what Yankeestan spends.
And it does fill that specific role quite well.
No it doesn't. As many experts have explained in great detail, F35 tries to do too many things and it doesn't do any of them well. It's incredibly expensive to maintain, it has constant breakdowns, and they can't even keep a sufficient number of them operational as a result.
I remember the hype about Chinas new submarines. Oh they were gonna be so good and so stealthy. Turns out they didn’t make it far out of the Harbour before sinking.
The fact that you'd latch onto a conspiracy theory really highlights the quality of your intellect.
So what was that you said about China producing things that “actually work”? Or maybe you excluded their sinking sub in that statement. I must have missed the asterisk
Nah, I'm just not dumb enough to fall for propaganda marketed to people who don't have fully developed brains.
Ah yes. Everything that is inconvenient for your arguments is a conspiracy. Must be very convenient.
The F35 does try to do a lot of things. You can argue effectiveness of many of them. But what it DOES do well, is performing as a stealth strike craft. Credit where credit is due. The ram technology development in the US is impressive and world leading.
You resort unprovoked to name calling ("yankeestan"), and attack others intellect. It really shows your insecurity the moment something doesn't go your way.
You speak of "generations" as if the jets are a console. "They're making a 6th gen aircraft". They claim they're making a 6:th gen aircraft. That claim won't be proven until they start producing. Until then it's nothing but speculation and fairy dust.
Buddy, you've not just fallen for propaganda, you've taken an express elevator right down the shaft and keep drilling once you arrive.
don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
Nah, Just anything that is presented without a shred of evidence for the benefit of racist rubes such as yourself.
But what it DOES do well, is performing as a stealth strike craft.
Incredible claim to make given that it's never been used against a peer adversary with actual modern AD. The fact that you state this as a fact shows that you're utterly incapable of critical thought. Probably the reason you fall for conspiracy theories so readily.
It really shows your insecurity the moment something doesn’t go your way.
So much projection here.
You speak of “generations” as if the jets are a console. “They’re making a 6th gen aircraft”. They claim they’re making a 6:th gen aircraft. That claim won’t be proven until they start producing. Until then it’s nothing but speculation and fairy dust.
Maybe learn a bit about the subject you're attempting to debate and the common terminology used instead of making a clown of yourself in public.
Buddy, you’ve not just fallen for propaganda, you’ve taken an express elevator right down the shaft and keep drilling once you arrive.
You've perfectly described yourself there kiddo.
Jfs has been a cluster, they wanted a VTOL jet that do everything, which physics doesn't like. But with 15 years extra development, they kinda did it.
80% readiness is higher than most jets, my sources are actually showing loser, but still in line with other military jets.
A-10 Thunderbolt II (67 percent) and the F-16C (69 percent), while significantly outperforming air superiority fighters like the F-15C (33 percent) and F-22 (52 percent).
sandboxx.us/news/why-media-cov…
And is your third source just saying that the biggest problem with the F22 is that they want more of them? That hardly seems like a criticism of the plane itself.
Jfs has been a cluster, they wanted a VTOL jet that do everything, which physics doesn’t like. But with 15 years extra development, they kinda did it.
In the same way the Cybertruck is kind of a truck.
80% readiness is higher than most jets, my sources are actually showing loser, but still in line with other military jets.
80% is not the readiness of F22, but a target they can't hit.
And is your third source just saying that the biggest problem with the F22 is that they want more of them? That hardly seems like a criticism of the plane itself.
It's a criticism of the abysmal production capability showing that these things are artisanally made.
Did you see the comparison to other jets?
Su57 is artisanally made, less than two dozen. ~200 is a short production run, they shut it down early because those 200 could defeat every other air force on the planet several times over. But tech has progressed since then, it's only a bit better than the J20. But like the U2, that's not it's fault.
Expensive maintenance compared to what? Have you looked at the operations rates? It looks like F35 costs about the same per hour as the F15EX.
Ah yes. Now I'm a racist as well. What do you base that on exactly?
If you think they've never tested the stealth capabilities of the f35 you're delusional.
You got absolutely nothing in terms of knowledge on the subject, which is why you resort to personal attacks and throw in the occasional "no u" to derail the discussion into a match of name calling. You follow the same pattern every time.
Ah yes. Now I’m a racist as well. What do you base that on exactly?
I base that on your religious belief in western superiority.
If you think they’ve never tested the stealth capabilities of the f35 you’re delusional.
I know they've never tested capabilities of f35 because it's never been used in combat against a peer competitor. The fact that you don't understand this shows that you are in fact the one who got absolutely nothing in terms of knowledge on the subject, and are incapable of rational thought in general.
You got absolutely nothing in terms of knowledge on the subject, which is why you resort to personal attacks and throw in the occasional “no u” to derail the discussion into a match of name calling. You follow the same pattern every time.
I love how you keep making ad hominem attacks here to distract from your utter ignorance.
Far more expensive compared to SU-57 that's actually been proven effective in combat against NATO air defence systems. This is how actual weapons are developed:
The Russian Air Force has demonstrated high confidence in the Su-57’s stealth capabilities, and has deployed the fighters for high intensity combat operations to parts of the Ukrainian theatre with particularly high concentrations of Ukrainian air defences.The Su-57 program has prioritised reducing maintenance needs and operational costs to avoid the very low availability rates that have plagued America’s F-117, F-22 and F-35 stealth fighter fleets. One notable means by which this had been achieved is through reduced reliance on radar absorbent coatings, which was achieved by using innovative solutions such as radar absorbent fibreglass. In contrast to American stealth fighters which consistently cost far more to operate than their fourth generation predecessors, this approach allows the Su-57 to potentially achieve lower operational costs than its direct predecessor the Soviet Su-27, thus allowing Russia to move its fleet into the fifth generation without either significantly raising sustainment funding or contracting the number of fighters in service.
My religious beliefs? I don't have any. Nor have i stated anything about certain people being superior over anyone else.
You're right, the f35 has not been performing strikes against Eastern nations directly. That doesn't mean it has never been tested. They're sold to various countries in Europe and each and every nation does test their capabilities with their own systems. Each of their neighbours take every oppertunity to test their capabilities as well. Everyone has come to the same conclusion. The ram capabilities of the f35 is mighty impressive.
You've displayed your lack of insight into each and every aspect enough as it is.
And addressing your childish game of name calling isn't an ad hominem attack. But it is funny you mention that, seeing how you unprovoked, resort to personal attacks. The comment-chain is there to read for everyone. You're the only one between us making personal attacks.
Here's what an actual battle test platform looks like:
The Russian Air Force has demonstrated high confidence in the Su-57’s stealth capabilities, and has deployed the fighters for high intensity combat operations to parts of the Ukrainian theatre with particularly high concentrations of Ukrainian air defences.The Su-57 program has prioritised reducing maintenance needs and operational costs to avoid the very low availability rates that have plagued America’s F-117, F-22 and F-35 stealth fighter fleets. One notable means by which this had been achieved is through reduced reliance on radar absorbent coatings, which was achieved by using innovative solutions such as radar absorbent fibreglass. In contrast to American stealth fighters which consistently cost far more to operate than their fourth generation predecessors, this approach allows the Su-57 to potentially achieve lower operational costs than its direct predecessor the Soviet Su-27, thus allowing Russia to move its fleet into the fifth generation without either significantly raising sustainment funding or contracting the number of fighters in service.
militarywatchmagazine.com/arti…
You’ve displayed your lack of insight into each and every aspect enough as it is.
And addressing your childish game of name calling isn’t an ad hominem attack.
I see you don't know what ad hominem means. Ad hominem isn't a personal attack, it's a way to deflect from the point being made. You're trying to discredit what I'm saying by claiming that I don't know what I'm talking about. You're not providing counter points, but instead attacking me to deflect because at the end of the day you'rej ust a troll.
In any case, I've said all I needed to say here. You can keep on bleating if you like though. Bye.
F22 was introduced in 1996, SU57 is a new platform that's still being tested and hasn't been put into mass production. The manufacturing only started in 2019, and there are already 32 produced. Let me know if you need help crunching the numbers on that one.
What’s the su57 cost per hour taking into account maintainer income differences?
The cost of the entire jet is a mere $35 million. Here's an article you can read discussing the lifetime cost comparison
If you're saying it's still pre production, then it's production delay is worse than the F35. It's first flight was in 2010, so that puts it at 15 years from first fight to lrip and counting. F35 only had 10 year timeline between first flight in 2001 and lrip in 2011.
First, maintenance costs are fundamentally different from sticker price. To find maintenance cost, you'd want to find the maintenance factor, how many hours of maintenance per flight hour, and the cost of replacement parts per flight hour.
Comparing quoted sticker price isn't much good either, since they haven't sold any, and as you said it's still pre production, so even if the cost wasn't subsidized, it'd still be way off from final numbers.
If you’re saying it’s still pre production, then it’s production delay is worse than the F35.
I'm saying it's still being tested in actual combat conditions and kinks are being ironed out before mass production starts. This is how you avoid having a debacle like F35 where you start producing something in volume and then discover crippling problems down the road.
Also, not sure what argument you're trying to make regarding the cost being subsidized. The cost is labor and material used to build it. It costs the Russian state 35 million a pop. There is absolutely no reason to think this cost will go up dramatically once mass production starts. In fact, what happens is that economies of scale kick in and costs go down.
I'm trying to say we have no idea what the maintenance costs are on the su57. Russia doesn't report things like that. I don't know if they even track it themselves. So you can't just blanket say the su57 is cheaper to maintain unless you bring data.
One thing that works against Russia in maintenance is they tend to run their equipment much harder. To get good performance on their engines, they sometimes push them so that they only last a couple hundred flight hours. Doing the same with many components would indicate a very high maintenance factor.
Maybe if there are no competitors. Even as monopolistic as the military aircraft industry is in the U.S., drones open up a lot of space for competition by being vastly cheaper.
Then there's concern about long-term sales to foreign countries, plus the corresponding parts and maintenance revenues. The F-16 is flown by 25 other countries.
To back calculate the cost per flight hour (which is what you're suggesting) we'd need to know the overall cost of the su57 and the number of flight hours flown. Do we know those numbers? Given there are only about a dozen su57, they'll have very low flight hours. Plus Russia tends to have about half the training time for pilots as the US, so that further lowers the flight hours.
But do you have info on the yearly cost of the su57?
Russia makes engines that actually last a long time shows the strength of Russian engineering.
I was saying exactly the opposite. US engines usually last a couple thousand hours, Russian engines last a few hundred.
The U-2 first flew in 1955. One was shot down over the USSR in 1960, and another was shot down over Cuba in 1962. They largely stopped flying over peer air defenses at that point.
That's about a 7-year span where it was useful for its primary task. Hanging around to fly over Libya in 2011 is not the same as fulfilling the role the plane was designed for decades later.
The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) grant database, which provided detailed records of Washington-funded NGOs, civil society, and media projects worldwide, has been removed from the web.
Collapsing Empire: RIP CIA Front's 'Overt Operations'
All my investigations are free to access, thanks to the generosity of my readers.Kit Klarenberg (Global Delinquents)
unphazed
in reply to geneva_convenience • • •