That’s actually a viable tactic in my field. The first three jobs in my field of expertise I got by walking into the clinic/office and giving my resume to the manager/owner.

Is this copium? Maybe, maybe not.

In a place like Texas… More than likely.

In a state that’s closer to a swing state it’s easier to over do it with gerrymandering and spread out your support too thin. In a state where there’s a lot more support to spread out… Accidentally fucking up is a little more challenging to do.

Plus, I would find it difficult to believe that political operatives wouldn’t be able to grasp the idea that things like the Latino vote from the last election might not be as dependable this year and react accordingly.

gas stove on the other hand is only about 30-40% efficient.

Maybe on a really old stove top? High efficiency burners with the right pan can be 85-95% efficient.

Yeah, unfortunately in my area gas range is actually more efficient than induction because the electricity is mainly by natural gas anyways.

How does it work with the wok? Wouldn’t it just be the bottom getting the heat?

Right… But one could say the same about the proletariat pre-revolution.

we don’t like corn syrup right?

Yeah, we need corn syrup…please do not be insensitive to our addiction.

There is no stopping the impulsive need to add corn into everything. Corn for the fuel, corn for sugar, corn for the livestock, corn for the hole. If you can cram corn in it, we’ve done it.

However, without confirming in reality, some took it to mean that the peasantry would oppose socialism if they weren’t already proletarianized. It isn’t quite as stupid as it sounds.

I can see how someone unfamiliar with the countryside could make the assumption. However, as a person who’s lived and worked on a farm it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. Farming communities are extremely interdependent on the local community to get just about anything done. No one person or family can work the land by themselves, it really does take a community if you’re not a wealthy land holder.

Trots take it to mean that all socialist countries are generally highly flawed to outright bad

Yeah… He was a messy bitch about a lot of things. Really a mixed bag of conflicting ideas in that little dude.

Well… The problem is that the Catholic Church does not act as a unified body, especially in America.

Trad Catholics in America have been hating the pope since basically Vatican II. That doesn’t mean that “they are at war with the church”, just that organizations like Opus Dei are actively trying to pull the church further to the right.

So while some of the church maybe doing good, the other part of the church is ending abortion rights and partaking in other crazy shit on the supreme court.

but prevalent idea that the peasantry would be counter-revolutionary, as they would have more of a petite-bourgeois ideology based on their largely self-driven living conditions.

I guess hindsight 20/20, but I had always figured they were referring to the landed peasants like kulaks or sub-kulaks. Seems incongruous that peasants in poverty would be counterrevolutionary.

Trotsky also rejected that a country itself could be socialist, as he believed internationally the system being capitalist would cause a reversion to capitalism eventually.

Kinda agree with this to an extent.

When the Russian revolution failed to inspire successful revolution in the west, they reached a dillema. Trotsky feared the Russian peasantry would attack, and so wanted to go on the offensive first

What time frame are we referring too here, and what peasantry? Im guessing well before the implementation of the five year plan? Also, in his references to the peasantry I always kinda figured he was speaking about the kulaks.

Chinese Trotskyists were wrong, wanting to attack both the KMT and Japan before kicking out Japan. Mao and the CPC formed a temporary alliance against Japan, then kicked out the KMT, which ended up being correct.

I mean… Like most things in this time period, it kinda depends on when you are talking about. In the beginning most communist did not like the decision to form a united front with the kmt, but acknowledged it as necessary. There wasn’t really much of a delineation between trotskyists and stalinist until when it came to the kmt until the Shanghai massacre. And tbf it’s kinda understandable that people like chen duxiu would want to break/attack with the kmt afterwards.

Trotsky’s plan of Permanent Revolution rested on the idea that the peasantry would erode socialism, because he thought they could not be truly aligned with the proletariat.

Isn’t that just in the case of later developing capitalist countries? My understanding was that he believed later developed capitalist countries would be unable to build the industrialized economy that creates a large proletariat class. So in these countries the existing proletariat would have to seize control and then later form an alliance with the peasantry down the road.

However, I don’t think that means he only wanted to develop socialism with western nations. I mean Stalin and him had a major rift develop over Trotsky wanting to support the Chinese communist and Stalin siding with the kmt. One of the things I kinda agree with when it comes to Trotsky was his opposition to the socialism in one country policy.

This is kinda dependent on what year it is of course, Trotsky was kinda all over the place once he fell from grace.

Yeah… I think a lot of people are thinking the end of the USA will mirror the end of the USSR, hoping that China will step in to fill the vacuum as the western hegemony did when the USSR failed.

Im afraid it’s not going to be that simple or bloodless, and that with the advent of climate change the world’s just going to be rocked by food and resource insecurities while major powers scramble to secure borders and resources.

I think we’ve probably hit a point where capitalism is running on fumes, but those fumes may have already run long enough to where it’s too late to switch to a new economic/political system before the shit hits the fan.

Ehhh… I’d have to disagree with that. The meaning of “the orient” has changed drastically over time, but even in the early days the furthest west it would encompass would be the caucuses, and even that’s pretty rare.

Yeah, there was a website that had all the unedited transcripts and some recordings from crashes. I don’t think I remember reading any real prayers, that’s unless you count something like “oh God, oh god” as a prayer. Mainly just a lot of swearing and a mix of panicked or resigned statements. Most are just a couple sentences long, seems like most crashes go from fine to catastrophic very quickly.

orientalized due to orthodox christianity.

Russian orthodox christianity is separate from oriental orthodoxy practiced in places like Syria or Armenia, who follow nicene Christian traditions. They may be othered by their western European counterparts, but eastern orthodoxy is fairly normal in places like Greece. I don’t think it would be appropriate to label them as oriental, especially in the modern understanding of the word.

Oriental = Asian to you I guess.

This you…?

My dude… Youve had soo many wild takes on this subject you should just stop.

Lol, I see you deleted the one where you claimed none of Russia was in Europe. Embarrassing.

Lol, I am Asian… I know what oriental means. If you would read your own source, you would know what oriental means as well.

From your fuckiing source…

The adjectival term Oriental has been used by the West to mean cultures, peoples, countries, Asian rugs, and goods from the Orient. “Oriental” means generally “eastern”. It is a traditional designation (especially when capitalized) for anything belonging to the Orient or “East” (for Asia), and especially of its Eastern culture. It indicated the eastern direction in historical astronomy, often abbreviated “Ori”.[8] In contemporary American English, Oriental usually refers to things from the parts of East Asia traditionally occupied by East Asians and most Central Asians and Southeast Asians racially categorized as “Mongoloid”. This excludes Jews, Indians, Arabs, and most other South or West Asian peoples. Because of historical discrimination against Chinese, Korean and Japanese, in some parts of the United States, some people consider the term derogatory. For example, Washington State prohibits the word “Oriental” in legislation and government documents and prefers the word “Asian” instead.[9]

Lol, the irony is neither of you even read the source…

Russia,[b] or the Russian Federation,[c] is a country in Eastern Europe and North Asia. It is the largest country in the world, spanning eleven time zones and sharing land borders with fourteen countries.[d] With a population of over 140 million, Russia is the most populous country in Europe and the ninth-most populous country in the world.

How can you be so confident, and yet so wrong about everything?