It's not a whole book, but chapter 8 from History of the CPSU(B) that covers that whole period. It's also not super long: https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1939/x01/ch08.htm
And here's a text-to-speech recording of the chapter: https://youtu.be/CICY79HKEYo
Pfizer and BioNTech’s Covid-19 vaccine is just 39% effective in Israel where the delta variant is the dominant strain, but still provides strong protection against severe illness and hospitalization, according to a new report from the country’s Health Ministry.
The efficacy figure, which is based on an unspecified number of people between June 20 and July 17, is down from an earlier estimate of 64% two weeks ago and conflicts with data out of the U.K. that found the shot was 88% effective against symptomatic disease caused by the variant.
Might not be that the 39% figure holds outside of Israel since they were one of the first countries to do widespread vaccination
Blanket antipathy and dismissal of the southern states, where exploitation of the American working class is most acute and where most black and latino communities are concentrated, is definitely lib.
Both became a thing roughly around the same time, which is the 1970s, but I'd say Neoconservatism is more of a US thing (although one could argue there were Canadian and European neocons) that was about hawkish foreign policy and maintaining democracy abroad with a kind of "Pax Americana." Many of these people were former liberals and even some Trots who were not anti-war. George W. Bush and the Iraq War were the culmination of this movement.
Neoliberalism is more of an economic push to not only roll back all social democratic reforms in the wake of a weakening socialist bloc, but to have the state directly subsidize the private sector instead with "public-private partnerships" among other things. The ideological justification of this was, in the US, basically made by libertarian, Koch-brother-funded think tanks and incursion into almost every economics department in the country until even high schoolers are getting taught who Freidrich Hayek is and are forced to read Ayn Rand.
Reasoned discussion is not against site rules and used to be pretty prominent. It's died down a lot since the huge wave of struggle sessions, which I think have more to do with the current state of discourse on this site than the policy against mean-spirited debate.
Given that 1C Entertainment has already put out games like "Realpolitik" and "Secret Government," it seems that they are trying to cover all their bases by tapping into neoliberal, fascist, and socialist power fantasies.
Critical race theory is an academic discipline within the social sciences and humanities that theorizes about race and racism with a progressive bent. American conservatives have this tendency to take concepts from social sciences and humanities classes and make a big fuss out of them. Never mind that most universities teach nothing but straight liberalism, some of it with a radical sheen.
I see the "critical race theory" panic as similar to the "Frankfurt school" stuff from a few years ago. It's just conservatives reaching to try and find "cultural Marxism" in the curriculum by finding the most far-left stuff that is actually taught, which ends up being progressive lib stuff.
Sure, WEB Du Boise was a communist party member and he technically falls under "critical race theory," but none of his communist beliefs are taught in the university. It's completely de-fanged and turned into "racism sure harms our psyches and social institutions huh."
Lib game, doing anything slightly socialist makes your economy "uncompetitive" and your GDP starts tanking. Maybe I'm just bad at the game but it seems like the game kind of brute-forces you into doing free market with some state regulation.
...there can be no “impartial” social science in a society based on class struggle. In one way or another, all official and liberal science defends wage-slavery, whereas Marxism has declared relentless war on that slavery. To expect science to be impartial in a wage-slave society is as foolishly naïve as to expect impartiality from manufacturers on the question of whether workers’ wages ought not to be increased by decreasing the profits of capital.
Not posting this to suggest that this is definitive, but to show that this is how Lenin thought, which is to show how the social sciences (and by extension, the press) have a class character
It makes no sense to be either really. "Woke" is just being vaguely progressive, which is a mishmash of good instincts and liberal ideology. When people are anti-woke, it's usually really reactionary, but being "pro-woke" would fail to recognise how incredibly liberal those politics are and how absent it is of true, Marxist class analysis. This lack of class analysis allows "wokeness" to be weaponised by the ruling class and used as a cudgel to beat down the working class and its organisations. However, if you are organising people, working class people with "woke" common sense is a good starting point imo.
It's cool and good and very anti-authoritarian for members to be able to individualistically spout their reactionary opinions on social media, where they rep their membership status, and undermine the position of the national organisation. If DSA stepped in that would be very tankie of them.
It's not a whole book, but chapter 8 from History of the CPSU(B) that covers that whole period. It's also not super long: https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1939/x01/ch08.htm
And here's a text-to-speech recording of the chapter: https://youtu.be/CICY79HKEYo