Revisionism in the Marxist context explicitly and precisely means modifications to theory that make Marxism compatible with liberalism. The Kruschevites were revisionist, but Lenin and Stalin were not. Both of the latter developed Marxist theory but we're not revisionist. Mao also developed Marxist theory but was not revisionist.
It would be awesome if Taiwan were rid of the dominance of the Han Chinese and recognized as an aboriginal nation-state led predominantly by the aboriginals. Unfortunately, just like the KMT, the West would ensure that such a state would be part of the fascist empire and used against China regardless of the will of the aboriginal peoples. Maybe someday Taiwan can be decolonized, but not until the European empire ends. Decolonization before that will end up like decolonization of Africa did - with European capture, counter-revolution, and the building of imperial military extensions.
That's how it goes though. The only way for these people to survive is to double down on the white supremacy when the tide turns against them. It's escalatory logic
I agree. Which is why the IMF rhetoric is suspect. It almost feels like a new narrative thread is being developed with the end goal of manufacturing consent for austerity in the USA. Why would they do that? I can only imagine the goal is to "reform retirements and pensions" meaning loot the old, loot social security, end Medicaid and Medicare, and blame it on "the other" in order to generate more support for mass imprisonment, sanctions, and war (but I repeat myself).
Let the record show June 10 2024, Freagle puts a bet down that these words from the IMF will be referenced later to justify austerity and a bunch of liberals are going to support killing the poors via neglect because "fiscal responsibility" and "vote blue if you want to fix it".
This is SO bold that I have to imagine it's a sign of a very very significant intelligence advantage Russia has over the USA. They're not going to do this in an attempt to get the US to attack the ship to escalate conflict. They're likely prepared to lose the ship to US violence, but that contingency is likely counterbalanced by a gambit to reduce the USA's diplomatic power by allowing it to erode it's legitimacy. It's also telling that this is happening at the same time that China is reported to be engaging in "intense diplomacy" in LatAm this past week. It feels like a concerted effort to significantly reduce the USA's sphere of influence in a very short period of time, which is only something you would try if you had serious preparations, intelligence, and counterintelligence indicating that now would be an advantageous time.
One alternative is that its desperation, but I don't see a lot of evidence for that.
You don't know what exploitation means in this context.
Exploitation, Marx's term, is the mechanism by which the owning class reproduces their living via the labor of others. It is not a spectrum, it is a phenomenon with an unambiguous boundary. As an owner of stocks, you are benefiting from the increasing value of the property which is created by the people who work in those companies. As an owner of rentable properties, you are benefiting from the labor of workers who produce the value that built the property and the workers who produced the value that is converted to cash to pay the rent. As a middle manager, sales person, or marketer, your entire salary comes from the value produced by others, most often those laboring in extraction and manufacturing.
Exploitation is the phenomenon in which value is taken from the people producing it and used to reproduce a way of life for someone else.
Oh, I hadn't seen the bleed-them-dry angle yet. Yeah, this makes the required defensive capabilities much more expensive across the whole network, and it creates opportunities for guerillas to keep 'em guessing and constantly have minor threats that require evaluation to determine full extent.
Don't assume Western means USA in this case. Also don't assume Western targets means USA homeland. It is clear to me that Russia has been cultivating resistance groups in Europe, Africa, and potentially AsiaPac, and that all of these groups would benefit from the ability to deter and ultimately demolish USA forward bases and forward deployments.
Revisionism in the Marxist context explicitly and precisely means modifications to theory that make Marxism compatible with liberalism. The Kruschevites were revisionist, but Lenin and Stalin were not. Both of the latter developed Marxist theory but we're not revisionist. Mao also developed Marxist theory but was not revisionist.