• 1 Post
  • 32 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 8th, 2023

help-circle


  • Who’s saying “nuh uh”? It could go both ways.

    I’m saying (in winey child voice), “nuh uh! I’m not a communist! I’m an anarcho-blahblahblah, and there are nuanced distinctions between blah blah blah! Nyah!”

    Marsupial is saying, “nuh uh! China doesn’t blame Western capitalism for the opium trade! They only blame the Brits!”

    I have no disagreement that typical “tankies” would call the Five Eyes an empire and Western hegemony, but calling the idea “tankie” is just using a thought-stopper to avoid talking about the idea that empires serve those with power and not the other way around.

    And I just fucking disdain fervent communists, so Marsupial struck a nerve. I’d rather be dismissed for what I actually think.


  • lmao, just to be clear, I think tankies are little CCP dick-sucking bitches, but anyone who throws around a thought-stopper like “tankie” really doesn’t deserve respect. C’mon, you can engage with the merits and flaws of an argument, right?

    If you want to get into a whole ad hominem thing: I’m suspicious of communism (free markets are great for almost everything), and communist revolutions are a joke. I haven’t finished reading Das Kapital, but I’ve heard that the capitalism will inevitably create communism out of the consequences of its own actions, so any revolution is just trying to force the wheel of time forward. I also think it is plain to see that you can’t have a communist government without democracy (preferable direct democracy), because how can everyone be equal otherwise? China’s communism is just capitalism in a trench coat, which is why you see the same effects on its populace as elsewhere. Fundamentally, I’m an Anarcho-syndicalist or Anarcho-socialist. No hierarchies, free association, worker solidarity, and mutual aid.


  • Thanks for pointing that bit out!

    So if this quote is to be believed:

    “This represents a blow to (the cartel’s) financial operations and illicit activities, since the company receives chemical shipments from China,” Salazar said in a statement.

    It looks like China is struggling to enforce their controls. I’m trying to think of a reason that doesn’t boil down to a lack of political will. I don’t blame them, though. They certainly have a bunch of more pressing, complex domestic problems (balancing environment, business, and social welfare). I would certainly shrug as well when Uncle Sam comes whining when those he trampled on are dying from poisons you’ve made illegal and are being produced somewhere else. It’s not like any other nation can perfectly control their imports and exports. They probably are just denying it altogether to save face with their people.

    I’m always surprised at just how capitalist Chinese businesses are.


  • Interesting. Your quote says China controlled fentanyl, but states the precursors were restricted in the Hong Kong SAR, and they may go through the SAR.

    Does China itself restrict the precursors? Or could they be making their way out through other routes?

    China certainly helped get the ball rolling for the 4 years between 2015-2019, and then divested itself to some extent, which is driving the demand for other sources. I doubt India is going to stop exporting precursors anytime soon. Their pharmaceutical industry is insanely unethical.

    Mexico is mostly owned by the narcos, so they’ll “cooperate,” but the fentanyl will continue to flow as long as they can get precursors. It seems the US has quite a pickle on its hands.

    Hopefully, the crisis will die out over time? (oof, that’s a lot of bodies) Unless the US pharmaceutical companies have a new, “non-addictive” pain killer they’re promoting these days.









  • Thank you! Here’s the actual PDF doc of their clarifications and here’s the original DSA

    The specific language for number of users is:

    average monthly active recipients of their service in the Union, calculated as an average over the period of the past six months

    And the definition of active recipient:

    (p) ‘active recipient of an online platform’ means a recipient of the service that has engaged with an online platform by either requesting the online platform to host information or being exposed to information hosted by the online platform and disseminated through its online interface;

    So you just need 45 million EU citizens looking at a platform to qualify as a VLOP. Amazon probably qualifies, but it would be easy for them to prove they were unfairly discriminated against as well.