Yeah someone correct me if I’m misremembering but think ~1% of the US is trans so this lines up almost exactly with what you’d expect based on the number of mass shootings.
They’re no more or less likely to do it than cis people based on that chart.
Math was wrong they’re actually 10% less likely than cis people so even more ludicrous they’re trying this but obviously they’re not basing the ban attempt on reality.
If you’re looking for something easier I’d recommend Hakims videos
Think he has book recommendations in it for further reading but he goes over most of the major points well.
Im at work but very high level some of the issues are below. Apologies I may not be writing these out the best but will try to edit later.
Computational problem
Since this was before computer started to become widely used, central planning of a large economy like the USSR was difficult. This lead to some economic problems.
Nowadays that obviously wouldn’t be the case and this is covered well in the book “People’s republic of Walmart”.
Leadership Issues
The western idea of a dictatorship wasn’t accurate but the party did have some issues with leadership. Ossification (spelling might be wrong but too many old people in leadership) made it unable to pivot in some ways it could have. Also I believe it was Kruchev that allowed effectively any class to join the party (even bourgeois) led the party to become revisionist over the years.
As others mentioned they actually ended up reintroducing some market forces as a result of the reformists but not in smart/controlled way like China which led to other economic issues.
Will try to flesh this out more when I have a chance.
No worries and thank you! I’d rather get accurate info even if it takes time, thanks for the link they do give a good rundown on how the article is incredibly misleading.
Trump is not going to own the land or the company. They’re paying him $5M in franchise fees for the brand right basically which is pretty small amount given they were able to get their tariff lowered from I believe 47% to 20%.
Vietnamese company Kinh Bac will own and manage it.
The farmers didn’t own the land so it’s not like it’s being taken from them. All land in Vietnam is owned by the public and rights to use the land are given so they basically got free us of it.
Foreigners can’t even be given rights to use land.
Immediately after the investment policy was approved, the local government organized conferences to collect community opinions to win their agreement and high consensus on the project.
A 2019 law outlining settlements for when land use rights are transferred like in this case so are known publicly.
This part is just speculation on my part but I would assume they can just submit another land use request for different farmland and be given that.
That account seems to be a pretty good source for Vietnam news and debunking western propaganda related to it.
You would really think after all the publicity this pizza index stuff has brought the pentagon would pay for a decent cafeteria and staff it 24/7 so it’s not so obvious when something is happening lol.
Thanks it’s been a while since I read the report and couldn’t remember if that section was another one where they used Zenz or what the source of the claims was.
Yeah if you’re getting very into the weeds on it Is there some minor difference between how that classless/stateless society operates?
Sure but most of the difference in analysis and conclusions is on how to arrive at the classless/stateless society.
The differences between the vision of classless/stateless societies communists and anarchists have is minor compared to pretty much any other broad 2 political ideologies have as what visions of the perfect society is.
Cuba has sent doctors and other medical support to countries of many different ideologies. They would 100% assist an anarchist group if asked and it’s something they could
provide.
Currently China and Vietnam are both willing to trade with countries of any ideology.
You’re latching on to a couple examples in the past and saying nothing else can happen besides that. If that’s going to be the extent of your argument no point in continuing this since there’s nothing left to talk about then.
There’s some historical examples where that may have been the case but that’s not some universal constant that can’t be changed.
Fundamentally they both want the same thing in the end so disagreements on how you get there can be resolved. If 2 different areas/groups try 2 different paths there’s no reason they can’t work together where mutually beneficial.
Would people have to get over being too overly dogmatic about their way? Yes and that may be difficult but not impossible.
Which is the end goal of communists, but you can’t really have a stateless society until all or nearly all countries are socialist unless you’re going the anarchist route.