@_The_Wub_ If anything, Lincoln's survival probably would have meant an even _softer and shorter_ Reconstruction. Lincoln's death was the best thing that could have happened to the Radical Republicans and they still wouldn't/couldn't carry out what was necessary.
@_The_Wub_ It's wild how little the basic, uncontroversial history is recognized that Lincoln and the Radical Republicans were actually opposed to each other and his death removed a serious obstacle to them in addition to being leveraged as a martyrdom against the South in their favor.
The book "Profits in Wilderness" exposes the "communistic settler" myth. The highest organ of unity for settlements was the fact that they were businesses and usually most of the settlers were shareholders. The next largest class was non-shareholding *landowners*, then servants.
You often see "socialists" focusing their ire on the inequity of that triage, launching campaigns aimed at reducing the gap between the first or the second class and their larger, but equally wealthy third sibling. This is because their base *is* the wealthy middle.
This is imperial wealth triage: a third to the patricians, a third to the equestrians, and a third to the plebians: the "citizen masses."
Below that are the dregs; a full 40% of the population are treated by the empire -- in law or in practice -- as unworthy of full citizenship.
The four main wealth classes in the US are:
The top 1%
The next 9%
The next 50%
The bottom 40%
The first three classes divide almost 100% of the country's wealth into approximately equal piles, and the bottom class owns essentially nothing.
i've said before that "no kings" implies the salient political point was made 250 years ago, and like part of that branding is a promise by the democrats organizing the event that it's not going to make you consider any new ideas, that's how they got the numbers they got
i think the republicanism is fake. i don't think the people who showed up have strong feelings about monarchy. they have strong feelings about trump being an intruder.
So yes, on one hand that article is absurd but it also reflects a serious concern, the fact Iran - in spite of vicious sanctions on it - has a functioning agricultural sector that's efficient enough to export in large volume to its neighbours. The US wants to end that capability.
From the perspective of the US, states that oppose US hegemony and strive for self-sufficiency must be destroyed and de-developed in whatever way possible. It is that simple.
@rhetoricAcrobat Having played the game quite a few times I'm not even confident what the pronunciation is, in part because I don't think any possible pronunciation sounds good
the very limited and achievable goal marx sets for us is bringing the social division of labor under the conscious control of the working masses through organization which initially means state power
are we dominated? sure, why not, but like this way of posing the question sends us in the direction of ideal theory, the utopian pursuit of imagining a society totally free of domination, where maybe schools and doctors and parents don't exist either, or we're all born 18 yrs old