I mean, if a post says that the US has higher rates of starvation than socialist countries, someone jokingly references the “communism is when no food trope,” then you respond by suggesting there may be some truth to that, I don’t think it’s an “argument” to point out that socialist countries did achieve food security better than capitalist countries.

It’s not irrelevant, the idea that “communism is when no food” is wrong because they ended famine in a region where that was common.

It’s the last option they have, and it largely has been working to undermine Israel’s existence. Settlers have been fleeing at enormous rates and now Iran is destroying US and Israeli millitary structures, accelerating that.

After WWII, soviet caloric intake was higher than the U.S.

Nooooo you foiled me! I forgot that resistance to genocide is illegal… 🫠

/s

Do you dispute how these rates were calculated and the sources used for them?

Hummus is quite tasty, I commend it!

Hits incredibly hard. Rest in power.

Kinda. There’s an important difference between revolutionary violence and adventurism. In Palestine, it’s existential and necessary.

What metaphysics does to people.

Sure, my point is that the rise in solar is a good thing and that this is benefiting the Cuban people. Not that it is capable of fixing the problem alone.

A flotilla from the US just arrived recently. Cuba’s electrification and adoption of solar is slowed by the embargo but it’s also something that is happening and is making an impact.

It’s a bit of both. Aid is being blocked, but is also arriving. It’s helping, but the embargo itself is still causing shortages and deaths.

Oh silly me, I forgot /s

Yep, good point. Thankfully solar and other supplies are being given to Cuba in large quantities, but this is a return to special period style intentional misery.

Free Palestine.

Mao was referring to Krushchev, not Stalin. Mao supported Stalin, but opposed Khrushchev’s line that class struggle had ended in the soviet union, when it hadn’t. This led to some of the worst foreign policy by the PRC, such as supporting Pol Pot over Vietnam, and siding with the US over the USSR. Comparatively, the USSR continued to be firmer anti-imperialists. Mao was correct about the snake Khrushchev, and Khrushchev did introduce reform that led to the weakening of socialism, but neither the PRC nor the USSR were imperialist, and the split was a major error.

Do you think that changing the system fundamentally has zero impact on the way people exist and think in said system?

As I explained in this comment, there’s practically no actual evidence supporting the claim that Stalin impregnated a 14 year old. Said claims come from Montefiore, who is in Epstein’s black book:

Yep, just that you have to give them somewhere to go. Planting seeds isn’t enough, water and adequate sunlight need to be available and the soil has to be fertile.