Yup. It’s all either the most cliched sinophobic meming you’ve seen, bitching about traffic caused by Xi’s presidential convoy (kinda reasonable I guess because they’re closing off or redirecting something like 17 highways, but it’s just 3 days), or getting performatively offended because the state visit got headline & special pullout coverage in the Chinese & state-linked newspapers (they’re making a minor fuss that a long-planned state visit is overshadowing ex-PM Abdullah Badawi’s sudden passing, but who the fuck cares about the guy who was basically Malaysian Sleepy Joe - a mostly ineffectual centre-right figurehead propped up by and upholding a wider reactionary establishment political apparatus, who is now somehow retrospectively praised by liberals because he’s supposedly an improvement over a more disruptive and proactively-right-wing/authoritarian predecessor; and (ii) the guy died at like 7pm local time; papers have already gone to press, literally just wait one day lah you entitled babies).

Yup, it’s the same tradition/genre of analysis being carried on into the internet era by Natalie “all radical ideologies are rooted in envy” Wynn.

Xi is visiting my country at the moment, and the libs on my country’s subreddit are (predictably) spamming Winnie the Pooh and social credit memes

It’s an old-fashioned British English word that’s originally mostly used in the context of its own elite education system (i.e., Oxbridge), which filtered down to its Commonwealth territories (college/school administrators naturally applying the terminology they used back home to the institutions they establish and run in the colonies). Why you don’t see comments speculating that this ad was made by MI6 agents to propagate Wodehousian Tory ideology among feebleminded Youtube-watching youth, I guess we’ll never know…

jinx does the piltover equivalent of 9/11

whew thanks for the clarification google AI overview

Eh the glasses magically appear onto the man’s face in the first gif.

Even if non-photorealistic effect filters applied onto live action has a lesser tendency of causing an uncanny valley effect compared to making animation photorealistic, what even would be the point of doing so, artistically? Either way, there aren’t any meaningful modifications or iterations upon the input artwork, no interesting or intentional comment on the original work except for the facile and superficial question of “what if someone else (definitely someone else, because I doubt any of these ai enthusiasts train their models solely on their own past works) copied the original but randomly applied techniques and characteristics stereotypically associated with another widely-recognised artstyle”. The overriding point of AI art tools under a capitalist organisation of society is for the bourgeois and petty bourgeois classes to minimise their labour costs, whether it’s the wages they need to pay actual artists currently under their employ or expenses incurred in accessing crystalised artistic labour within IP-protected art.

Even though it’s annoying to see ai startup grifters clumsily vandalising existing popular art to imply that they can “improve upon” or “fix” entartete kunst made by actual working artists, they’re not the most immediate danger. The more insidious and immediate threat of existing AI art tools is probably when they are used to produce peripheral material that people are less likely/able to pay close attention to (e.g., promotional posters, or in-between frames), where corporate IP holders would otherwise have had to pay for additional artists/artist working time to produce.

[This desertion crisis] comes as the U.S. urges Ukraine to draft more troops, and allow for the conscription of those as young as 18.

The US suggests implementation of vigorous structural adjustments programs in Ukraine to unlock yet-untapped youthful innovation and dynamism in the latter’s thriving meat-processing industry.

Off the top of my head: “follow your leader”, “[group/person] gets the wall”, "actually it’s a good thing that your grandma’s [slave plantation/egg farm/toothbrush/pony] got confiscated?

You can maybe also take a visual approach, eg. romanov-wall.jpg, pictures of Lyudmila Pavlichenko/giant spoons/motorised paragliders/[communist “dictator”] with shining laser eyes, the “your grandpa deserved it” video.

Seriously though, dogwhistles shouldn’t be a leftist’s go-to tactic in any remotely serious argument. Shitposting is fun and all, and has a place in conversations among like-minded people, but communist revolution won’t be built using obscure online forum in-jokes. It’s always more important, and productive, in internet debates to focus on clear-headed material analysis and education. There’s a reason why Marx says that Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims, and Sankara says revolutionaries must never stop explaining.

Chinese Harry Du Bois with maxed out Authority confronting Scab Leader

Hmm what I heard was: “你好中国朋友们，这是（?）之家，我叫利，欢迎来和我们一起玩“

“Hello China friends, this is <probably the bear’s name?>'s home, I am called Li(?), you’re welcome to come play with us”

Joint-Dictatorship of the Proletariat Pierrots of Oppressed Nations

Why waste time scrounging up both a sock and a half-brick when a single cast-iron frying pan is already more than adequate for any imaginable problem, plus fairy incursions? Typical PMC wizardry, always trying to overcomplicate magic.

Malala could have had some vaguely “left” sympathies when she was attending that Trot summer camp 2012 as a 16 year old. But I doubt that she has any kind of real socialist convictions left in her as a 27 year old adult, when she’s been safely ensconced within Western elite liberal “progressive” institutions for more than a decade, and is now so financially secure and socially accepted within that crowd that she’s co-producing suffragette Broadway musicals with the Hilldawg herself. https://archive.ph/rURQV

She’s not a comrade or any sort of revolutionary. At most she’s a safe brown “activist” who’s ultimately compatible with Western capitalist hegemony.

She’s just foreshadowing her pick for Secretary of Defence.

I assume OP is referring to Kamala’s maternal grandfather, P.V. Gopalan?

lmao

Nah, it’s funny even if Trump leaked documents for personal profit or due to general incompetence. Maybe funnier, since it’s Uncle Sam tripped up by an individual idiot perfectly embodying the nation’s core capitalist qualities of rapacity and hubris

Also, it doesn’t really matter if Trump didn’t do it for ideological or moral reasons. Nobody in the colonised world cares too much about how imperial hegemony is disrupted, so long as it is.

gross mishandling of classified documents that totally coincidentally coincided with an alarming rate of intelligence assets getting killed

lol owned

That interpretation sounds like a plausible socially progressive reading of the law, given that there’s a proviso to address cases where a person rapes a military spouse “by means of violence, coercion or other means” (it refers such cases to Article 236, which concerns cases of rape by violence or coercion in general). One could argue the addition of this proviso implies that the entire article is intended to be read as a law to protect the welfare of military spouses, addressing different ways a man could take advantage of a lonely military spouse, either by dishonest seduction (dishonest because conviction under the law requires proof of the man knowing that the woman is already married), or by force/abuse of position. The relevant clause of the Chinese criminal law code reads:

第二百五十九条　明知是现役军人的配偶而与之同居或者结婚的，处三年以下有期徒刑或者拘役。 利用职权、从属关系，以胁迫手段奸淫现役军人的妻子的，依照本法第二百三十六条的规定定罪处罚。

Article 259: Anyone who cohabits with or marries a spouse of an active-duty serviceman knowing that the spouse is the spouse of an active-duty serviceman shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years or criminal detention. Anyone who uses his power or subordinate relationship to coerce and rape the wife of an active serviceman shall be convicted and punished in accordance with the provisions of Article 236 of this Law.

Of course, the broad way that the law is phrased reveals big blindspot in the provision, as it kinda fails to consider or address a possibie situation where a military spouse could or would want to exercise agency by actively seeking out affairs while their spouse is deployed.

Edit: Actually, upon reading the criminal law code further I realise that it also contains a general criminalisation of bigamy in Article 258 (anyone “who has a spouse and commits bigamy, or who marries another person knowing that the other person has a spouse” can get up to two years imprisonment). So, I guess in cases where a military spouse actually remarries while the soldier is deployed, that would also open her (or him/them) up to some criminal liability. However, if she’s “merely” having an affair, or cohabiting, she’s technically not liable for any crime. Which means, on a structural level, the law is a little more lenient on the military spouse as compared to the jody. This further supports the argument that it’s more accurate to read Article 259, which addresses only the person seeking to marry or cohabit with the military spouse, as theoretically aimed at protecting military spouses from being taken advantage of while their husbands are deployed instead of it being a law meant to punish military spouse infidelity, since it distinctly doesn’t seek to punish the cheating military spouse like Article 258 does for general bigamy. If Article 259 was intended to punish all military spouse infidelity, it logically would need to treat both the military spouse and the person they cheated similarly.