https://twitter.com/War_Takes/status/1546579298508750852?cxt=HHwWiICyibHrxvYqAAAA
The Rhodesia episode itself was good, but then I went through his tweets. of course he omits the NATO proxy war when discussing ukraine (framing it purely as a russian invasion that happened for no reason) in addition he had this lovely drivel where he responded to Luna Oi, saying she's "Denying the agency" of people in countries like Vietnam (her home) for noticing how often the US backs color revolutions. He's also quote tweeting himself while claiming "tankies" called him a "cuck" and presenting no evidence anyone said any of those things.
After this guy, and AdamSomething, I'm waiting for them to bring Vaush on and start complaining about "tankies" every episode. I'm starting to think the entire "Nate Bethea" produced podcast circuit: WTYP, Trash Future, Lions Led By Donkeys, 10K Losses, etc. is just social imperialist drivel. Nate Bethea and Joe Kasabian are both vets of the US invasion of Afghanistan (not conscripts, but actual fucking volunteers who fell for imperialist propaganda and now feel or pretend to feel some guilt about it) , and wouldn't you know it, every podcast Nate Bethea produces tows a tepid "both sides are always equally bad" line with regards to US imperialism. Joe Kasabian in particularly loves to play up Soviet atrocities with western sources like Montefiore and Snyder. Weird. Getting very disappointed in this shit. Chapo-adjacent pods, for all their faults, aren't nearly this bad when it comes to US imperialism.
Getting real tired of this line I see increasingly in media: Pointing out US hegemonic involvement is "denial of the people's agency". If you point out the US's specific involvement in this or that coup, this or that color revolution, this or that forced loan, this or that diplomatic pressure, no matter how specific you get, or how well-documented your sources, you get accused by liberals of "believing everything ever is the USA's fault." They apply a false broadness of scope to the specific historical point to discredit it.
He's doing the classic Twitter thing of making up a guy and getting mad at them, but he's insisting that the guy he made up is representative of all "tankies".
"Tankies" almost always have the most nuanced and informed takes about protests and uprisings outside the imperial core, meanwhile idealist leftists like to imagine that every single demonstration by a large group of people is proletarian in character and fueled by nothing but legitimate grievances against the obviously bad leadership and happened completely in a vacuum unaffected by events elsewhere.
deleted by creator
:us-foreign-policy:
Even then they give more agency to random foreign reactionary movements more than revolutionary socialist ones. They’ll say that communists are all conniving but when it comes to Hong Kongers waving the British flag, it’s very organic and has nothing to do with the CIA (even though the west has written about HK being a hotspot for spies)
It literally doesn't matter, too. Anyone waving a British flag is obviously the wrong side to be taking.
deleted by creator
That one in particular is a Churchill quote of you see it in the wild.
Love to get called a tankie for doing class analysis of Hong Kong protesters and realizing they suck
:very-smart: "Seems like the people waving British colonial flags and ranting about how 'mainlanders' are subhuman might be racist assholes."
:wojak-nooo: "TANKIE REDFASH 1984 STALINIST PUPPET!"
deleted by creator