Image: the last sight of many a commie.
Please pronounce his name wrong to make the title pun work better.
Anyway - Javier Milei, a caricature of a libertarian invented deep in the Hexbear Bit Factory, has won the Argentinian general election; and with a 12 point lead over Massa, it wasn't even particularly close. There are several analogies for this situation - Trump beating Hillary, Bolsonaro winning in 2018, or the alternate universe where Le Pen beat Macron. Massa is not a great guy. The last couple years have been difficult for Argentina, facing massive inflation and the same general economic downturns that are happening everywhere.
Milei is an... interesting person. To name just a couple things going on in his deeply bizarre life, he has a very special relationship with his sister, and an even more special relationship with his mastiff, Conan. When Conan died in 2017, he was so utterly distraught that he had him cloned into four new dogs, named Murray, Milton, Robert, and Lucas, for his economist idols. And he uses mediums to speak to his dead dog. This is probably the closest we're ever going to get to having a dog be president of a country.
Milei wants to essentially collapse the economy even harder. Playing off the general public sentiment of "dollar = good, peso = bad", he has vowed to make the national currency of Argentina the US dollar, thus eagerly giving a massive amount of control over the Argentinian economy directly to America. He wants to take a chainsaw to the status quo, cut off trade with communist countries like China, and demolish the Central Bank. Will Argentinian capitalists and the Senate let him do this? Probably not. What happens with their membership in BRICS+? Who knows. Where does Peronism go from here? Who can say.
But he still won, and will now be president. I suppose that every dog has its day.
Friendly reminder: when commenting about a news event, especially something that just happened, please provide a source of some kind. While ideally this would be on nitter or archived, any source is preferable to none at all given.
Sources on the fighting in Palestine against Israel. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:
UNRWA daily-ish reports on Israel's destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.
English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news (and has automated posting when the person running it goes to sleep).
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.
English-language PalestineResist telegram channel.
More telegram channels here for those interested.
Various sources that are covering the Ukraine conflict are also covering the one in Palestine, like Rybar.
The Country of the Week is Argentina! Feel free to chime in with books, essays, longform articles, even stories and anecdotes or rants. More detail here.
Here is the map of the Ukraine conflict, courtesy of Wikipedia.
Links and Stuff
The bulletins site is down.
Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict
Add to the above list if you can.
Resources For Understanding The War
Defense Politics Asia's youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don't want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it's just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists' side.
Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.
Telegram Channels
Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.
Pro-Russian
https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR's former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR's forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster's telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a 'propaganda tax', if you don't believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.
Pro-Ukraine
Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.
Last week's discussion post.
Then they clearly didn't read the article. Why should I argue the content of the article against a stupidpol reactionary who refuses to discuss the actual content they are whinging about? Read the article. It doesn't attack all gay men. It literally opens with an account of a conflict at a Pride March where more radical components of the LGBTQ+ movement were protesting and trying to get cops and corporations kicked out, and the overwhelmingly white cis gay men at the pride protest who jeered and attacked those protesters. How is this not about the LGBTQ+ movement internally? READ. I'M ASKING YOU ALL TO READ.
Because that's what you should have been doing from the first. Not imply that the article is correct because of who wrote it. That sort of essentialism is what 'stupid identity politics' supposedly means, even as you use that term as an insult against other people.
Apparently it's "reactionary" according to mods and I'll get banned if I quote it, so the most I can do is paraphrase. Are you familiar with the subreddit community of stupidpol and their reactionary stances? I'm accusing the person I'm replying to of being one of them. You are trying to twist this into me being reactionary, but in fact I'm the one arguing on behalf of the POC and trans writers of the article who have a leftwing critique of a privileged group. It's PosadistInevitabiltiy and you being Reddit "not all white cis men" pedants.
You're asking for a lot of charity for someone who shows none whatsoever. It's not convincing to claim that there's a class war to be waged against gay men while, at the same time, claiming that intersectionality is important. Are there no black and worker gays to account for?
The person i'm discussing with is editing their comments after the fact to mean completely different things than the originally stated, after I respond. They are lying about their position constantly, and saying they didn't say things they clearly did a couple comments back. This is reddit-tier bad faith behavior. The fact you're mad at me instead of them is very, very stupid. I get if you're coming into this convo late and didn't see that pattern and are just falling for their pedant rhetoric but wake the fuck up
Did you also edit your comments? Because this conversation started when I criticized an argument you made and you called me Reddit for doing so. My second post also talked about another argument you made, but you decided to ignore that as well and talk about someone else's posts.
My edits are only typo corrections or adding a supplementary sentence. They are changing the entire content of the comment, removing what was there and putting in another comment with an entirely different meaning
You're not reading what I'm writing at all, are you?
It's not an issue to edit comments if it's for clarification or typo corrections, or if it's immediately before anyone responds. You leveled the accusation at me that I'm acting the same as them, but I'm not. I'm not arguing in bad faith and changing the content of my comments.
Your entire argument is reddit stupidpol "identity essentialism is bad" so I don't really care. I sidestepped it because it's stupid
You're the most uncharitable person I've met in this website, to be quite honest.
You clearly never met my old sensei z-poster
i think you're misinterpreting that gay people in general were criticized and i don't think thats fair when looking at the post. it was talking about the intersection of whiteness in gay and queer spaces that can, has, and continues to marginalize Black gay and trans people within those spaces.
That is the whole point I wanted to make. An article was removed from view. One interpretation of the article, which justifies its removal, claims that it tarnished an entire group. Another interpretation is that is an uncharitable reading. If one wants to support the latter case, one does not simply stop at stating the interpretation as a fact unto itself. Nor should they argue that the identity of those who wrote the article justifies its perspective in itself. The comprador analogy makes it rather clear. It wouldn't be ok to be racist against, say, brazilians - many of which are compradors - because the racist person is argentinean - which is a country exploited by the sub imperial power of Brazil.