We tried the “trade your skills for something you need”. In every surviving society it eventually lead to the development of a currency (not hard to see why), which requires/leads to regulation, which requires enforcement, aaaand you’re back at a modern society. I’m all for more regulation to reduce economic and social differences in society, but the people that are talking about abolishing governments and currencies need to pick up a history book and follow their ideas to their natural conclusion.

“Controlling speech” is a hallmark of authoritarian governments, be they far-left or far-right, there are plenty of historical examples of both.

And your solution to the problem is literally not vote, which is doing exactly nothing. I have a really hard time seeing how you can expect yourself actively not influencing the system to somehow influence the system.

Your suggestion to fix this failure of a system is literally “do nothing”. Please try to recognise that: You are advocating for fighting the status quo by doing nothing.

It will not work. If you want change you need to take action. Not voting is the exact opposite of attempting to change things. Use the influence you have to push for a change in the right direction.

Congrats on knowing a person that had something positive to say about China, that must make you proud!

It’s just laughable that you’re actually swallowing the Chinese propaganda that they want countries “internal affairs” to be left alone, when everybody can see how they’re treating the south-west pacific. China is a country with major imperialistic intentions, that believes they have the right to shove any smaller country in the region out of their way, and it’s obvious by their actions. Just look at recent events in the Philippine sea once you get out from under your rock.

Saying that Russia, the country that is actively engaged in a war of aggression that has killed hundreds of thousands of people, is “not a threat” is just so dumb it’s not even funny. Also, saying that they “retreated backwards”, when they weren’t even capable of sticking within their own borders is beyond stupid.

Point me to a Democratic NATO country that has expanded its borders by force after ascending to NATO, and I’ll give you permission to pat yourself on the back.

Lol, you’re literally claiming that Russia is too weak and pathetic to not attack someone when it is in their best interest to not attack them, because “big bad west” somehow forced them to attack, against their own wishes. Also, you’re talking about NATO expansion as if it’s something that’s been forced upon other countries, rather than a tough process to get through, that a bunch of countries have worked hard to complete, because they wanted to join. Just look at the recent ascension of Finland and Sweden, and you’ll quickly recognise that the main driver for NATO expansion is Russias neighbours wanting security from Russia. If Russia didn’t want others joining NATO they could just leave people alone.

Not only that, you’re saying “The US has no interest in Ukraine, Russia does…” as if “having interests in Ukraine” justifies invading the country and killing thousands of civilians. I don’t care what interests Russia has in Ukraine, they have no right to invade, because Ukraine is a sovereign country. Western countries don’t need to have interests in Ukraine to have a vested interest in maintaining a rule-based world order, where we can focus on making the world a better place rather than fighting off invading Russians. If Russia is allowed to force their will upon a free country, we are all forced to spend more resources on our militaries, which we would really prefer not to.

Again, this whole “Ukraine is a device to provoke Russia” argument just makes Russia look even more pathetic. They can just stop the invasion and leave if it isn’t in their best interest to fight. That’s literally what we’re asking for: Just stop. We don’t want this war, and the way we’re going to stop it is by helping Ukraine kill Russian soldiers on their soil until Russia gets the picture.

Finally, the thing about democratic governments lying to their citizens doesn’t really carry the weight you think it does, because we have actual free press and free speech, which leads to lying politicians being held accountable. Just take a look at any Western European democracy, and you’ll see a host of politicians that have been outed for all kinds of things, and subsequently been punished either legally (if applicable) or in the polls.

There was no Chinese “crackdown”

Lol. You apparently do live under a rock… Like, have you actually spoken to anyone that was there? I have, and they’ve either experienced more or less severe police brutality and dissappearings, or claim that the Chinese government is full of saints that could never do harm. You know, if you don’t mistreat your population, you won’t have to spend resources on undercover out-of-country police stations, and on sending people to other countries to report on “disloyal citizens”.

That could save you quite some resources in the long run, just a tip.

Lol, you’re literally claiming that Russia is too weak and pathetic to not attack someone when it is in their best interest to not attack them, because “big bad west” somehow forced them to attack, against their own wishes. Also, you’re talking about NATO expansion as if it’s something that’s been forced upon other countries, rather than a tough process to get through, that a bunch of countries have worked hard to complete, because they wanted to join. Just look at the recent ascension of Finland and Sweden, and you’ll quickly recognise that the main driver for NATO expansion is Russias neighbours wanting security from Russia. If Russia didn’t want others joining NATO they could just leave people alone.

Not only that, you’re saying “The US has no interest in Ukraine, Russia does…” as if “having interests in Ukraine” justifies invading the country and killing thousands of civilians. I don’t care what interests Russia has in Ukraine, they have no right to invade, because Ukraine is a sovereign country. Western countries don’t need to have interests in Ukraine to have a vested interest in maintaining a rule-based world order, where we can focus on making the world a better place rather than fighting off invading Russians. If Russia is allowed to force their will upon a free country, we are all forced to spend more resources on our militaries, which we would really prefer not to.

Again, this whole “Ukraine is a device to provoke Russia” argument just makes Russia look even more pathetic. They can just stop the invasion and leave if it isn’t in their best interest to fight. That’s literally what we’re asking for: Just stop. We don’t want this war, and the way we’re going to stop it is by helping Ukraine kill Russian soldiers on their soil until Russia gets the picture.

Finally, the thing about democratic governments lying to their citizens doesn’t really carry the weight you think it does, because we have actual free press and free speech, which leads to lying politicians being held accountable. Just take a look at any Western European democracy, and you’ll see a host of politicians that have been outed for all kinds of things, and subsequently been punished either legally (if applicable) or in the polls.

You keep twisting to talking about NATO, and the EU, when an elected government in Ukraine is choosing to keep fighting. Remember that the majority of western support came after Ukrainians showed in the first weeks/months of the war that they were willing to fight- even without support.

Then you talk of how it is “irrational” for Ukraine to try to defend itself. In what world is it rational for Russia to spend so many lives and so much equipment on a war of choice?

Ukrainians wanted, and want, to live peacefully and in harmony with their neighbours. They never had any intention of hurting Russia. The Russian attack showed the whole world why any country that wants to be left alone needs to arm itself.

Hell, Russia was on its way into the good company of Western Europe, relations had never been better, with more cooperation and international trade than ever, when they decided that they had to attack and subdue Ukraine, because Ukraine was becoming a bit “too good” friends with the west.

You know you have a problem when NATO and the EU can just have a half open door, and countries actively seek to join, while Russia has to cause hundreds of thousands of deaths in order to force others to be “friendly nations” towards them.

If you didn’t notice the crackdowns in Hong Kong a couple years back, and haven’t noticed the stream of political refugees from Hong Kong afterwards, I can’t help you.

China signed an agreement when the UK gave up Hong Kong, and they blatantly broke that agreement. There really aren’t that many complicating factors.

Of course they’re arming Taiwan: Did you see what happened to Hong Kong, after China had signed a deal with Britain to leave them alone? Just like Russia signed up to keep Ukraine safe when they have up their nukes… They’re going out of their way to make it clear that the only authoritarian facist you can trust to hold a deal is the one with a rifle down his throat.

How is Ukraine, a country that has spent 10 years fighting a low-intensity conflict on its own land in the Donbas, without strong military allies, and with an economy and political system that were just barely starting to see some stability, a “security concern” to Russia, a country that has soon thrown half a million men, and equipment worth several times Ukraines GDP at a war they can leave whenever they choose?

Ukraine never attacked anyone. They’re literally fighting for their lives. If Russia would just leave them alone this would be over. They didn’t have the capacity for aggression agains russia, but due to this war of Russias choosing, they’ve been forced to spend enormous amounts on scaling up their military.