Class struggle in all its forms.

  • 11 Posts
Joined 2Y ago
Cake day: Apr 12, 2021


Why should China be incapable of reaching anything more than one quarter the per capita GDP, with therefore roughly one quarter the living standards, of the U.S.? Is it some xenophobic illusion that the average Chinese person is only one quarter as smart, or only works one quarter as hard, or cannot work out a way to achieve more than a quarter of the living standard of an average American? Or to put it the other way round, that the average American works more than four times as hard, or is four time as smart, or can work out a way to remain living more than four times as well as the average Chinese person?

Well you see actually China uses rote memorization unlike us in the West where creativity™️ and free thinking™️ is taught in schools.

Silly Marxist, that’s why they can’t be richer than us.

I was investigating some current NGOs and other groups in my country and somehow it lead me to this site and org called the Global Peace Foundation.

The website definitely looks like a 3 letter agency, and what I found funny was that in the board of directors one of the ex-Presidents of Guatemala was there.

I really have 0 tolerance for these people because they really are unashamedly chauvinistic in the most idealistic way possible.

I’ll support my homophobic country everyday rather than any liberal utopian reincarnation these people concoct in their heads because the fact of the matter is that the people here are overwhelmingly queerphobic.

That is the reality.

I’ll support China’s BRI building a highspeed rail line right through my gasp homophobic hometown.

What a naive, ahistorical and disgustingly parochial view of international relations, politics and society.

Taliban deploys heavy reinforcements to Iran border

Videos circulating social media on 31 May show Taliban forces heavily reinforcing the Afghan border with Iran on 31 May, after significant escalation regarding a water dispute between the two countries, which resulted in heavy border clashes between the two sides over the weekend.

The outbreak of fighting came a week after Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi warned the Taliban to respect Iran’s rights to water from the Helmand River shared between the two countries, under the 1973 Afghan-Iranian Helmand River Treaty. Iran has long accused Afghanistan of restricting the flow of its water to Iran and causing droughts or dry spells.

Despite videos showing reinforcements on the border, Iranian media reports suggested that some “elements are trying to provoke the parties involved with rumors and fake news.”

I really wish yankees would stop interfering with SEA affairs like history hasn’t shown that they’d rather kill of us than give an inch to treating us like humans with dignity and self-determination.

Also of course another Malaysian Chinese guy that blew up in anglosphere internet (Nigel Ng) has to lean onto anti-Chinese sentiment (social credit, cancelled, Taiwan province etc) meme to woo over Western simpletons.

I read a comment months ago about how “overseas Chinese” are meticulously planning for the downfall of socialist China and you know what this only gives credence to that.

Obviously I don’t believe that wholeheartedly but ffs these people make it too easy to think that way.

I mean comedians are petty bourgeois anyways so what am I really expecting.

I hate medical insurance companies and the MIC (medical industrial complex) consisting of all the shitty Western pharmaceutical companies (GSK, Roche, J&J, Bayer, etc).

Fuck you all.

I wonder how many have died because of their “intellectual property” and “risk-taking”.

Edit: used wrong word, pharmacology instead of pharmaceutical. Annoyed me too much so had to change it.

I was reading Coloniality of Power, Eurocentrism and Latin America by Anibal Quijano and it makes me sad that such a sophisticated retelling of race is basically non-existent here in (maritime) Southeast Asia.

It is often actually ignored in favour of a sort of vulgar developmentalism. Racism in it’s colonial and “post”-colonial forms are never fully interrogated and historicised, and in fact is often reproduced by the supposedly indigenous governments here.

A reason for this was the defeat (or failure, depends on how you see it) of left-wing movements in the region, by comprador reactionary forces and their Western masters.

In a way my comment history is a testament to that alienation and nihilism.

I didn’t even realise this was the name of what I have been practicing in general for a couple of years now - with some degree of success. That’s good to know.

Funnily enough I also experience something similar with temperature. When it’s hot and I sweat, hell, even when it’s cold and I sweat, it triggers a full body sensation because of my skin condition.

It’s unpleasant to say the least.

I’ve been slowly forcing myself into the heat and learning to tolerate it all.

At least now I can tolerate being outside for more than 10 minutes at a time, which is a success I guess.

Currently feeling the freedom of a 10% rent increase by a poc landlord because of “inflation, interest rates and rental demand”; how progressive.

That top panel is a barely disguised white supremacist, manifest destiny caricature.

In this case, literally both sides are wrong.

Definitely. However I do think there is hope to be seen by the fact that the process of de-dollarisation now is irreversible, with the Global North’s inability to stop it from happening, shown by the results of NATO’s aggression in Ukraine.

Even the bourgeoisie here knows where the wind blows.

Seeing de-dollarization irl is pretty cool
Over the past few years, honestly more than that, maybe even a decade or so now, there’s been more and more forms of e-payments over here that are independent from Global North systems. The government has been pushing for digitalisation of payments, as part of the wider ASEAN push for more localized and independent systems. Now you see stores and stalls accepting a lot of payment systems, such as Chinese ones like WeChat and Alipay, but also local ones such as TouchnGo and MaybankQRpay. You can actually see more than 10+ logos on each cashier stall, accepting a wide range of payment mediums. Of course Global North ones like Visa and Mastercard are still accepted. Just “recently” Singapore and Malaysia signed a deal to further integrate each other’s local QR payment systems. I think the deal with Thailand is ongoing with the [wider ASEAN agreement]( on E-commerce. De-linking from the Global North is increasingly important as they retreat from their neocolonial “free markets” to open domination and sanctions of “rowdy” and “authoritarian” Global South countries. South-south co-operation is always a good thing.

I can explain this actually.

Deng did take inspiration and learn from the so-called Asian tigers.

But these economies, especially Singapore, are very different to China.

Superficially it may seem similar, especially in SEZs and Hong Kong, whereby both Singapore and the SEZs/Hong Kong exhibit characteristics of a free market, low taxes and basically higher exploitation of labour.

Singapore started as a trade colony and success came from trade. It was never really truly was a productive economy, although currently does invest and is part of the global value chain for electronics. However, financial services was and continue to dominate it’s economy.

SOEs are also prevalent in Singapore, which the World Bank always tries downplaying, but unlike China, Singapore’s population has been effectively urban from the start.

The great thing about China’s economy is the collectivised rural sector, throughout it’s existence and even after reform and opening up, played a critical role in absorbing internal and external shocks to the economy. This allowed for consistent double digit growth and allowed them to continue to let their economy grow even when external factors where unfavourable (ie. Asian Financial Crisis of 1997-98, Atlantic Financial Crisis of 2008). Not to mention that although SOEs in China took a backseat during the 2000s, the “commanding heights” of the economy, and critical infrastructures continues to be publicly owned.

Singapore’s success came from literally being a Tax Haven for all international companies to dodge taxes in SEA economies. It’s economy is fully integrated into the world economy, which also explains its very Western-friendly foreign policy (relative to rest of ASEAN except Phillipines).

So a country with 1.4billion people really can’t emulate the economy of an island state literally 0.0001x its population.

Is watching the series worth it? A lot of people here have been talking about it.

And by worth it I mean was it atleast entertaining or had something interesting to say?

The last thing I want is to watch something painstakingly Euro-Amerikan that didn’t even happen anywhere close to them.

I do wonder how the few people who are critical of China but concede that China has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty thinks they managed to do it.

Do they just think China through their own authoritarianismTM just outlawed poverty?

Or do they actually recognise the massive undertaking of mobilizing and organizing millions of people into the countryside to directly tackle the problems of those most affected?

Western MSM pushing the whole BRI is failing narrative really is major cope.

Is this grifter still popular in Amerikan circles?

I would say he should touch grass but it might be better for everyone here that he doesn’t go outside.

This just made me check if the Malaysian one, Bernama and RTM is labelled and nope it isn’t.

I guess it only applies to current Western geopolitical enemies and in typical liberal “both sides” fashion they label some Amerikan ones as well to seem fair.

I think directly calling it the colonizer mentality is more effective.

I always had apprehensions regarding the use of the word tribalism and these articles voiced those concerns really well.

I have been playing a lot of geoguessr lately and US towns and cities really stand out like a sore thumb. I thought I knew car centric cities but the way Amerikan cities look, with low density residential spaces and wide roads coupled with relatively flat land makes every city feel very barren with concrete.

Too many times I expected the area to be peri-urban but it is actually close to the centre of a city.

I wouldn’t say so. Colonisation has a deep and lasting impact on our cultures of course, but to say that none of the precolonial customs were maintained is a bit of a stretch.

It is more accurate to describe Nusantara, or the Malay archipelago, to that of South Asia. Native languages are still spoken. Cultural traditions have largely been maintained. Although, there is now a confluence of Westernised middle classes, reactionary traditionalists and chauvinists, isolated indigenous groups, and accompanying capitalist classes and imperialism attacking collectivist values and structures in our societies.

Just to raise a few points about it, for religion, christianity missionaries did penetrate the southeast Asian archipelago, with the most obvious example being the Phillipines, having a christian majority, but in the case of Malaysia and Indonesia, it had a very limited impact on indigenous religions, most importantly being Islam, Hinduism, and local traditional faiths, however christianity gains prominence the more eastwards you go.

Western Papua and Sarawak (East Malaysia) has christian majorities for example.

Language is another contentious issue, with both left-wing and right-wingers in Malaysia for example, supporting the use of Bahasa Melayu (Malay) as the main language of the government prior to independence. Again this has some exceptions, with for example Sarawak, maintaining English as the de facto language of (state) government even though Malay is the national language.

Indonesia has only bahasa Indonesia as their national language, but other indigenous languages are recognized in the regional level. I can’t say for sure about the specificities of Indonesia’s national language policy, but from what I know, “colonial” languages like Portuguese, English and Dutch have a negligible amount of speakers or relevance there.

A bit of a long response, but I wanted to justify my choice of words with proper care.

What I mean by “conventional meanings” is which ethnic groups in southeast asia are typically considered as indigenous in popular discourse.

For example, Arab peranakans, people who had Arab descendants, are often considered indigenous, while Chinese peranakans are not. Indian peranakans also suffer the same predicament, with some considered indigenous while others are not.

So in my original comment, if we consider chinese Indonesians as indigenous, that would amount to literally 99% of the population, if not just 100% of the population, except for a small segment of eurasians.

Indigenous thus is not about if you were born there, about how long you’ve been there, about the religions you follow or the languages you use but it’s about all of those things all at once, dependent on the sociohistorical conditions of that time.

This was (is) often to the detriment of chinese groups in the region in the 20th and 21st centuries, regardless if they were “totok” (first or second generation immigrants) or peranakan or “straits-born”.

This is further complicated by the political-economy of colonial southeast Asia.

The key point is that there have been “foreign” migration into the Malay archipelago long before European arrivals in the 15th century. Prior to “proper” colonisation in the 16th century.

They were fully incorporated within the respective feudal kingdoms (and mode of production) and some have had mixed blood, and some also completely assimilated to local cultures and customs.

These mixed race individuals formed part (and came from) the mercantalist, trading class that morphed into the “middlemen” class, alongside other mixed race groups (eurasians) as well as other “foreign” ethnic groups during colonisation. They occupied the middle and lower-upper sectors of the racial economic hierarchy in colonial society.

These became the capitalists of post-independence southeast Asia (alongside a fledgling indigenous capitalist class).

Certainly, indigenous southeast Asian peasants were dispossessed of land during colonisation, but they were dispossessed by their own native brethren and europeans through feudal and colonial institutions, not by the vast majority of newly arrived Asian immigrants, which were sometimes either similarly or seperately exploited by european colonizers through indentured and wage labour.

History itself shows this through the proletarian pendatangs and asings (foreigners or aliens) support of the national liberation and decolonization movements in the region.

So, it is unlike the indigenous in the Americas and other settler-colonial nation-states, where a (relatively) clear delineation can be made between settlers and indigenous peoples, through the settler’s expropriation of indigenous land and accompanying genocide. In these societies, indigenous people are defined by their oppression by the settler economy, regardless of cultural assimilation, blood mixture, class or being “non-white”, because that came after the arrival of the settler economy. (If I understand it correctly.)

So I watched this DW documentary on Nusantara, and what I found odd was their statistic that 20% of Indonesia’s population are indigenous at 5:50.

In actuality, close to 98% of Indonesia’s population is indigenous if we take conventional meanings of the term.

Don’t get me wrong, indigenous and similar terms, like bumiputera and pribumi have very loaded meanings in maritime Southeast Asia. There are ethnocentric and inclusive interpretations of these terms.

However, the statistic seems just so random. I don’t know of any ethnic classification that consists of 20% of the Indonesian population.

Is this just some settler-colonial insecurities being projected onto a global south country?

Again this applies to a lot of global south countries, including southeast asia. When he mentions the race to the bottom, this is seen through the overemphasis on foreign direct investment (FDI) taking place in ASEAN countries. We see leaders in the region bend over backwards for Western entrepreneurs and capitalists, giving them overly favourable conditions so they can exploit our labour, our land, and our environment.

That’s the infamous 1997-98 Asian financial crisis. Neoliberalism does it’s wonders aye?

I blocked shit reactionary says a few weeks back and I have to say my scrolling experience in this site has just been much more chill as a result.

I find it so ironic that Europe really sold any independence it had to be Amerika’s lapdog.

Even capitalist countries in the global south, like India or Indonesia, has seen high average GDP growth over the past few decades, and will continue see higher than Western average growth the next coming few years.

They can’t even adequately benefit and manage the mode of the production (and associated colonial profits) that was first developed on their own soil.

Was reading this transcript of an interview of John Bellamy Foster on Ecological Civilization and I found this quote particularly funny:

Thank you, Professor Foster, for your wonderful speech, which brought us the vivid progress of Marxist thought with Western academic characteristics.

I understand in this context it is a compliment but calling someone a Marxist with Western academic characteristics conjures up a very different person in my head.

Just because you read a few Western news articles does not make you an expert in a country of 32 million people. Global South Marxism is an evolving science, it is there if you actually seek for it.

I wrote this mainly for my own personal reference, so I don’t expect much engagement and just posted it here for those few number of people who care enough to read it.

I also barely scratched the surface. There is much to be said about AI and Mahathir, and Malaysian politics generally, but for precision I didn’t mention it. And of course I don’t blame foreigners for not knowing Malaysian history. In the grand scheme of things, it is less historically significant than for example British, Indian or Chinese history.

Indeed, even when neglected countries occasionally gets mentioned in Western or Alternative media, how much thought and consideration is given to those living their lives in those countries? What do the local revolutionaries and Marxists have to say about their own country, especially in countries with seemingly non-visible communist movements? This of course applies to numerous of countries across the global south and I think it really applies here.

No investigation, no right to speak.

The class struggle in Malaysia continues by the marhaen on the ground, even with chauvinistic side-lining by Eurocentric commentators.

On Malaysia’s recent elections and Eurocentric Western commentaries. (super long post)
Skip to conclusion and discussion for TLDR. Firstly, I want to discuss an article on the “Journal of Democracy”, the NED’s “academic” propaganda outlet. The China one is [not surprising whatsoever]( And the [Malaysian one](… exhibit the same eurocentric rhetoric, although is less obvious at first. The article recognises Anwar Ibrahim’s (AI) shapeshifting politics depending on the climate, literally the most politician ever to politicking. The article mentions that corruption has been a problem for Malaysian democracy since the beginning. That is true. It is a DOTB after all. Typical politicians and western commentators only say that the ruling party has corruption, but corruption and nepotism infects Malaysian society in all of its popular bourgeois parties and beyond parliamentary politics and the state. **On Mahathir and his “anti-imperialism”** Western media always depicts Mahathir as more anti-West than he actually is. It was during his rule that a large scale privatisation programme took place. You can’t even blame Western neocolonial institutions because Malaysia was lucky than most countries and had no sovereign debt. [He literally oversaw an economy that was 50% run by the state to one that is <10%]( The only reason the resulting financial crash in 1997-8 didn’t destroy us was due to both Chinese and Japanese cooperation with ASEAN. Mahathir literally asked Reagan for and subsequently allowed Amerikan troops into our land in the 80s. The high GDP growth in the late 80s to mid 90s was due to the very profitable state-run oil sector, and a lot of FDI that funded all these privatisation programmes. Privatisation and economic growth continues to be a myth perpetuated by the ruling parties during that time. Post-crash, even the economic growth had decreased compared to pre-crash. Not to mention it enabled the shift of the Malaysian economy to “importing” (to use their terms) of foreign labour to pay them subsistence wages for plantation work. Our real wages may have increased but it ignores at how much of that is subsidized by “importing” labour from poorer countries, considering that 10% of the Malaysian population in 2020 are immigrants. Another example would be the privatisation of our power grid through TPPs, in which specific capitalists and their cronies benefit from favourable government lending contracts. This economic liberalisation also lead to chronic food insecurity and a destruction of our rainforests for cash crop plantations. After the 1997-8 crash, the government relaxed their privatisation policy. This is because lots of privatised industries failed, and not only that, but they stopped mentioning privatisation by their 11th five year plan (yes we have 5 year plans that are also produced in English!) due to the failures. This neoliberal policy, however, was continued and maintained by his successors. The 97-98 crash prompted Mahathir to kick out AI, justifying it by saying AI was an IMF stooge. Mahathir exploited the anti-imperialist tendencies found in a postcolonial population. We are not the west, we still remember, either through popular discourse or even through current material conditions, the role of imperialism and colonialism in our country and global history more generally. It is a matter in which this sentiment is channelled towards. As I demonstrated before, this depiction that Mahathir was a principled anti-imperialist in any regard falls apart with any close inspection. Akshually, Mahathir and BN/UMNO generally was doing a based anti-imperialism because they didn’t fully subscribe to Westernisation and follow what Westerners expected. Wow! The… _Oxford graduate_ really told the colonizers off! **On “Anti-imperialist” westerners** AI will not impose [Reaganite neoliberal measures]( ) because that already happened. AI can’t discontinue every single [chinese-linked project]( because he doesn’t have the power to do so. The prominence of [bourgeois Malay-muslim money that went into all these projects]( further secures the development of these projects. Most of the “development” (including some of the BRI projects) as well, are high-rises like the country hasn’t already seen 10 million condominiums for the T20 (top 20%, see previous link). A lot of them are for the inflated and speculative property market in Malaysia. It was for political convenience that these programs were determined to be part of BRI, NOT something China itself proposed. Not to mention the [flagship ECRL project was continued]( If you actually followed Malaysian politics, read the coalition manifestoes, it would have been obvious that none of the parties had any form of bare privatisation policy in mind. All of them are an eclectic mix of social democratic policies. Of course, manifestos are not representative of what the coalition will actually do - a limitation of bourgeois democracy, I might add - but it is still useful to see what the parties think is valued to Malaysian voters. Furthermore, the New Atlas uses statements from AI as fact. Of course the dude in front of anglos would be a neoconservative war hawk. I can easily find quotes of him being a centrist liberal in local media. Like [here](, and [here]( (from the Turkish Anadolu Agency), and [here]( > The new government’s foreign policy will be largely shaped by Anwar himself. Since Malaysia’s foreign policy is highly consistent and institutionalised, his approach to foreign affairs will be like that of his predecessors but with his characteristic energy and self-confidence. …and [here]( > “(Of course) he (Anwar) will expand the process of diversifying our economic dependence and trade relations with other major economic players in Asean, India and the US.” […] > “China is an important neighbour. Of course it’s a priority to enhance bilateral, trade, investment and cultural relations with China,” said Anwar. “I would not just leave (ties with China) as it is. (They) need to be enhanced.” Even in the clip of the IRI the New Atlas referred to, they mentioned how other US agencies (USAID) said that the current Malaysian governments were friendly to the US, and they didn’t want to jeopardise the relationship. Great choice we have here in a bourgeois democracy, Western-friendly reactionary right or Western-friendly reactionary right enabler. Like Malaysia’s 2021 GDP PPP per capita (29000) is closer to states like Russia and Turkey (33000, 31000) than even her immediate neighbours (Indonesia, 13000, and Phillipines, 9000). GDP isn’t everything, but you need to understand, the Malaysian ruling class has matured and isn’t composed of weak neocolonial compradors (mostly). We don’t even have a prominent communist or socialist opposition in the government like in Turkiye or Russia. It is simply ridiculous to support the bourgeois Malaysian government. As for the bersih movement, that is much more complicated. Again, like other protests, it came from a genuine result of the bourgeois dictatorship. The nature of protests I think are much more organic than it is made out to be. Somehow when the *rakyat* face succeeding economic downturns, marketisation of welfare, racialized and spatialized gap between rich and poor, rising living costs, and corruption and rentierism, the assessment is: akshually this is all concocted by the West and we should support a bourgeois government because they are marginally not as anti-Chinese geopolitically (even that is subjected towards the government’s own need to villify and scapegoat the chinese minority and I remain unconvinced that Najib was anymore pro-Chinese and anti-West than his predecessors). The protests was done through a so-called united front, including Marxist and socialist, as well as petty bourgeois-liberal and social democratic elements. So the claim that the Marxists involved in organising, who had faced police harassment, threats of death penalty, and arbitrary detention throughout their entire lives, are actually “Western agents” is not only tone-deaf about the Malaysian political reality, but screams Western chauvinism. In Malaysian politics, foreign funding is a constant political trope levelled against the opposition. It’s nothing new. Not saying its wrong but acting like Malaysians don’t care is simply wrong. There were already concerns [raised about NED funding of AI]( by Malaysians prior to the western “anti-imperialist” saviours! Right-wingers in this country especially love talking about foreign intervention (unless it’s disguised under US-allied Saudi Wahhabist flavour). The government had always accused anyone critical of them for destabilization and other red scare propaganda to scare the people into submission. But the government are the good guys! The protests are bad because some people and organisations that participated in the protest took some NED money! Ignore that the major orgs have stopped taking NED money after IRI-NED connections were discovered. Regardless, the Marxist orgs involved of course had no NED funding. Imagine if this was Amerikan politics, and someone insisted that you vote for the Libertarian party because they are isolationist (ie. they have a “good” foreign policy), not recognising this is part of the election cycle of Western bourgeois dictatorships. Dissent is allowed, and isolationist tendencies are just a reactionary response to labour aristocrats receiving less of the imperial profits. In the talk of Malaysian elections, ignoring the alternative coalition, headed by a radicalised and chauvinistic PAS is a grave error. It simply is dangerous for the party who wants to introduce Sharia to all people in the country to be in charge. Not only is that unwanted by the ethnic minorities and the bumiputera of East Malaysia, it is this right-wing political Islam that may actually pivot Malaysian foreign policy more to the West. They act like typical religious chauvinistic political movements. They perpetuate red scare propaganda and ostracize Jews and the Chinese. It is a no-brainer that in the long term their interests lie more with the West, considering recently in their party propaganda they claim that [Communist colonialism was worse than the Western colonialism]( I probably don’t need to explain why that is wrong and dangerous now do I? And all these westerners have the gall to say that Malaysians are propagandized! Yes they are! But they are propagandized by the denial of the explicitly left-wing and communist movements that gave our independence! They are propagandized about neoliberal capitalism and democracy! They are misled by those who resort to ethnic chauvinism for their support! What Malaysians want is continual equitable prosperity and modernisation. Stability and peace is highly valued. This weird fear mongering that AI will want war with China, when it runs counter to the aims of the Malaysian ruling class and the *rakyat*, is ridiculous. China has been Malaysia’s largest trading partner, and Malaysia has been China’s largest ASEAN partner, for a decade plus. Although we form part of the FPDA, and host an Australian military base (which also counter the assertions that previous Malaysian governments were anti-western in the first place), these bilateral arrangements are well, bilateral, and a more comprehensive military partnership is domestically unpopular. It is only the Global North that has a fully developed Military Industrial Complex. Malaysian opinion polls show that they have a positive opinion of China and US for years now as well. Although I wish Malaysians would hate the US more, these polls show how non-alignment, not playing into Amerikan geopolitical games, is popular. So when they talk about Malaysia - clueless of its history and culture, doesn’t attempt to understand the complexity of a postcolonial semi-peripheral state - is it not just eurocentrism? What’s with this fear-mongering about AI’s ascension like you have an attention span of a liberal (one election season)? **Conclusion and discussion** The culmination of events that led to AI's prime ministership was a result of decades long bourgeois rule. It was inevitable. Communalist/racialist politics perpetuated by the British and ruling classes after independence is inherently unsustainable and destructive for society. To simply attribute it to US influence is simplistic and signifies a lack of knowledge and understanding of southeast asian and Malaysian politics, and reeks of eurocentrism in which the only thing they seem to know about the country is that the flag looks similar to the Amerikan flag. Malaysian, and in general SEA politics, is a result of numerous upon numerous contradictions of colonialism and capitalism. This is reflected through our politics. Please do not import your understandings of geopolitics, colonialism and capitalism from the Americas and Europe. Like it’s amazing that a [Trotskyist website]( was more accurate, which is a low-bar considering their most profound analysis is “Malaysians should rise up against their bourgeoisie”! Malaysia normalised relations with communist countries after the cold war, and is part of the NAM and ASEAN, which may have had anti-communist roots, but by the late 1990s had changed with the ascension of Laos and Viet Nam. Malaysian foreign policy has been largely consistent since then, and will continue to maintain certain “non-negotiables” such as Palestinian support and a safe distance between any great power (neutrality). Euro-Amerikan news media likes to picture foreign politics as solely about them and their anxieties. It must always be about China-US relations. It must always be about them because people in the global south don’t make history, only northerners do!

Really hate how my government and local media is harping about muh debt to GDP ratio and justifying the most uninspiring liberal think tank market policies known to man.

This is what happens when you outsource tertiary education to Western universities.

No wonder we do so well in those “Economic Freedom” indices. Yes keep attracting FDI, that will surely develop our country…maybe in numbers.

A short history lesson:

During the supposed “Labour” leadership of the UK in 1947, they enacted further anti-union laws that effectively destroyed all of the major trade unions - all affiliated with left-wing and communist independence parties - in Malaya. And when the federation of Malaysia was formed in 1948, the UK arrested thousands of communists and labour union leaders through a declaration of a State of Emergency. Concurrently in 1948, in the coloniser’s turf, the NHS was established.

To this day, unions are completely irrelevant in Malaysian politics. We had no general strike since the hartal in 1947 against the aforementioned British laws. A large aspect of the multi-racial and multi-religious, secular labour and liberation movement defanged and subdued.

This gave way to the rise of political Islam that rejected syncretic and sufi principles that were part of our interpretation of Islam (and how it related to our culture).

Of course this isn’t just putting blame on the colonisers. I have to also blame the bourgeois compradors that was tasked to maintain the coloniser’s superstructure and mostly fulfilled that role.

It’s also important to note that a good chunk of the Malayan liberation movements supported reunification of (the area that consists of modern-day) Malaysia, Brunei, Singapore and Indonesia into a single state. This is something that is maybe reserved to history (at least currently) but I personally say is a strong prequisite for a socialist future for Nusantara. However, that is very obviously not wanted by the West - even a capitalist one would counter their aims back then and even now.

If you force decoupling from China, you will instead find yourself decoupled
Although the entire article has full of bangers, the quote below is my favourite. > The program of the "rules based order" is more maximalist than the Cold War. Anglosphere policy elites occupy a narrative-based reality. Their narrative of the necessity of liberal democracy and neoliberal capitalism for all places and all times must be maintained whatever the facts. They are the heroes of an eschatological conflict between light and darkness, good and evil, democracy and totalitarianism. Compromise with their satanized adversary is appeasement and coexistence is a dirty word. The West is the last bastion of ideology, the crusader of a deformed, late liberalism with the right to fashion every society on earth in its own image. The rest of us must either be re-made according to the latest iteration of "values," however inimical or repulsive to tradition, culture and faith, or be marked for expulsion. There is nothing in between. > Good luck forcing this infantile logic on the foreign policies of the most culturally and politically diverse region in the world, with a shared identity constituted by two thousand years of cultural cross-pollination across the trade routes of the Old World. Southeast Asia is constituted by its very in-betweenness with respect to the civilizational poles of Islamic, Indic and Sinic worlds. Today it is what makes ASEAN central to the multilateral architecture of East Asia, the crossroads of an "Asian Century" made possible by the rise of China.

To elaborate on the other comment, this quote might be useful:

This is why ASEAN should steer clear of either bandwagoning (i.e., openly and exclusively aligning with a stronger power) or hedging its bets (i.e., playing both sides) via the IPEF – which could well be inimical to the pre-existing RCEP and other areas of strategic cooperation and make joint-development (JD) in the SCS even more difficult to achieve.

Joint development of course, being one of the only well-thought out plans that can actually resolve the SCS dispute. (Which is why the West hates it so much.)

The Western Pacific region or rather the southwestern Pacific is different from the rest of the wider region – with its own perspectives and concerns and vision. Geo-economic linkages and supply-chains don’t necessarily extend to geopolitical/geo-security alliances, at least for ASEAN as a whole. And even (regular and customary) joint-military exercises don’t necessarily translate into concrete military commitments in the form of a Nato-like alliance.


Which is also why I very much cringe at overly online liberals when they picture ASEAN as nothing but just either a US or China pawn (showcased through their lavishly sadistic WW3 maps), like we can’t assert our own independent politics.

I hope the ping works? Here’s the “essay” you asked about all those months ago lol.

So the US indeed justified it’s use of chemical defoliants in Viet Nam by it’s use by the British in Malaya.

This was prompted by a comment I made before.

I actually finally had time to watch the lecture I linked in the comment and they showcased a quote from a memo made by the Secretary of State to Kennedy.

I was able to eventually find it here.

The use of defoliant does not violate any rule of international law concerning the conduct of chemical warfare and is an accepted tactic of war. Precedent has been been established by the British during the emergency in Malaya in their use of helicopters for destroying cops by chemical spraying.

I hate anglos so much.

I went on a spiral by reading a report from a free market think tank and then came across some self described “centrist liberal” news site, with their token non-white authors of course.

And they are all so bad. Like not only through their misuse of statistics, but in general, I can’t help but after reading it their very Western, and White, worldview that plagues everything they write.

Not to mention their protestations of “trans ideology”.

The rest are just some funny quotes I like to share with you all.

It’s time for us all to recognise that China is hostile to the West, and bent on world domination by any means. We need to bite the bullet and be prepared to pay extra for products not made in China.

After reading that, I genuinely burst out into tears. I was expecting something more sadistic, ie. justifying war, but instead it’s the painfully liberal “lets not buy any made in China products”, that broke me.

You make an excellent point, imo. The fear I have for the West is not China, but the so-called progressive movement. It has become detached from reality and, among other things, seeks to silence (aka cancel) its critics and redefine language to suit its own ends. It is attempting to dismantle the freedom of speech you identify as so important. So far, the progressives seem to be winning. Western society so lacks core values it seems incapable, even unwilling, to effectively oppose the progressive nonsense. China’s greatest threat is its own totalitarian ideology, not the West. The West’s greatest threat is its homegrown progressive ideology. I don’t know how we stop the internal rot.

Both taken from the comments of this article, which is funny in on itself.

And of course this amazing quote from this article:

One of the signature aspects of the culture war is the weaponisation of history, particularly by the new, academically-aligned Left. Decolonisation now dominates thinking about university curricula, as well as hiring practice, while museums have embraced its agenda with open arms.

The first sentence already a marvel to read.

Meanwhile, the ongoing return of Benin Bronzes from museums and, most enthusiastically of all, from Cambridge (116 are in the latest planned shipment back to Nigeria) involves an even more naked use of history as a grenade; most reports on the Bronzes’ return don’t even refer to the massacre of the British that preceded the looting, nor the fact that they belonged to slave-traders in the first place.

NOOO not the deaths of colonizers. I’m crying rn.

If you complain about coal power this or that it simply falls on deaf ears because a significant part of the world doesn’t even have stable electricity. Something that affects the day-to-day life of the people. Something that is needed for development.

Electricity outages is felt sometimes in the West, during extraordinary weather events usually, but it is not a constant threat. This is what a lot of westerners struggle to grasp when it comes to environmental issues.

Development unfortunately requires these tough calls, which means succumbing to coal for the short term. Especially in the current political climate. Haphazardly banning certain energy sources, like some environmentalists clamour for, would do the opposite of actually mitigating climate change and would lead to far more harm than good.

Controlled phase outs are needed. China’s plan (NDC) for the past few years (which they reiterated time and time again) was a carbon emissions peak in 2030, and from their current 5 year plan, an espousal for a ‘ecological civilization’, I have high hopes that they’ll achieve their NDC.

But to answer your question: is it fast enough, ie. is their NDC ambitious enough?

According to this site, no it isn’t.

But again, we have to consider, the West still unequally benefits more from the environmental devastation of the global south. See for example, ecological unequal exchange and its role in core-periphery relations.

The burden is not only on global south nations, when western countries must not only fulfill their own NDCs but should also provide the necessary (unconditional) aid and financing to global south nations.

“as many as 60 rising to 90%” of Indian labourers died in British-owned plantations in Malaya (1910s-1930s)
Colonial capitalism moment. Was reading a book chapter this topic so take this post as a daily reminder to hate the Brits. Admittedly, this is the full quote: > Many ‘coolies’ perished in this brutal and coercive colonial capitalist economy due to diseases, largely malaria, poor diet and harsh working conditions for long hours. On some plantations, the mortality rates were huge ‘as many as 60 rising to 90% of the labourer’s died within a year of their arrival’ (Sandhu, 1969: 171). These appalling and deplorable living conditions were prolonged for a long time (Sasidaran, 2012), and the education and medical facilities were far from adequate (Tinker, 1976: 153). But what's interesting was the book mentioned that more than 2million south Indian labourers had arrived into the colony by 1939, but the actual recorded Indian population from census never reached above [700,000]( Although they could have emigrated back, another possibility is well, as mentioned above, they died. Regardless, the population statistics do add up. Book chapter referenced: Selvaratnam V. (2021) ‘Malaysia’s South Indian ‘Coolies’: Legacies of Imperialism, Colonial Capitalism and Racism’ in R. Rasiah, A. Hashim and J.S. Sidhu (eds) Contesting Malaysia’s Integration into the World Economy, Singapore: Palgrave Macmillian, 169-200.

I attended this talk whereby the researcher, working with local Cuban academics to improve living spaces in Cuba, mentioned how in their experience the locals are very much involved in the decision-making process of their local neighbourhood (and politics generally), which I found completely stark to many bourgeois capitalist democracies we have today.

And this assessment seems to be reflected in the video. (Unsurprisingly.)

Westerners crying that China helped subsidized their shitty liberal democracies since the 2000s and subsequently probably saved them from an even worse crisis than they are facing now. From [Pew Research Center]( Quoted from [South China Morning Post]( (paywalled): > Chong Ja Ian, an associate professor of political science at the National University of Singapore, said populations in Singapore and Malaysia were more “primed towards pliancy to authority” and tended to place more emphasis on economic performance. I really do hate this rhetoric that somehow Malaysia/Singapore values authoritarianism (whatever that means). Liberal politics will never understand how even if the 2 countries are functionally 1 party states and may not be the most socially liberal places in the world, the parties carried and boosted economic performance, making both nations the top 3 in GDP per capita in southeast asia. Personally, they would never get how economic performance has allowed my family to literally escape from poverty and peasant level subsistance farming to clean, modern houses and high-school/university education. Of course they wouldn't understand. Muh liberal values and hooman rights. The West would rather see us fighting for scraps and being unstable and war torn like the Middle East. Fuck them.

cross-posted from: > Went and dug a little deeper and it seems that for high-income nations, this trend of more women than men graduating in universities (as well as outperforming in school) has been going on for multiple decades now. > > Apart of me wants to think its just right-wing hysteria because this was brought to my attention by some random podcast clip using this example as somehow proof that patriarchy doesn't exist lol. Some articles I read did mention how other factors (particularly class and race) was a higher determinant of school/university success. > > And I particularly do not like biological explanations anyways (too essentialist to my taste, but I can't say for sure). I forgot which article in particular but it did argue it's because men used to be able find jobs in more traditional blue-collar industries, leading to this present day discrepancy. > > What do you all think?

The way mixed race marriages especially of colonised and coloniser (through their offspring) allowed Europe to exercise greater control of her colonies, acting as a bridge or middleman. Its thoroughly fucked up. Not to mention the racial/ethnic hierarchy that was then embedded in colonial societies across the global south, still present in the modern day. This is what happens when you take liberal idpol to its conclusions. You apologize and give prizes to ‘one of the good ones’, in this case the ‘Indo-Europeans’ minority while ignoring and leaving the vast majority of Indonesians, in Indonesia, to suffer. We do not express enough hatred of the Dutch in particular tbh.

cross-posted from: > Copy pasted below. Amazing that news such as this is pay-walled. > > For more than 20 years, successive US presidents have given Saudi Arabia a pass on the question of whether the kingdom's government had anything to do with the 9/11 terrorist attacks. As the story goes, plenty of individual Saudis were involved — including 15 of the 19 hijackers and Osama bin Laden — but there was no evidence to indicate that the Saudi government itself was behind the attacks. That's more or less what the 9/11 Commission concluded, and the Saudi government continues to cite the commission's report in official statements as proof that "Saudi Arabia had nothing to do with this terrible crime." > > In its report, the commission took particular pains not to implicate Omar al-Bayoumi, a Saudi national who met two of the 9/11 hijackers in Los Angeles shortly after they arrived in the US. Bayoumi then helped them move to San Diego, where he signed as the guarantor on an apartment they rented. > > Bayoumi has long maintained that he met the hijackers by coincidence, a claim the commission did little to contradict. Instead, it painted a mostly innocuous portrait of Bayoumi's background, concluding that he was in the US "as a business student" and that he worked for the Saudi Civil Aviation Authority. "I don't believe he was a 'Saudi government agent' working to help terrorists," wrote Philip Zelikow, the 9/11 Commission's executive director, in response to questions from a journalist in 2007. > > But over the past several months, a raft of new documents released by the American and British governments suggest that the 9/11 Commission got it wrong. An FBI memo declassified in March, in response to an executive order by President Joe Biden, reported that Bayoumi was receiving a monthly stipend from Saudi intelligence. In other words, he was not a student but a spy. According to the FBI memo, dated June 14, 2017, Bayoumi was tasked with gathering information "on persons of interest in the Saudi community" and passing the intelligence to Prince Bandar bin Sultan al-Saud, the Saudi ambassador at the time. > > "Allegations of Albayoumi's involvement with Saudi intelligence were not confirmed at the time of the 9/11 Commission Report," writes the memo's author, an FBI special agent at the bureau's Washington field office, whose name is redacted. "The above information confirms those allegations." > > A second declassified FBI memo shows that a confidential source told the FBI there was a "50/50 chance" that Bayoumi had advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks and "assisted two of the hijackers while residing in San Diego." > > The FBI declined to comment. But the revelations appear to undercut the Saudi government's claims that it had no ties to the 9/11 attacks. While US intelligence agencies have repeatedly concluded that the Saudi government as a whole had no advance knowledge of the 2001 plot, they have flagged specific Saudi agencies and members of the royal family as having ties to Al Qaeda. Last year, newly declassified FBI files complicated another crucial piece of Bayoumi's narrative, suggesting that his initial meeting with the two hijackers had been arranged by contacts at the Saudi Consulate in Los Angeles. > > Zelikow, the executive director of the 9/11 Commission, told Insider he's skeptical that Bayoumi knew about the plot, or that he was working for Saudi intelligence. Many high-ranking Saudis, Zelikow pointed out, were despised by bin Laden and opposed to his efforts. "The information that Bayoumi might have been a paid informant ... if it is true, actually tends to cut the other way," Zelikow said — suggesting that Bayoumi would have been working against the hijackers. > > In an interview with Insider, Thomas Kean, the former New Jersey governor who chaired the 9/11 Commission, acknowledged that Bayoumi "was definitely involved" with the Saudi government. But he remains uncertain about what form that involvement took. "There's no question he was involved with Saudi..." Kean said, and did not complete that sentence before continuing. "It's difficult in Saudi Arabia to decide who's who — whether it's the royal family or Saudi intelligence." Kean also reiterated that the commission found no evidence to suggest that Bayoumi had advance knowledge of the attacks. > > But a second raft of documents — released by the British government last week in response to a civil lawsuit against the Saudi government by the families of 9/11 victims — points to the possibility that Bayoumi knew about the attacks before they took place. Among Bayoumi's papers was a diagram depicting a plane descending toward a target on the horizon. Beside the diagram is a formula used to calculate the distance to the target. > A diagram showing a plane descending, beside a mathematical formula. > Among Bayoumi's belongings, British investigators discovered a drawing of a plane descending toward a target — and an equation that an FBI source said was used to calculate "the height of an aircraft necessary to see a target." UK Metropolitan Police via Kreindler LLP > > The diagram was seized by British police in late 2001, but its existence wasn't noted until 2007 — three years after the 9/11 commission issued its final report. It's hard to imagine an innocuous explanation for anyone possessing such a diagram shortly before the 9/11 attacks. "Sure looks suspicious — and sinister," said Philip Shenon, author of "The Commission," a history of the 9/11 report, which recounted dissent from some of the commission's staff regarding the extent of Saudi involvement. "Fair to wonder whether it suggests he knew in detail about the 9/11 plot." > > Mark Rossini, a former FBI agent who worked as a liaison to the CIA's bin Laden unit, didn't believe the Bayoumi had advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks, which, he said, was limited to a small circle within Al Qaeda. But after reviewing the diagram, he changed his mind. "There's no question that guy was a Saudi agent," Rossini told Insider. "He lied. It's unequivocal." > > Zelikow, for his part, remains skeptical. He suggested that the drawing and calculations might be related to Bayoumi's work with the Saudi Civil Aviation Authority. "It is possible that someone working in civil aviation might have worked on such equations, for various reasons," he said. > > Bayoumi, who has returned to Saudi Arabia, has given multiple interviews to law enforcement over the years, but the deposition he gave in the civil lawsuit brought by the families of 9/11 victims remains under seal. It's unclear whether he has been asked about the diagram but, it's hard to see how the core question of Saudi involvement in 9/11 can be resolved without a full and credible account of his actions. > > The evidence declassified by the British government also includes videos showing Bayoumi filming himself and his circle during his time in San Diego. One shows him embracing Anwar al-Awlaki, a local imam at the time who had ties to Al Qaeda. Like Bayoumi, Awlaki was close to the hijackers. In 2011, he was killed by a US drone strike in Yemen. A second video shows Khalid al-Mihdhar, one of the two San Diego hijackers, in the kitchen of the apartment that Bayoumi helped him rent. > Still frame from a video showing Khalid al-Mihdhar at a party. > This video still shows Khalid al-Mihdhar, one of the 9/11 hijackers, in the kitchen of an apartment rented for him by Bayoumi. UK Metropolitan Police via Kreindler LLP > > The release of these new documents comes at an inconvenient time for the Biden administration. The US wants cheap oil, continued rights for military bases, and a revived nuclear deal with Iran. Saudi Arabia wants to end all discussion of the state-sponsored murder of Jamal Khashoggi and a free hand to pursue its brutal proxy war in Yemen. The last thing either country wants is a renewed debate over the Saudi role in 9/11. "The sad truth is that because of geopolitical issues, especially petroleum, we'll never go after the Saudis or hold them accountable," said Rossini, the former FBI agent. > > For decades, the US has allowed its codependent relationship with the Saudi royal family to circumscribe what was supposed to be an exhaustive 9/11 investigation. The more the loose ends become public, the harder it will be to avoid taking a closer, more complete look at who supported the hijackers, and why. The reason we have new information about Bayoumi's ties to the Saudis, it's worth noting, is because Biden decided to declassify more documents related to 9/11 — a much-needed step toward greater transparency. > > "All of a sudden, all of this information is available," said Karen Greenberg, who directs the Center on National Security at Fordham Law School. "Maybe we're finally coming to a sense as a country that we can look these facts in the face and tell the story of what happened."

Link to twitter thread [here]( So today’s been a real stressful day since Eid is tomorrow (technically today its AM right now) and I have an essay due the day after aswell as exams in the few days. I am stressing the hell out on how I can make a coherent argument in my essay dealing with world-systems theory, eurocentrism and use of “networks” and flows in viewing the history of globalisation but reading the twitter thread made me realise, even if I fail at writing anything coherent it will never be as embarassing as any takes anarchist twitter has 💀