There’s simply no evidence any nation has been able to engineer a popular uprising. Such a thing is not possible. People feel how they feel and they hate their government for a reason.
It’s just selectively chosen and distorted facts and invectives against the enemies of authoritarian leftists. It’s not a serious attempt to document reality.
As an example, I looked at the page on color revolutions the user above recommended. It’s just a series of unsupported assertions with no supporting evidence. It literally doesn’t contain a single reference.
I do find it useful for evaluating leftists though. I find when prolewiki criticizes them then it’s usually because they actually care about facts and have consistent values. So it does have some use.
Oh to be clear there’s no factual information. But who they decide to tar and feather is interesting, since tankies can’t abide facts, real history, or true convictions of any kind. All need to be sacrificed before the altar of the great leader, whichever one it is they choose to bow before. If they’re falsely calling you an anti-communist, it’s a good sign, so thanks for the validation!
Anyone can see what this guy is trying to do here.
If mods are removing my comment about it for ‘bad jacketing’ that says a lot about them.
I guess ‘lefty’ here is the embarrassing american Dem/lib “we’re not Republicans” and not more.
References
Statista (2022). Catolicismo y evangelismo: las dos religiones más comunes en Latinoamérica – Statista
UNDP Human Development Report (2021-22). Human Devlopment Report 2021/22 – UNDP
“Chile: The Failed Socialist Revolution” (2019-09-14). Politsturm. Archived from the original on 2021-08-27. Retrieved 2022-06-12.
Jeremy Kuzmarov (2022-09-21). “Murder on Embassy Row—46 Years On: Remembering the Assassination of Orlando Letelier and Ronni Moffitt” CovertAction Magazine. Archived from the original on 2024-07-23.
Vijay Prashad (2008). The Darker Nations: A People’s History of the Third World: ‘La Paz’ (pp. 147–8). [PDF] The New Press. ISBN 9781595583420 [LG]
Notes
Spanish: República de Chile
There are also people like Chris Hedges, Greg Palast and multiple others. But I already knew you weren’t sincere and wouldn’t accept any sources.
What I find fascinating, and I’ve certainly been guilty in years past, is the louder and more “confident” people are, the more uninformed, misinformed, or guilty they turn out to be.
I reacted the way I did because you basically said “lol google it nerd” instead of providing useful information. You get what you give in online discourse.
I’m just asking people to share information and substantiate their claims. If they won’t do so then I assume they’re full of shit. That’s just how this works.
Right. And you read the prolewiki article. Completely unsourced claims.
Except…
Are these supposed to be links or what?
It’s the first set of references on the page. I just let you run with it a minute.
Op, I owe you an apology, this is my fault, completely!
OMG, I see what happened, and I owe OP an apology! I must have inadvertently tapped on: 1970-1979
Coup d’état in Chile, 1973. without noticing! Those are references on that page!
Edit to add, I am sorry. The links in the page are the references.
I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you’re describing a different page than the one I have now checked and confirmed like four times that it does not have references. If so, and you’re not just straight up lying, this is a problem you created by refusing to provide a simple link.
Edit addendum*: did you actually click the drop-down arrow? It occurred to me maybe you did and it isn’t rendering properly for you. I asked about it in the magazine and linked your post since you posted a photo. If someone contacts you about it, perhaps you will find some manners if you reply.
I did click the dropdown. I was fiddling with it and may have left it in the wrong state in this screenshot. Are you saying there should be references there but they aren’t displaying?
It also says pages needing references and the text itself contains no citations. So I’m finding this a bit hard to believe but if someone is able to confirm that would be helpful.
That you would accept, or even consider? I doubt it. If you are sincere, there is an article on prolewiki.
Prolewiki is a joke. So you have nothing.
There’s simply no evidence any nation has been able to engineer a popular uprising. Such a thing is not possible. People feel how they feel and they hate their government for a reason.
How is prolewiki a joke?
Removed by mod
It’s just selectively chosen and distorted facts and invectives against the enemies of authoritarian leftists. It’s not a serious attempt to document reality.
As an example, I looked at the page on color revolutions the user above recommended. It’s just a series of unsupported assertions with no supporting evidence. It literally doesn’t contain a single reference.
I do find it useful for evaluating leftists though. I find when prolewiki criticizes them then it’s usually because they actually care about facts and have consistent values. So it does have some use.
“Prolewiki is lies when it disagrees with my anticommunist bias. But it’s all truth when they agree with my anticommunist bias”
Oh to be clear there’s no factual information. But who they decide to tar and feather is interesting, since tankies can’t abide facts, real history, or true convictions of any kind. All need to be sacrificed before the altar of the great leader, whichever one it is they choose to bow before. If they’re falsely calling you an anti-communist, it’s a good sign, so thanks for the validation!
Removed by mod
Anyone can see what this guy is trying to do here.
If mods are removing my comment about it for ‘bad jacketing’ that says a lot about them.
I guess ‘lefty’ here is the embarrassing american Dem/lib “we’re not Republicans” and not more.
Argue against statist propaganda tactics? Sorry that bothers you so much but it really shouldn’t.
you’re full of shit
There are also people like Chris Hedges, Greg Palast and multiple others. But I already knew you weren’t sincere and wouldn’t accept any sources.
What I find fascinating, and I’ve certainly been guilty in years past, is the louder and more “confident” people are, the more uninformed, misinformed, or guilty they turn out to be.
Are these supposed to be links or what?
I reacted the way I did because you basically said “lol google it nerd” instead of providing useful information. You get what you give in online discourse.
Right. And you read the prolewiki article. Completely unsourced claims.
Except…
It’s the first set of references on the page. I just let you run with it a minute.
Op, I owe you an apology, this is my fault, completely!
Edit to add, I am sorry. The links in the page are the references.
…what fucking page?
I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you’re describing a different page than the one I have now checked and confirmed like four times that it does not have references. If so, and you’re not just straight up lying, this is a problem you created by refusing to provide a simple link.
You see “references?” Yeah.
You are rude, arrogant, unstable, and uninformed. Blocked.
Edit addendum*: did you actually click the drop-down arrow? It occurred to me maybe you did and it isn’t rendering properly for you. I asked about it in the magazine and linked your post since you posted a photo. If someone contacts you about it, perhaps you will find some manners if you reply.
I did click the dropdown. I was fiddling with it and may have left it in the wrong state in this screenshot. Are you saying there should be references there but they aren’t displaying?
It also says pages needing references and the text itself contains no citations. So I’m finding this a bit hard to believe but if someone is able to confirm that would be helpful.
deleted by creator