news

Oh hey, it's just some bit of small news that are news nevertheless. Bit of a longpost too.

So my University will be holding elections throughout this week

We all know universities have always been heated political battlegrounds. In some countries, under authoritarian regimes, political activity and formation in universities is heavily restricted and is almost illegal, like in the United States . In other countries, like in the hellhole that is Argentina (MY HELLHOLE), surprisingly it's allowed for a wide range of political parties and organisations to participate in democratic elections to elect representatives and authorities whitin their respective universities. Of course, it goes without saying that elections never take place in universities of authoritarian nature like those which are deemed "private institutions". It seems that Capital ain't interested in democracy after all.

Anyways, my university in particular belongs to the much larger University of Buenos Aires, which has a lot of ups and downs. Our elections are celebrated among students to elect other students into three different bodies, all fully validated by the State and the University itself. So, one of the elections will send student representatives to a Junta which itself is made up with said students, professors and other academics. There's one Junta specifically for each career, in my case, and since I'm studying History, my vote goes for the representatives in the History Junta. Others will emit a vote for their representatives in the Anthropology Junta, the Philosophy Junta and so on. These Juntas deal with everything related to their careers. The other body is the Board of Directors, once again a number of students (often a minority) is sent in representation and will be able to cast a vote during the internal elections they have to choose the University's main authorities.

None of that is interesting. The real battleground is the third body that is up for grabs: the Student's Centre. Basically, it's a student-driven government body that is tasked with defending the interests of all students. Historically it has been a very contested battleground for many parties, lots of militants everywhere (from all parties) began their careers in their Student Centres (if they even attended to a State University). It's an important body, during heated political moments it becomes the framework for mobilisation and organisation. For example, pre-COVID years saw several attempts to reduce "costs" in education, as a response, quite a lot of student centres took their universities literally by storm, declared them "Tomadas" (Taken) and ran the entire thing by themselves. Sounds familiar?

At the same time, the Centre offers services like operating the university's buffet, support for students, study groups, etc. Not a lot, but can have an impact in the students day to day life.

So the elections for the Centre always get spicy. This time around, the Centre is under control by the Peronist coalition, which groups several peronist, kirchnerist (soccdems) and some like-minded independent groups. Like all peronists they suck massive amounts of ass, because they negotiate with power, not fight it. First, they're ideologically aligned with the authorities. Second, they've been around since like 2022 or so and so far their management has been bad. We've lost hours from our schedule thanks to their passiveness, meaning that the university opens later (from 7am to 8am) and closes earlier (from 23pm to 22pm), everything had to be modified to fall into this new scheme and many students got fucked, because almost everyone who studies here is a student AND a worker at the same time. They also allowed for the History program to get butchered by removing certain subjects (made them optional) and replacing them with pseudoscientific shite like psychoanalysis . So, I will not vote for these fucking losers.

As for the opposition, it's made up of about three Trot orgs (Because OF COURSE IT IS LIKE THAT ) and one or two extra orgs I don't know. As for the Trots, one has absolutely no chances (In typical Trot fashion it used to belong to a much larger party, but their sixty five million years old leader broke away from them and formed their own marginal group), the other has little chances (It's filled with TERFs, or at least, used to. Regardless they're all 100% insufferable) but this one has some national projection (They even participate in national elections as Nuevo MAS). Finally, there's the big Trot front that is Frente de Izquierda (good Trots) which, in itself, is made up by four Trot parties. I know quite some people who their militant life for them and they're pretty cool, I have a lot of respect for some of them.

So yeah, I'll be voting for the good Trots. Still, I consider myself to be a Communist yeah but also Independent as I don't campaign for a party. Therefore, I am not a Trot. I also know some of their candidates in the ticket and I get along with them well.

If you guessed that most of the political struggle comes from the Trots infighting you'd be right. There was a pretty big incident years ago where a group of Nuevo MAS militants got involved in a massive brawl with militants from the Frente de Izquierda that even got nationwide TV coverage. It's still spoken about after all these years, it constituted a monumental moment in our University's lore lmao. Still, it's pretty emabarrasing. These days this kind of shit doesn't happen, but there's always heated discussions between the two as both are apparently interested in forming a single ticket, but Trots be Trotinn', they never agree on anything and go separate ways (then they get eaten by the Peronists).

The University is also filled with political propaganda, mostly coming from Nuevo MAS militancy. All walls, and I mean ALL WALLS have political ads. It's almost unbearable to watch. I've included an example in the spoiler below. Also, as soon as you come in from the main entrance you get jumped on by militants asking you questions and trying to convice you to vote for them lol. It's very amusing for me, others feel really threatened about all this.

spoiler

And this is nothing, it gets worse in other places. Also it's the same ad repeated over and over again.

---

I wish the good Trots win (they have a good chance), I'd rather have them instead of the bootlickers in power. I want them to be completely insufferable to those in power.

In Ireland, the Catholic Church is at it again:

CW: Mentions of CSA

Ireland to set up inquiry into sexual abuse at schools run by religious orders

Inquiry to follow preliminary investigation unearthing 2,400 allegations of historic abuse

The Irish government is to set up a statutory commission of inquiry into sexual abuse at schools run by Catholic religious orders after a preliminary investigation found almost 2,400 allegations of historic abuse.

The investigation, led by a leading barrister, Mary O’Toole, documented 844 alleged abusers in 308 schools run by 42 religious orders across the Republic of Ireland.

One hundred and thirty seven people who participated in her inquiry completed in-person interviews and 12 provided written submissions.

Most of those who took part were men in their 50s and 60s.

Full article (The Guardian, archived)

Some more news and videos from the front (and rear).

Ukrainian anti-fascist partisans of the Opir resistance movement set fire to a large warehouse of the Danish entity “Autukrania biler til Ukraine” in Copenhagen that had been supplying military equipment to the Kiev regime and Western mercenaries for over two years: https://southfront.press/ukrainian-resistance-movement-starts-fires-across-europe/

RT video report on the recent liberation of the southern DPR town of Konstantinovka: https://odysee.com/@RT:fd/strategic-city:f

Kiev regime invaders of Kursk oblast forgot to shut the door… (18+): https://lostarmour.info/media/videos/news/22180.mp4

Foreign Policy - Ukraine Needs a New Storyline

But as important as the messaging, Ukraine also had a clear—if simple—theory for how it would win the war. First, it stopped the Russian offensive in Kyiv. Next it broke Russian forces around Kharkiv and retook Kherson. Finally, as Western-made arms poured into the country, a final counteroffensive in the spring of 2023 would at the very least push Russia back closer to its borders, if not finish the war entirely.

Unfortunately for Ukraine, the latter step never materialized, not least because months of Western hesitation to deliver critical weapons such as tanks and aircraft gave Russia the time it needed to complete extensive fortifications along the front. When the 2023 counteroffensive petered out, Kyiv lost more than troops and equipment. It also lost a compelling argument for how it intends to win.

Arguably, the accusation that the Russia-Ukraine war was stalemated was never entirely accurate [lol. lmao]. While much of the Western media attention focused on the stagnant front lines, Ukraine notched a series of less headline-grabbing but arguably equally important achievements, including pushing Russia’s once vaunted Black Sea fleet out of its Crimean ports and the western Black Sea—a significant feat for country without a navy. Moreover, the lack of Ukrainian military progress was at least partially due to monthslong holdups in U.S. and European aid deliveries, as well as strict red lines limiting the use of any Western weapon to attack airfields, bases, and other military assets on Russian territory.

While practically every one of the dozens of Ukrainians whom I interviewed—at different levels of seniority, both inside and outside of government—recognized the need for victory and the existential stakes at hand, few were able to articulate just how Ukraine would come out victorious.

In this respect, the Kursk counteroffensive arrived not a moment too soon.

While the counteroffensive came as a surprise to many—including officials in the U.S. Defense Department—the push into Kursk makes perfect sense. Ukraine, after all, needed to do something big. It needed to show that while the Russian military may be vast, it is still uneven and, in places, brittle.

Inferring from Ukraine’s actions, the country’s new, if still unstated, strategic tagline seems to have three relatively well-defined parts: survive, strike, and seize. The first—survive—focuses on withstanding Russia’s punishing assaults against Ukrainian energy infrastructure and halting Russia’s slowly advancing offensive in the Donbas. The second—strike—seems to revolve around hitting military and industrial targets deeper inside Russia, not only in order to wear down Russian military capabilities, but also to increase the economic and political costs of the war for the Putin regime.

The third and final part—seize—is where Kursk fits in. This action emphasizes capturing Russian territory along the border, presumably both as a buffer to protect Ukrainian territory from Russian aggression and as a potential bargaining chip further down the road.

Ultimately, all three elements are necessary but likely not sufficient [lol. lmao.] in constructing a new theory of victory for Ukraine. While the survive, strike, and seize elements of Kyiv’s nascent strategy will undoubtedly ramp up the pressure on Moscow, they probably will not, by themselves, allow Ukraine to retake its lost territory. Indeed, Russia has continued to advance in eastern Ukraine, despite the Ukrainian offensive in Kursk. Nor will future strikes and seizures dramatically ramp up domestic pressure on Putin to the point where he will end the conflict. Most Ukrainian analysts whom I interviewed admitted that most Russians—particularly those who actually have influence in Putin’s autocracy—simply don’t care enough about Kursk to force Putin to abandon his war aims.

Thus, the question that remains is what the next and final element of Ukraine’s theory of victory might be, if it exists at all. Essentially, Ukraine has two basic choices—supplant or settle.

But with U.S. elections on the horizon and growing challenges around the world competing for scarce attention and resources, Ukraine’s leadership owes its partners and allies—as well as its own public—its theory of how it will win.

The authors thesis is fundamentally contradictory.

The author argues that Ukraine’s theory of victory is to survive and seize bargaining chips, but also that these seizures of strategically unimportant areas obviously don’t affect the war in a meaningful military sense.

And so the author concludes by admitting Ukraine has no theory of victory.

Even in the best case scenario that Ukraine can horse trade Kursk for a bit of territory, Ukraine has fundamentally lost the war.

The question not being addressed is post-war neutrality. It seems the deep state are now fully engaged in preserving a rump Ukraine that is NATO-aligned and hostile to Russia so we’ve entered the true negotiations here of drawing permanent spheres of influence.

By Raphael S. Cohen, the director of the Strategy and Doctrine Program at the Rand Corporation’s Project Air Force.

WSWS - 84 years since the assassination of Leon Trotsky

Kittenposting in a new mega

Over the last 12 hours, the Democratic Kittens Republic of My House has successfully repelled invasions by a raccoon in the backyard and the neighbor's dog

Chairman Goggles touts the efficiency of the "jet" setting on the garden hose to deter raccoon lumpenprole subversion

Express Tribune - US itself pushing Asean closer to China

A peaceful, stable and resilient region is the lifeblood of ASEAN Community Vision 2025, which is built upon three pillars: Political-Security Community; Economic Community; and Socio-Cultural Community. To implement this vision, the bloc strives to maintain peace and stability, integrate markets and build a community with enhanced capacity and capability to respond effectively to challenges and seize opportunities.

China's Global Security Initiative (GSI) – underpinned by six commitments, including respecting territorial integrity of all countries; abiding by the principles of the UN Charter; and peacefully resolving differences through dialogue – is believed to challenge the US-led security. It fits well with ASEAN's Treaty of Amity and Cooperation that embodies universal principles of peaceful coexistence and calls for mutual respect for sovereignty, non-interference and settlement of disputes peacefully.

There is another striking similarity between the GSI, which seeks to build partnerships based on mutual trust, inclusiveness and win-win cooperation, and consolidate the political foundation for regional peace and ASEAN's vision that aspires to collaborate and cooperate with like-minded partners to promote stability in the region.

rest of the article

The South China Sea (SCS) is perhaps the only major source of friction between ASEAN and China, making the strategic waterways a regional flashpoint and shoving it to a great power competition between China and the US. But the Southeast Asian states do not want to drag themselves in such a situation where they have to choose between the two economic and military heavyweights.

Then there is the Declaration of Conduct on the SCS that stipulates all parties to resolve their disputes by peaceful means. However, it doesn't mean China and ASEAN should not expedite the process of completing the Code of Conduct, which is crucial to prevent the region from sliding into instability as evidenced by the recent Beijing-Manila stand-offs in the SCS.

This is also vital for China given ASEAN in 2021 agreed to elevate their relationship with China to comprehensive strategic partnership and looked to strengthen their ties. Year 2023 marked a milestone for the China-ASEAN relationship since nearly all leaders of the bloc had visited Beijing. During Chinese President Xi Jinping's trip to Vietnam, the leaders of the two countries announced establishing a strategic China-Vietnam community of "shared future", indicating a region-wide consensus to safeguard regional stability and boost trade.

ASEAN's approach is further reflected in its economic relations with China. According to the ASEAN Secretariat, trade between China and ASEAN since 2010 had doubled to $507.9 billion by 2019 and quadrupled since the entry into force of the China-ASEAN Trade in Goods Agreement in 2005.

While China and ASEAN are strong supporters of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, this economic relationship has been bolstered by the ASEAN-China Free Trade Agreement, pushing bilateral trade per ASEAN statistics to $702 billion in 2023 and posting a robust 10.5% growth in H1-2024, according to Chinese data. China has been ASEAN's largest trading partner since 2009; and ASEAN has become China's for three consecutive years.

Unlike the US that practises selective engagement by prioritising countries often seen as strategically important in containing China, Beijing pursues a policy of peaceful coexistence, mutually beneficial cooperation and shared growth – something that is viewed in ASEAN as an effort to build a closer China-ASEAN community with a shared future and enhance "regional peace, security and prosperity" including through upholding the principles of the UN and ASEAN Charter.

This affinity is also reflected in the people, academics and researchers of the ASEAN countries who consider China as an invaluable ally, thanks to their strong trade ties with Beijing, growing people-to-people exchanges and benefits brought about by the projects of China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) such as the China-Laos Railway, Jakarta-Bandung High-Speed Railway and Malaysia's East Coast Rail that promote regional integration and serve as a catalyst of growth for regional economies and domestic tourism and industry.

ASEAN is seeking a greater US role in the region but not at the cost of regional stability and its relations with China. While ASEAN Outlook of the Indo-Pacific (AOIP) strives to promote inclusiveness rather than rivalry in the region, the alliance is committed to reinforce their comprehensive strategic partnership with Beijing.

China is being helped by the US-led mini-lateral alliances such as: Squad, a refined version of Quad, leaving out India and signing on the Philippines alongside Australia, Japan and the US; the JAPHUS, a trilateral grouping of Japan, the Philippines and the US; and the AUKUS, an Australia-UK-US nuclear alliance. These all enfeeble the AOIP relevance by challenging its very principles.

What's more, the ASEAN Economic Community Blueprint 2025 envisages building a highly cohesive, integrated and resilient economy. In the coming years, these security architectures as well as the West's ambivalent attitude toward ASEAN, return of Donald Trump to the White House and labeling of China as "greatest strategic challenge" will likely widen the gap between ASEAN and the US, accelerating the trend of a robust ASEAN-China relationship.

Final paragraph which summarises it all quite nicely:

The bloc's view of China radically varies from the West, which interprets the BRI as an emblem of its expansion strategy. Most Southeast Asian nations don't see Beijing as expansionist or a military threat and aspire to benefit from the world's second largest economy. This fundamental asymmetry in the respective approaches will continue to dominate the regional geopolitics and, to the dislike of the US, will cement China's position as ASEAN's comprehensive strategic partner.

https://xcancel.com/JoshEakle/status/1831420035413299250 Russiagate is back.

i just saw on intel slava v that the US is covering up a death in Ukraine by saying he was stationed in Poland and died from "unintentional manslaughter"

Responsible Statecraft - When Will The War In Ukraine End?

There has long been a growing recognition in private among Western experts and officials that it is in reality impossible for Ukraine to recover its lost territories through victory on the battlefield. However this has not so far led — even strictly in private — to suggestions that Ukraine and the West might propose terms that the Russian people (let alone the government) could accept as a basis for negotiations.

In the meantime, the evidence suggests that it is Russia, not Ukraine, that is strengthening its military position for eventual negotiations; and it is not at all clear that Ukrainian strikes deep into Russia would significantly change this trend.

There is no reason therefore to think that time is on Ukraine’s side in this conflict, and that it makes sense to delay the start of negotiations. That however does not mean that all the cards are in Russia’s hands, and all the Kremlin has to do is wait for Ukrainian collapse. The economy has performed far better than the West hoped, but the Russian Central Bank itself is warning of serious problems next year. As for the situation on the battlefield, while Ukrainian soldiers are exhausted, that also appears true of many Russian troops.

… As Russian establishment interlocutors acknowledged to me, Russia probably does not have the troops to capture major Ukrainian cities, unless President Putin launches an intensified wave of conscription — something he is clearly unwilling to do.

This means that if given a clear choice between what they could regard as a reasonable peace and a continuation of war to complete victory, it seems probable that a majority of Russians would opt for peace; and that it would therefore be very difficult for Putin to continue the war, if to do so meant the conscription of many more Russian sons and husbands. Such a compromise peace would be very far from what the Ukrainian and Western governments hope. It would also be very far from what Putin hoped for when he launched this war in February 2022.

Algerian elctions:
temporary results were announced:
2.16% for Youcef Aouchiche (FFS)
94.65% for Tebboune (Independent)
3.17% for Hassani Cherif (Hamas)
Now I wasn't surprised for the current president who's supported by the biggest political party in the country with 1 million members and 4 other parties to win, but 94% 💀💀💀??? anyhow the results aren't perminent and can be changed later.

BASHAR

update:

🔴 The campaign directorates of the three candidates for the September 7 presidential elections issue a joint statement.
📍 The directorates inform the national public opinion of the ambiguity, contradiction and ambiguity of the numbers recorded with the announcement of the provisional results of the presidential elections by the President of the National Independent Election Authority, especially:
📍 The contradiction of the numbers announced by the President of the Authority with the content of the minutes of sorting and concentrating the votes submitted by the municipal and state electoral committees.
📍 The ambiguity of the statement announcing the provisional results of the presidential elections, in which most of the basic data covered by the statement announcing the results were absent, as is customary in all important national elections.
📍 The defect recorded in the announcement of the percentages of each candidate.

Based on Iran’s focus on the F-35I, the James Martin analysts assumed the likely target point for the Iranian fire would be a cluster of aircraft hangars. The position also serves as a near-central point within the Nevatim base itself.

That offers “a much more valuable target” than just “poking holes in the runway,” Lair said. But none of the Iranian missiles directly hit those hangars.

Assuming Iran targeted the hangars, the James Martin analysts measured the distance between the hangars and the impact zones of the missiles. That gave an average of about 1.2 kilometers (0.75 miles) for the “circular error probable” — a measurement used by experts to determine a weapon’s accuracy based on the radius of a circle that encompasses 50% of where the missiles landed.

what is this shit? (linky to ap) we estimated the target to be hangars and thus the missiles are shit, deeply unserious analysts (unless they are doing shenanigans, in that case carry on )

i just came across this article from mintpressnews about tucker carlson's CIA connections https://www.mintpressnews.com/tucker-carlson-biography-nicaragua-cia/279782/

Honduras Not To Allow Pressure From Washington: Vice Chancellor Torres - Telesur

Article

Our nation does not have to obey the mandates of other countries, he emphasized. In an interview with teleSUR conducted on Tuesday, Gerardo Torres, the Vice Chancellor of Honduras, recounted the growing pressures that the United States has been exerting against President Xiomara Castro to prevent her administration from maintaining a sovereign and independent international policy.

“We have seen actions of pressure from the United States that have been escalating against President Castro. The most recent is putting Honduras under attack in its position of regional leadership,” he said, referring to the criticisms that Washington made regarding the expression of respect Honduras showed for the results of the Venezuelan presidential elections in July.

“Honduras respects the sovereignty and self-determination of peoples. That’s why our President congratulated President Nicolas Maduro’s victory once the Venezuelan authorities declared him the winner.”

Later, the highest point of the escalation of aggressions against Honduras occurred after Defense Minister Manuel Zelaya and the Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces, Gen. Roosvelt Hernandez, participated in a Latin American athletics event organized by the armed forces in Caracas.

“For some years now, within the framework of aggression against Venezuela, the United States has practically prohibited the armed forces of several countries from attending Venezuela. Honduras does not have to obey the mandates of other countries,” Torres emphasized.

Nevertheless, immediately after Zelaya and Hernandez returned to their country, the U.S. ambassador to Honduras accused those Honduran officials of being drug traffickers and of meeting with drug traffickers.

“We remind the U.S. that those who were meeting with drug traffickers were them,” Torres said, mentioning that political figures like Donald Trump, Barack Obama, or Nancy Pelosi had held meetings with former President Jon Hernandez, knowing that he was involved in international drug trafficking.

Just came across these 3 things about the recent german regional elections.

"Most BSW voters come from former Linke voters, non-voters or CDU. Minimal weakening of the AfD", also minimal weakening of the SPD, the question may still be open as to how the party will fare in other regional elections where Die Linke already barely exists.

Plurality of young germans in Thuringia supported the AfD

According to Adam Tooze the Thuringian branch of the AfD is its most radical branch