One is a regular person taking out a person of huge authority, balancing power.
The other is the biggest authority taking out a smaller one to consolidate power.
One is a regular person taking out a person of huge authority, balancing power.
The other is the biggest authority taking out a smaller one to consolidate power.
Wow this one really brought out the votes, both kinds ๐
Putting the agitation in agitprop
great thread OP
It really hit the right balance, it prompted discussion in what is (hopefully) a productive manner by highlighting mass support for violence against billionaires compared to the actions of AES states. Hopefully people start reading Marx after this.
One isn't a corrupt dictator killing or imprisoning anyone who complains about him. If you think the little guy isn't getting hurt in China I want the drugs you're on.
I wonder if it has anything to do with PRC's punishment towards citizens who have been critical of their government. Who knows man.
The former acted because he was personally affected by a person supporting exploitation within a liberal system, the latter leads an authoritarian regime that allowed their CEOs to do what they do until they got annoying for whatever reasons.
So if you want to talk objective results here, sure, one of them got a higher kill count. However, who has the moral high ground here is not even up to debate IMO
All this comment section proves is that if the only thing that changed was that Thompson was a Chinese healthcare CEO called Zhao Qiang and got clapped by the government libs would be calling him a working class hero and a martyr like the fucking NYT.