Hinkle makes anti Zionism unpalatable and directly leads to the arrest of people like Mahmoud. He got retweeted twice by the state of “Israel” which each time gave him a ton of publicity.

By making his unhinged takes (he’s outright an antisemite, ACP is doing damage control every time he tweets something lol) he associates antizionism with people like him and with antisemitism so that people won’t call themselves anti zionist and if you do, you’ll look like a nutjob.

Hinkle worked with Tulsi Gabbard when he was younger (so 5 years ago), Gabbard being head of the psyop division in the US military or something like that (edit: she’s literally Director of National Intelligence). The info is super easy to find if you Google her name plus military but I forget the exact job title. He interviewed her last year again for some reason and never mentioned this past relationship.

Tucker Carlson’s father, Richard, was the director of Voice of America, close to Reagan, and US ambassador to the Seychelles. He was deeply embedded in US politics at the foreign affairs level, so Tucker is more of an untouchable. And tucker is far from doing any anti imperialism, moreso the appearance of doing anti imperialism

Feds don’t directly infiltrate anymore, or at least most of the time they don’t. They get informants to do it, see Beau of the Fifth Column (his name is not Beau and he fakes a southern accent). Usually as the result of a plea deal. Then after that I assume the snitch has sort of free reign in how they carry out their operation as long as they submit results.

The thing that everyone should be looking at is how Hinkle, who is based in the US, gets to meet with Putin, Dugin, Ansarallah, Hamas, goes to Iran – basically does everything the US state hates, BUT never gets in any trouble for it. There’s a man (Mahmoud Khalil) who is currently MIA after being adbucted from his home in New York by the police for talking about Palestine, but Hinkle gets to talk to an audience of 2 million + on twitter, he gets to travel around the world meeting heads of state that sponsor terrorism (according to US State Department of course), he gets to meet current war enemies of the US, and he gets to talk about that on social media openly, and he doesn’t even get questioned when he comes back? Even Blumenthal, who is the son of an aide to Bill Clinton, got detained and questioned when he came back to the US.

Dugin says a lot of “hmm… this could either be a good thing, or a bad thing… I can’t tell which” sprinkled in with super obvious stuff to anyone who’s paid attention to the topic he’s talking about in the last few years.

It’s the same mysticist bs. They quote Marx like it’s scripture, and they will quote lots of him but always fragmented, always stopping short of the next paragraph that will disprove their point. It’s very superficial and they make Marx Engels Lenin etc. say whatever they want them to say by quoting the same old tired quotes out of context. Their “good takes”, if there are any (they have long stopped producing any, now they got their hands full with ACP doing damage control for Hinkle, their most famous representative, saying unhinged take after unhinged take)

I can produce the same takes easily.

“When our turn comes, we shall make no excuses for the terror.” [said in response to the Rheinischer Zeitung being raided and shut down by the police but I will conveniently not mention that] “Political power grows from the barrel of a gun is actually wrong, the original Chinese is 枪杆子里面出政权 which reads more correctly as ‘the power of the gun exceeds the spineless child’ 🤓” “The young people are the most active and vital force in society”. "For the other people, the babies, the young ones, I did not order them to be killed. For Son Sen and his family, yes. " (Pol Pot, but in infracel fashion I should misattribute to someone more palatable that quoted this quote or just not tell you who it’s from).

Clearly this means children are dangerous and we should “not make excuses for the terror” regarding them, and there is precedent for killing children, therefore communists must kill children. If you disagree btw you are a counter-revolutionary holding back the real communist movement which is exactly the one I’m trying to build a cult around.

Basically, find any and all quotes that support the point you are trying to make at face-value, and just blast them out everywhere. If people object to your interpretation, argue semantics or run them around in circles (“you clearly didn’t understand” but don’t elaborate, let them do the work). They have entire documents of these and you catch on pretty quickly when you talk to patsocs because they will always use the same quotes and never deviate at all. In regards to infrared specifically, well, they’re the ones that feed their audience this information in the first place.

*Regarding the translation it’s true if you read the Chinese absolutely literally with no sense of grammar or character combinations lol. I literally put the sentence in an online dictionary and picked which meanings I preferred to say whatever I want it to say.

He’s a mysticist like them. Write one thing, get it interpreted 100 different ways. But only one is the right interpretation - the one the patsoc wants. If you read him the “wrong” way, they’ll beat you with “read him again” again and again until you come to see it the way they do. I’ve read a tiny bit of dugin to get what the fuss was about, it’s meaningless nonsense. He says stuff one sentence and contradicts himself in the next. He goes off on pure vibes. Actually, I wrote a bit about him some time ago: https://criticalresist.substack.com/p/alexandr-dugins-absurd-mysticism

Now I’m going into armchair psychanalyst territory but if you’re ready to believe them about dugin then they can start pushing you towards other stuff like maupin or infrared. It’s the same mysticist bullshit.

I don’t think we should compare everything socialist countries do to the US because the US is not the world. And I don’t necessarily agree with Getty either, who is a liberal, and shows his liberal bias by even giving credence to it in the first place.

Furr proved conclusively that Kruschev was the one who played up Stalin’s “cult” despite Stalin’s reluctance. So Getty’s argument is disproven here.

Perhaps the question you should ask yourself is, why would I believe socialist countries had cults of personality in the first place?

People like Ho Chi Minh, Kim Il Sung, Lenin/Stalin, Mao continue to be very influential to their countries and to the broader struggle. They literally led independence struggles and worked tirelessly for the people. Read into their biographies, the common thread you’ll find is they all spent hours a day between shifts doing agitation, party work, educating themselves and others. And then when the conditions were right, using this base of support correctly to lead the struggle for independence.

Apparently to liberals recognizing these achievements and that these very human people worked selflessly is impossible. Nobody is truly selfless to the liberal and so they have to find some silly point to make up to tarnish their legacy. Kim Il Sung was apparently playing the long con of, uhhh, literally leading resistance against the Japanese at 21yo to the point that a company was eventually created tasked solely with hunting him down? He should’ve fucked off to Miami during the war like Rhee Syngman instead, and then get appointed president by John Foster Dulles, silly Kim.

And these are real people who died less than two generations ago. It’s very, very recent history. Like, our grandparents could have met with Stalin or Mao. Literally when Koreans see a statue of Kim Il Sung they remember, oh shit, I could be living under Japanese occupation as a sex slave right now. But I fucking don’t.

But we don’t get any of that in the west because even in communist circles we don’t have any figures to look up to to remind us that the struggle is protracted, and we all need to pull our weight, and it doesn’t fall on just one person to do all that. So we point and laugh so that we don’t have to look at our own legacy of failure in the past 100 years of “organizing”.