https://abcnews.go.com/US/mistakenly-deported-kilmar-abrego-garcia-back-us-face/story?id=121333122 Kilmar Abrego Garcia back in US to face charges of helping traffic 'thousands' of migrants
news
Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.
Rules:
-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --
-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --
-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --
-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today/ . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --
-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--
-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--
-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --
-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --
The fact that decommissioning dragon could cause that much havoc and that its privatised is
The Economist now considers Xi the most powerful man on earth.
How an agonising relationship with his dad shaped Xi Jinping
The most powerful man on Earth had a grim childhood
Full article
BY THE TIME Xi Zhongxun was in his 70s, his teeth were failing him. Tough, chewy foods were a challenge so, during one family meal, he extracted some half-masticated garlic ribs from his mouth and gave them to his son to finish. Xi Jinping—by then in his mid-30s and a rising star in the Chinese Communist Party—accepted the morsel without hesitation or complaint. He took the remains of the ribs and swallowed them.
Mr Xi was used to leftovers. As a boy, he would wash in his father’s bathwater. (The next morning the water would be used for a third time, to launder the family’s clothes.) He also understood the importance of deference, for Xi Zhongxun had taught him that children who did not respect their parents were doomed to fail as adults. Every lunar new year, Mr Xi would perform the traditional kowtow ritual, prostrating himself before his parent in a display of reverence. If his technique was off, his father would beat him.
These stories are recounted in “The Party’s Interests Come First”, a biography of Xi Zhongxun by Joseph Torigian, an American scholar. Mr Torigian draws on a decade of research using Chinese, English and Russian sources, including official documents, newspapers, diaries and interviews. The book is valuable not only for its portrait of its subject—who was a major figure in the party’s history in his own right—but also for its insights into his progeny, now the supreme leader.
As China’s unquestioned ruler, possibly for life, Mr Xi is arguably the most important person in the world. He will be wielding power long after Donald Trump has retired to Mar-a-Lago. Yet information about him is paltry. His every movement is choreographed by a fawning propaganda machine; in the accounts of his life, interesting details are expunged by overbearing censors. There are only a handful of ways to understand Mr Xi, which involve poring over party records or leaked speeches, learning about key moments in Chinese history that he lived through and studying the people who most influenced him. Few people have shaped Mr Xi more than his father. Xi Zhongxun’s relationship to the party and his thwarted ambitions offer clues as to what his son wants for China.
Like many of his generation, Xi Zhongxun’s life was marked by tragedy. Born in 1913 into a family of peasants, he was an ardent believer in communism from a young age. His belief strengthened in his adolescent years, he said, as he witnessed “the tragic mistreatment of the labouring people”. He took part in violent student protests in 1928 and was imprisoned by the then anti-communist authorities. Xi Zhongxun’s parents died when he was a teenager: the result, he thought, of the stress caused by his jailing. Two of his sisters died of hunger.
After the civil war, Xi Zhongxun rose fast through the party’s ranks and “entered the very top echelon of the government”, Mr Torigian writes. Then, in 1962, he was purged by Mao Zedong for supporting the publication of a novel Mao considered subversive. Four years later, China’s paranoid dictator launched the Cultural Revolution, unleashing frenzied gangs who killed between 500,000 and 2m people and displaced many more. Xi Zhongxun was kidnapped, held in solitary confinement and tortured. Around 20,000 people were targeted for having supported Xi Zhongxun, the author estimates, and at least 200 “were beaten to death, driven mad or seriously injured”.
His family suffered, too. They were forced to denounce Xi Zhongxun; one of his daughters committed suicide. A teenager at the time, Mr Xi was branded a “capitalist roader” (ie, a traitor) because of his father’s disgrace. On one occasion the young Mr Xi was forced to wear a heavy steel cap and subjected to public humiliation. A crowd ridiculed him, shouting slogans including “Down with Xi Jinping.” His mother joined in the jeering.
Mr Xi was thrown in prison, where he slept on an icy floor during the winter. “My entire body was covered in lice,” he wrote. One time, Mr Xi managed to escape and make his way home. He begged his mother for some food. Not only did she refuse, she also reported him to the authorities, fearful that she would be arrested otherwise. Crying, Mr Xi ran out into the rain.
What doesn’t kill you
The anguish did not stop there. In 1969, aged 15, Mr Xi was “sent down” to the countryside with millions of other young people exiled from the cities. He lived in a cave in a desolate part of the country, where girls were sold into marriage for a dowry calculated by their weight. “Even if you do not understand, you are forced to understand,” he later recalled of that time. “It forces you to mature earlier.”
Why did both men stay committed to a party that had caused them so much pain? Mr Torigian suggests the answer may lie in “What Is to Be Done?”, a novel of 1863 by Nikolai Chernyshevsky, a Russian journalist. In the story a young man named Rakhme sleeps on a bed of nails to strengthen his will. Mr Xi imagined that he was Rakhme as he endured those cold floors, lice, rainstorms and blizzards. Both father and son may have been influenced by a Bolshevik political culture that glamorised “forging”—the idea that suffering strengthens your willpower and dedication to the cause.
Throughout his life, Mr Xi has been loyal to two groups that demand absolute obedience: the family and the party. Both were often “unfairly” strict, Mr Xi has said, yet this did not dent his loyalty. Mr Torigian shows how Mr Xi balances dedication and realism. “If I were born in the United States, I would not join the Communist Party of the United States. I would join the Democratic Party or Republican Party,” Mr Xi once told Abe Shinzo, Japan’s prime minister at the time. Abe concluded that Mr Xi joined the party not because of ideology, but as a way to gain power.
After Xi Zhongxun was rehabilitated under Deng Xiaoping in the late 1970s, he was put in charge of Guangdong province and began to liberalise the local economy. When Mr Xi became general secretary of the party in 2012—the top job in China—many expected him to be an economic reformer like his father. But the assumption that Mr Xi was any kind of liberal was wrong: he is not interested in creating an open and free country. He believes in restoring China’s greatness and thinks that, to this end, the party should use any means necessary. His experience of injustice has not taught him that arbitrary power is undesirable; only that it should be wielded less chaotically than it was under Mao, by someone wise like himself.
In a little over a decade, Mr Xi has become the most autocratic Chinese leader since Mao. His regime ruthlessly represses dissidents at home and activists abroad; it enforces a stifling political conformity, forcing many to study “Xi Jinping Thought”. Such methods are justified, he thinks, because he sees himself as a man of destiny, with a duty to generations past and future. He often speaks of himself as a protector of Chinese civilisation. “Whoever throws away those things left behind by our ancestors is a traitor,” he told Ma Ying-jeou, a former president of Taiwan.
That attitude is apparent in Mr Xi’s Taiwan policy, which bears his father’s influence. Towards the end of his career, Xi Zhongxun was put in charge of unification with Taiwan. The party had ambitious dreams of reclaiming the island, which has been self-governing since China’s civil war ended in 1949 and the losing side, the Kuomintang (Nationalist Party), retreated there. But Xi Zhongxun died in 2002 with this aspiration unfulfilled.
His son yearns to fulfil it. Mr Xi has made it plain he wants to take back Taiwan. Those who rule China must remember that “The territory left by the ancestors must not shrink,” he said in 2012. When or how he may try to seize Taiwan—through war, a blockade or other means—is unclear.
What is clear, though, is that his family’s suffering has shaped Mr Xi’s dark view of politics. “For people who rarely encounter power and who are distant from it, they always see these things as very mysterious and fresh,” Mr Xi once said. “But what I saw was more than the surface of things. I didn’t just see the power, flowers, glory and applause. I also saw the cowsheds [where people were confined during the Cultural Revolution] and the fickleness of the world.” Mr Xi’s formative years made him clear-eyed and cynical, hardened and imperious. The worldview he learned from his father will affect not only 1.4bn Chinese people, but the whole of humanity. ■
I'm particularly fond of that last line
The worldview he learned from his father will affect not only 1.4bn Chinese people, but the whole of humanity.
This fucking sucks because I'm obviously very interested in Xi's biography and that of his father, and the sordid parts too not just what an official biography would have, so normally I'd be down for a book like this but this whole texts psychologizes so much, and always from the same angle, that I know it would just be incredibly annoying to read.
I bet it's just shit like "Mr. Xi once had poo blown in his phase when fixing a bio-gas generator in a village he was administrating"-this is real btw-" this hardened his view and that's why the uyghur genoci-" fuck off
The worldview he learned from his father will affect not only 1.4bn Chinese people, but the whole of humanity.
Dreams from My Father: Multipolarity Edition just dropped
Imagine any American president around his age experiencing anything close to that hardship
The worldview he learned from his father will affect not only 1.4bn Chinese people, but the whole of humanity.
They just have to include this quote in the Encyclopedia Britannica entry on Great Man Theory
Before his death, Pope Francis donated the popemobile to be turned into a mobile clinic to help Palestinian children in Gaza. Israel won’t even let that enter Gaza.
- Telegram
This sounded ridiculous to me at first, but then I thought about the optics of blowing up the popemobile full of injured children and understood why they weren’t going to let it into the country.
Pro-Russians are very upset about last night's disproportionately small response to Ukraine's provocations. Normally I could see where they're coming from, but now it's a bit different.
Andrey Belousov's appointment as Russia's Minister of Defense one year ago marked a turning point in the war. The media constantly asserted that, since his background was that of a technocrat economist, his task would be to optimize the rate of attrition, ensuring that Russia would prevail in the end, after many more years of the meat grinder. Well, they're not too far off, but there is some nuance.
Bakhmut and Krynky were the peak of attrition warfare in this conflict. Since then, both sides have adapted to reduce losses while still accomplishing their goals. Kursk was likely Ukraine's last big hurrah of wasting their own resources. Now they flexibly hold lines with the bare minimum number of troops, while Russia slowly chips away with motorcycle attacks. Neither side suffers noteworthy attrition anymore.
Okay, so if Russia continues to steadily capture territory, why not just keep this going until Ukraine vanishes from the map? Well, Ukraine and the West recognize that it's a losing prospect for them, and they are not bound by international law. Now we see suicide bombings, terror attacks on trains, and so on, while the world turns a blind eye. It's going to get worse the longer this goes on. What happens if they start making or "acquiring" dirty bombs?
So what option does that leave Russia? Well... to end the war. One way or the other. Putin is graciously offering a final chance for a reasonable peace deal. Trump genuinely wants out so he can focus on other things, and of course, the Pivot to Asia. But he will need to pressure Ukraine to accept the deal, and it's unclear if he will.
If negotiations fail to achieve peace before a certain deadline, overwhelming military force must be used to eliminate the threat, permanently. No "hostile rump state, armed to the teeth" will be allowed to persist. It will be a combination of massive annexations and regime change. Russia has been preparing for this scenario at least since Belousov's appointment. His task was to keep up the pressure while building an entire new army on the side, complete with the best equipment and fresh, motivated soldiers. There are various articles from Western sources noting how Russia has been stockpiling equipment, most notably modern tanks and missiles, and don't forget Russia's enormous military recruitment campaign.
All this to say: tit-for-tat strikes don't really matter anymore. This is the endgame. If you want huge missile strikes, probably just wait a few months.
The problem with Russia's response is that they have to respond, but how, against what, and when is a big issue, Russia's kind of boxed in there. Ukraine doesn't have an equivalent asset to the large bombers Russia lost, and there are limits to what Russia can hit, I gave my opinion on that in a comment here
Which is exactly why I believe last night's strikes were the response.
If Russia is preparing a "shock and awe" style offensive, which I think they are, they can't really do much in the meantime besides protect their assets. The last important military-ish targets in Ukraine are energy infrastructure, which Russia will want to hit as part of said offensive, not now.
Yeah I agree with you, it was the response, but a relatively weak one because of the position they've boxed themselves into.
The problem with striking energy infrastructure, and we saw this when Russia launched their de-electrification campaign late last year, at times over 100 cruise missiles were fired in a single attack wave, is that there are hard limits to what can be hit because of the nuclear power plants (NPPs). Russia can't hit any of the electrical infrastructure attached to the NPPs or any of the other power plants supplying the NPPs with a secondary electricity source. Russia hit some substations that the NPPs depend on last year and the IAEA put out a very blunt statement a few hours afterwards. Russia has avoided doing that since then. The NPPs are a big headache for countervalue strikes on energy infrastructure. Not that I'm advocating for such, I'm just analysing here, I don't want anyone to suffer of course, but countervalue strikes are part of war unfortunately...
Update 260 – IAEA Director General Statement on Situation in Ukraine - 17 November 2024
Although the NPPs [Nuclear Power Plants] - Khmelnytskyy, Rivne and South Ukraine – were not directly impacted and did not shut down, several electrical substations on which they depend suffered further damage during the strikes, Director General Grossi said, citing information from Ukraine’s national regulator. The main power lines from four of the substations were disconnected. At the moment, only two of the country’s nine operational reactors currently generate electricity at 100 percent capacity.
The IAEA teams based at the NPPs heard air defence activities and sought shelter during the air raid alarms. At the Khmelnytskyy NPP, the IAEA team heard a loud explosion. At the Rivne NPP, two 330 kilovolt (kV) power lines were unavailable, the team there reported.
Of the nine currently operational reactors at the three NPPs, six reduced output during the morning, ranging from just over 40 percent of maximum capacity to above 90 percent. At the moment, only two operate at 100 percent capacity, with one in shutdown for maintenance. All NPPs continued to receive off-site power.
This is just ordering the most expensive thing on the menu and getting mad at the bill when it comes.
South Korea: Lee Jae-myung officially took office as the country’s new president, following his victory in a snap election triggered by the impeachment of former President Yoon Suk-yeo. President Lee Jae-myung nominated Kim Min-seok, a veteran lawmaker from the Democratic Party, as his candidate for Prime Minister.
- Telesur
lmao South Korean chuds have eaten so much shit the last six months
Yes, but Lee Jae-Myung isn't exactly friendly towards feminist groups in SK (though it seems like some of his party members convinced him to maintain the Gender Equality policies, and to be tough in crimes related to sexual harassment of women). I guess a positive thing is that Lee Jae-Myung will probably have cordial relations with the goverments of the DPRK and China.
Three security incidents in Gaza this morning, including one in which at least 6 IOF were killed. The most recent is described by Hebrew sources as "extremely serious".
I don't like how the zionists call them "security incidents" to delegitimize attacks by the resistance. as if the crime is by the Palestinians not the zionist genocidal occupation
Security incident
Sounds ridiculous
"10 IOF soldiers killed in a security incident after a Hamas booby trap explodes the tank they were inside of"
I love security incidents
Cool
Is it time to create a new political party in America that actually represents the 80% in the middle?
Would he himself do it and if so would it actually break the 2 party system this time like Reform (but less successful)? Obviously you can't expect Mr "big things coming" to follow through on anything though.
Competitive 3 way races where democrats get 3rd place are probably easier for a socialist party to surpass them though.
It’s just gonna be another Ross Perot moment, nothing lasting.
The two party system is much, much weaker today than it was in the 90s. If Musk threw his money into disrupting it, that could very easily open up space for all kinds of smaller parties to flood into the gaps.
The funny part is the amount of power they gave doge with all the databases they access makes them a national security risk
Tesla stock down. 284.70 USD −47.35 (14.26%)today.
Just at this company's over valued stock