Image is from this SCMP article.

Much of the analysis below is sourced from Michael Roberts’ great website.


Japan’s ruling parliamentary coalition, consisting of the LDP (purple) and it’s junior coalition partner Komeito (in light pink) have lost their ruling majority. They have ruled post-war Japan for almost its entire history. The LDP is currently led by Shigeru Ishiba after Kishida stood down due to a corruption scandal, and ties to the Unification Church.

While geopolitical factors (over the cold war between the US and China, etc) may have played a role, by far the biggest reason for this result in the poor economic conditions over the past few years. Inflation has risen and real wages have fallen, with little relief for the working class via things like tax reductions. While inequality in Japan is not as extreme as in America, it is still profound, with the top 10% possessing 60% of the wealth, while the bottom 50% possess just 5%.

Shinzo Abe previously tried to boost economic performance through monetary easing and fiscal deficits, while Kishida ran on a “new capitalism” which rejected Abe’s neoliberalism and promised to reduce inequality. Nothing substantial has resulted from all this, however, other than increasing corporate wealth. Innovation continues to fall, and domestic profitability is low, resulting in decreasing investment at home by Japanese corporations. Labour productivity growth has only slightly picked up since the mid-2000s and is falling again. The rate of profit has fallen by half since the 1960s, and Japan has been in a manufacturing recession - or very close to it - since late 2022. In essence: there is no choice but between stagnation or decline.


Please check out the HexAtlas!

The bulletins site is here!
The RSS feed is here.
Last week’s thread is here.

Israel-Palestine Conflict

If you have evidence of Israeli crimes and atrocities that you wish to preserve, there is a thread here in which to do so.

Sources on the fighting in Palestine against Israel. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:

UNRWA reports on Israel’s destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.

English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news.
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.

English-language PalestineResist telegram channel.
More telegram channels here for those interested.

Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict

Sources:

Defense Politics Asia’s youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don’t want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it’s just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
Simplicius, who publishes on Substack. Like others, his political analysis should be soundly ignored, but his knowledge of weaponry and military strategy is generally quite good.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists’ side.

Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.

Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:

Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.

https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR’s former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR’s forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster’s telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a ‘propaganda tax’, if you don’t believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.

Pro-Ukraine Telegram Channels:

Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.


  • thethirdgracchi [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    9 hours ago

    I think this is a fundamental misunderstanding of what the US military’s purpose is within American empire, and how it’s funded. Note that the American taxpayer does not fund the military, foreign countries with recycled dollars they accumulate from global trade do that by buying US Treasury bonds. And the military keeps “losing” but the shareholders of all those defense firms are quite happy. Long term sure the US is fucked if it’s military can’t even take out missile launchers in Yemen, but long is a rather long time.

    • coolusername@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      15 minutes ago

      they don’t even need to buy treasuries, the fed can credit member banks (i forgot the unit of account) and they in turn buy treasuries from the open market. Japan does this and has done it for quite a while

    • Hexboare [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Note that the American taxpayer does not fund the military, foreign countries with recycled dollars they accumulate from global trade do that by buying US Treasury bonds

      The US government takes dollars from US taxpayers and points to the military budget as part of the reason why.

      If this is a “fundamental misunderstanding of what the US military’s purpose” is, what is?

      • xiaohongshu [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        Sorry, this is just flat out wrong. Michael Hudson’s Super Imperialism had thoroughly dissected how the US can uniquely fund hundreds of military bases around the world simply through recycling the excess dollars spent overseas back into US treasuries.

        Governments with monetary sovereignty aren’t funded by taxes. If you’re US citizen who earns dollars, then those dollars are simply “tax credits”. All of the dollars in your bank account belongs to the US Federal Government, who reserves the right to take away your money (usually through tax hikes) because you never owned them in the first place!

        When you pay your taxes, they don’t go into funding government programs. Your money gets destroyed in the Treasury.

        Instead, you use the extra “tax credits” (money not being taxed yet) to obtain real goods and services that you can use, consume and enjoy. The government controls how much treats you can get simply by adjusting how much “tax credits” you can have. When the government raises taxes, you get less “tax credits” to buy stuff to consume. Similarly, when the government reduces deficit spending, there are less “tax credits” being circulated in the economy, and so you (and everyone) get less “tax credits” to buy stuff.

        The Republicans are king at deficit spending - but the money goes to the military industrial complex instead of public infrastructures that benefit the working people. Biden’s interest rate hike over the past two years also paid out interests mostly to rich people, while poor working class people are being squeezed harder than ever. This is the power of the State - they can do whatever they see fit with the currency simply by spending where it matters (to them).

        The same goes for billionaires. None of Elon Musk’s money belongs to him. They all belong to the US Federal Government, who reserves the right to confiscate every single dollar that Elon Musk “owns” if it ever wishes to do so. The government does not need a single dollar from Elon Musk to fund its spending, it can print the dollar any time it wants! The government can tax billionaires because they simply want to, not because they need the billionaires’ money. This is the power of the State.

        From the perspective of the government, money and taxation are simply tools to shape the socioeconomic activities. If some segment of the society has accumulated too much wealth, then taxation can be used to decrease inequality. If the government wants to punish bad behavior (smoking, public hazard etc.), then taxes are incurred on such products to discourage consumption.

        Remember, money is debt, and debt is just promise. Money has no inherent value (Michael Hudson would literally call you a fascist if you believe in such nonsense lol - a few years back during an online discussion, he suddenly lost it when a random person in the audience asked this innocuous question and got called a fascist by Hudson lol) - it is simply debt/promise from the government (hence “government debt”).

        Once you have made this fundamental shift in understanding how money (debt) works, you will understand how powerful the State truly is over Private Capital. And once you have realized how the dollar is a global reserve currency that is not tied to anything (i.e. fiat instead of gold standard during the British Empire), then you will understand how much power the US State has over the rest of the world.

        • Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          When you pay your taxes, they don’t go into funding government programs. Your money gets destroyed in the Treasury.

          There is no actual destruction of money being done this way, unless the relevant units are too damaged. The taxed money is either put into the treasury or it is returned into circulation through a budget.
          On that note, it doesn’t matter where money came from with regards to a budget, so when people say that some part of a budget if funded by some specific money (in the short term, at least), they are being silly.

          I’d also say that the points about money that individual people have being ‘tax credit’ are not informative.

          However, yes, the obsession with calling money ‘taxpayer money’ is rather silly, and it should be recognised that money is something issued by a government in order to reliably distribute various goods/services in a society. A state could, indeed, decide to maintain its military in many different ways, including with no budget, depending on how it sets up its economy. (However, it should be noted that it does depend on how the economy is set up. Capitalist states generally need to pay wages/salaries to its military, as well as buy equipment and/or resources to make equipment with for the military, which necessitates usage of money, and simply issuing more money without an increase in productive capacity would mean a reduction in the ability of money to guarantee one goods and services.)

          I do have to say that you did not make the relevant points clear for other people. It isn’t going to be clear to people what sort of a shift in understanding you are talking about there in the end.

            • What_Religion_R_They [none/use name]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              3 hours ago

              Ok people pay taxes, the money goes to the government, it gets allocated and used elsewhere. then you’re saying they just fudge the numbers at the treasury to make taxes be cancelled out? To have this manipulation, the people doing the manipulation must be cognizant of this process, but acknowledged processes are not how capitalism works, so what is the magic trick here? How does this money destruction take place and what is the rationale that the treasury uses for it?

              • coolusername@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                9 minutes ago

                https://www.law.georgetown.edu/environmental-law-review/blog/federal-taxes-do-not-finance-spending-and-cost-benefit-analysis-must-change/

                According to MMT, all dollars are spent into existence by the federal government first and taxed out of existence later.[8] When the federal government taxes dollars, it does not collect them— it destroys them.[9] This destruction of dollars serves an existentially important purpose: it guarantees private demand for the dollar, which otherwise has no determinable minimum value. Companies, households, and other currency users must pay their federal taxes in dollars to the currency issuer or else face severe punishment. The dollar’s unique ability to cancel tax obligations becomes its stable baseline value in the private market.

                The federal government, of course, does not tax itself. It has as much need for its own dollars as a teacher does for their own brownie points. As the currency issuer, the federal government never collects its own dollars because its purpose is to allocate them. It must spend more dollars into the economy than it taxes out, or else dollars would drain from the economy until none existed.[10] When considering how many dollars to spend into existence, the federal government’s true concern is whether the new dollars will dilute the currency, causing inflation.[11]

        • Hexboare [they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          So that’s a long post before I read it, can you confirm that you’ve read my much smaller little bit of text?

          The US government takes dollars from US taxpayers and points to the military budget as part of the reason why.

          I’m not saying that taxes “pay” for the military (“oh no my numbers don’t add up on both sides of the balance sheet!!”)

          But the US government taxes money from people, destroys it and points to the military budget as part of the reason.

      • thethirdgracchi [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Sure, but taxes are just to prove creditworthiness for bond sales. Governments are not funded by taxes. The US military’s primary purposes are to generate capital for the shareholders of defense contractors and be a big enough stick to threaten allies that don’t use dollars to buy Treasury bonds. All the other stuff, wars included, is secondary.

        • Hexboare [they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I agree generally but the country controlling the global reserve currency doesn’t need to care about convincing future creditors.

          Threatening allies and maintaining the international economic system is still important and something the US military is doing increasingly poorly with.

        • Z_Poster365 [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          7 hours ago

          All great in theory until another war occurs where their interests are greatly at stake, and they cannot achieve strategic victory. Until the myth of dominance fades and the world goes wild, defying the US in every corner of Africa, South America, Europe and Asia. Until the entire thing implodes or is defeated in the field to the point it must concede major losses

          • thethirdgracchi [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 hours ago

            Agreed, but losing Iraq and Afghanistan and Vietnam and Korea hasn’t seemed to dent the United States ability to force its allies to keep buying Treasuries. It’ll implode eventually, empires always do, but it’s more resilient than I’d like.

            • ziggurter [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              5 hours ago

              Even the loses can be fucking intimidating, especially when there’s a U.S. military base around every corner (and “guest” troops in “your” military base when there isn’t one that technically belongs to the empire).

              It’s like when you take some ex-employer to court, and have a rock-solid case about retaliation or illegal discrimination or whatever, but the legal proceedings take many years, all you get is some lousy back-wages and a notice posted on the corporation’s break room for a while, and you just want the whole thing to be fucking over now that you’ve had to move on and deal with yet another fucking boss for a good portion of your life on top of the legal battle. It has a pretty devastating effect on you even if you technically “win”. Whether it’s capitalists or their empire you are fighting, there’s a lot of machinery towering over you.