Did Japan's real estate bubble crash heavily during those times?
The US reined in their vassals.
Well, ultras go back much further than the CIA does. Lenin famously wrote about the phenomenon as an infantile disorder back in 1920. But that's not to say that the disorder hasn't been often used by the likes of the CIA and anticommunists in general as one of the many tools in their bag to smear and discredit actual Marxist-Leninists. There are plenty of genuine ultras out there but finding the line that differentiates them from psyops is usually a fool's errand. Honestly, I think there are some ultras whose hearts really are in the right place, they just crucially failed at the materialist part of dialectical materialism. The jackass in OP is not one of these.
This is the right answer. Several of the the comments in this thread have correctly identified climate change as an important factor, but it seems like they aren't recognizing how much of an accelerant for revolution it really is. Maybe revolution is not the perfect term here so much as radical and extreme political change because as you say, it can go in the direction of communism or fascism depending as always on the material conditions. Either way, the current status quo for every nation on the planet doesn't have long left, and its death is going to happen faster and faster in the coming few decades.
Well I've been trying to educate them with as much good faith response as I can muster. I considered just posting PPB, but I guess because I'm medicated, I felt compelled to press on. Anyway, I heavily quoted from this excellent site: DecolonizePalestine & their myth database. I would recommend it to anyone else, especially if you plan to argue with zionists or their dipshit water-carriers like the one in the image.
Well, you have to follow Rinox's entire plan. Creating a "well-defined border" will ensure that any animosity between the two ethnostates won't ever become a problem. Also they all have to stop having religions altogether. Easy peasy.
Link: https://hexbear.net/comment/4767245
Tagging @TheLastHero@hexbear.net since most of their good comment had to get cut off in the screencap.
Removing the Israeli state "from the river to the sea" as you say, would mean another genocide.
No it fucking wouldn't. Completely dismantling the STATE of Israel, a terroristic settler-colonizer project, would not necessitate a genocide in any way and by pretending it does, you're doing the propaganda work for the actual genocidaires.
I guess at the end of the day, it's always ok to commit a genocide, but only if it's your side committing it, eh?
Stfu with your false equivalency bullshit. Let's use the stolen house analogy that was used elsewhere in this thread because it is apt. If a group of armed assholes comes into your house and starts killing off your family, claiming your house as their own, your doing everything within your power to get them back out of your house is not committing a crime at all, let alone one that is equivalent to the crime they are currently perpetrating against you.
The real solution is to create two states, one for the Jews, one for the Palestinians, create a well-defined border
Consider again the analogy above and ask yourself if the real solution is letting those who came in your house and killed your family have their own kitchenette, bathrooms, and bedrooms in your house, just with new walls. When they've been saying the whole time (as they were killing your family) that that's all they actually wanted to do.
The following is from: https://decolonizepalestine.com/myth/the-two-state-solution-is-the-only-way-forward/ which you should read in full.
Is the two-state solution the only viable solution?
Viable for whom and for what?
The two-state solution is inadequate to right historical wrongs, as it focuses on the pre-1967 borders as a starting point, which are in themselves a product of the colonization of Palestine, and not the root cause of it. It is thus preoccupied with finding solutions to symptoms, rather than dare address the root cause, which is Zionist settler colonialism and the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
This automatically means that Palestinians must relinquish any rights or hopes for their millions of refugees, and it also means that Palestinians must relinquish their rights to live in over 80% of the land they were ethnically cleansed from. Consequently, resource distribution, from water to fertile land, will be heavily stacked in Israel’s favor.
Shortly put, the two-state solution is more interested in maintaining Israel’s colonial gains and artificial demographic aspirations, and lending them legitimacy, rather than seeking justice for the Palestinians in any form.
You should really go ahead and read the other myths discussed there too.
stop it with the holy wars, stop it with the persecutions, stop it with the genocides, stop it with the forced resettlement, stop it with terror attacks, stop it with the bombings
Only one "side" is doing all that and is the only one that has the power to immediately stop doing all of that. Instead, it keeps doing all of that. I wonder why it hasn't stopped. 
and stop it with religions altogether.
Seriously? You are a clown. And I say that as an atheist myself.
Everyone has the right to live, so just live and let live
Oh, just give peace a chance, right? My god liberals are so fucking vapid. This is not a situation with two sides of equivalent means and committing equivalent atrocities with an equivalent power to stop the violence. It is extremely asymmetric in every sense, including the fact that one side is currently conducting an open genocide against the other which is disproportionately made up of children. I would guarantee that most of the Palestinian people would do just about anything to be able to live and let live but Israel will not have that - they never have and they never will, which is the nature of all settler-colonial projects which you clearly don't understand.
Forgive me for posting the same comment twice, but since I just was talking about 1984 in this thread, I'll say here as well that I don't think you should be ashamed for enjoying multiple reads of it. I harp on how bad the writing was, but honestly it was... passable. But more importantly, I would argue that that book really did capture some important concepts and feelings and fears that were floating around. It's just that it was written by a hardcore liberal at heart who just had to fucking blame communism instead of taking the accurate path and blaming capitalism and imperialism. Anyway... what I just posted in another comment:
It's not even that 1984 was a terrible book. It is rather poorly written by an author who was kinda a shit writer, but the dude did capture a certain important and lasting zeitgeist. He did identify an undercurrent of fear, a very valid fear, that permeated culture. The problem was that he misidentified the direction where the fear was coming from, the systems it was actually bubbling up from were the capitalist systems. But commies were both easy and profitable to make the enemies. The source was the society he actually knew better and mostly lived in, but he had witnessed other systems and wanted to project all the negativity onto the socialist systems that, again, benefited him to badmouth. His book could have been still a poorly written but interestingly prescient warning of capitalism, what it was what it was becoming (and what it is), and some of the extremes trends towards... That's what could have been if he had correctly attributed the dystopian elements as being rooted in capitalism instead of communism. Also, even thought he may not have been a great writer in general, he was good with using phrases that fit well in the milieu at the time and continue to. Like "thought police" and "Doublethink" and "Newspeak" and "memory hole." "Big Brother is watching." "We've always been at war with East Oceania." Bunch of others. There is a reason that shit stuck around, reason that goes beyond just the fact that the capitalists blew it up and made it popular, this otherwise mediocre book they held up for its usefulness in propaganda as some great bulwark against the terrors of communism. Really a tragedy that Orwell was a fucking rat-narc liberal coward.
I would say that your answer is hidden in the way you phrased the question.
The idea that revenge is bad is indeed liberal idealist bullshit. What matters is, as usual, the material reality of whatever the circumstances are. Will revenge being taken in the specific circumstances you're talking about end up doing more material harm than good? Revenge is not an inherently bad thing and it can be an extremely good motivating force behind very good and necessary actions. It can also be detrimental and end up harming people even in completely unintended ways, including the ones who are trying to enact their vengeance for entirely justifiable reasons.
It all depends on the situation. But I think we can safely say that revenge as an idea being either good or bad is a liberal-style framing or misunderstanding.
If self immolation is "doing a liberalism" then I really wish more libs would do liberalism. Fact is, it is absolutely not liberalism. It is in the most literal sense an act of ultimate self sacrifice, even if that sacrifice is almost totally ineffectual in the face of an uncaring, unimpressed enemy and an alienated, thoroughly propagandized society. It is tragic that this person was so extremely alienated from any kind of community that could have channeled their willingness to sacrifice themselves in a way that would have made a vastly bigger, more meaningful impact. But it's hardly surprising when you consider the alienated reality we're living in, and definitely not deserving of derision. Being cold and condescending about this person's desperation and even their courage to do what they did for what we all here would agree is a good and just cause (freeing Palestine and opposing the oppression and genocide by Israel) is disgusting. You are the one being a lib here.
For the record, I also have no sympathy for US troops. Fuck them. Unless they do everything they can, even give up their lives to fight against the system or entity they joined once they realize what it really is. And even though it may have been sadly misguided, this guy did just that.
I keep thinking "Hezbollah is going to kick things back into gear any second now. If not, then Iran better take the initiative and will do something materially significant. Ok, fuck, if that's not going to happen, then at least Egypt will get some food and water and fuel through." But nothing happens except more Palestinians die from the unrelenting outright genocide. From being blown up to bleeding out to dying of white phosphorus burns to now dying on a mass scale of thirst because their oppressors are refusing them the most basic, fundamental thing necessary for life. Is this really how it goes? Genocide of Palestine, and then a return to the FUCKING STATUS QUO, with the only unambiguous win being that everyone knows Isntreal is a weakling paper tiger evil little pissfuck?
That's one fucking bitter pill. I can't swallow that. How can anyone else swallow that?
They'll blame it on Mexico this time around.