That's when only when the Polish government does it

Cool! ty for mentioning it

I concede that I should have said bartering.

I'm talking about the tribal societies

First of all, even Dengists agree to there being a lot of revisionism in the Soviet Union for the majority of its existence, so we can hardly throw the "anti-revisionist" title out just like that. Second, there were and are a lot of Marxists who believed in some approximation of what Mao was doing even towards the end of his life, who see Deng being reinstated from the exile Mao put him in, and seizing power by banishing all the Maoists as being essentially a coup. This was followed by a massive reversal of many different policies, seizing collectively owned land from the people and selling it off, re-establishing the bourgeoisie, and ostensibly abandoning class struggle which you can hopefully forgive them for perceiving as being not very Marxist.

Even if you end up supporting what he did, most SWCC-ers do not deny that he was a right-deviationist, which is a subcategory of revisionism, they just also accuse Mao of being a revisionist to the left in equal measure. How they can both be "70% good" when they were so fundamentally opposed to each other is, uh, difficult math to swing.

For the record, I do think China remains a historically progressive force and should be completely supported over the US, so I guess I haven't explained what would be the literal meaning of "Anti-China marxism", but a lot of people use that phrase to ask about Maoists rather than Trots (people who totally oppose China, usually), so I chose that interpretation.

Two grey sections are explicitly labeled as kingdoms.

At least by the Marxist definition, these societies virtually all did have states, they were just very small states. They enforced the oppression of women by men (patriarchy) along with other class relations.

Patriarchal* agrarian societies were brutal, though, and have nothing to do with anarchism if anarchism is worth anything. The "forced to barter bc no money" is a myth made up by capitalists though, since all of these societies were either self-sufficient or simply pillaged from other societies. The telling in which theses societies were reliant on trade between each other is so silly it doesn't even rise to the level of Adam Smith's "barter myth," which itself is discredited.

*in the old sense of men literally ruling as a rule, with all the women being in a condition not meaningfully distinguishable from slavery.

It's alright when there's genuine comedy, like Nichijou

But yeah, wake me up when there's Chinese battle anime that isn't the cgi mess that dominates their market right now.

Where are those 40 beheaded babies, again?

I remember reading a report by a Japanese think tank on the history of film in the dprk, where they described a film that had a fairly plain romance plot as being incredible because up to that point "state ideology only acknowledged love between the people and the Glorious Leader, not between individuals," which is just the most unhinged take.

I know it's a boring answer that has already been given, but I really think it's just projection + making the book more marketable by putting a sex fantasy plot in it. I've never seen even a vague gesture at what the USSR would have had as an "Anti-Sex League", and the anglosphere is filled with them (and was even more so at the time), and it's objectifying Julia in a perfectly anglo fashion, i.e. a young maiden presses you, a middle-aged schlub, into cradle-robbing