Why would I laugh? My impression is that that the UN has remained a terrain of struggle, even as that struggle was marginalized under US hegemony.
The PRC has consistently outlined what kind of international order they are trying to build to replace the imperialist world order, and how they intend to build it: namely, an international order based on mutual sovereignty rather than hegemony, with a materialist framework for human rights rather than a culturalist one. As US hegemony crumbles, I can't think of any good reason to abandon the ground that it's ceding in the UN.
I am so sick of checking into a newsmeme like this, intitally finding debunk articles like this that explain how it was totally just a misunderstanding and a glitch and a cynical lie believed by gullible plebs, and then digging into the question of how often that kind of "glitch" happens outside of the convenient-for-empire instance, only to find that it doesn't
Least orientalist Brit lmao
It seems like a drastically more fun and interesting time than Disney Place, even if it's a bit too lax on influencers holding phones
a vast oppressive conspiracy that sustains the existence of Israel
It's not a good answer to the question, "What is imperialism," but I can't deny it has a certain charm
I'm disappointed to see apologia here for this particular, concrete implementation of deprescribing. Nothing good will come from this.
To me it seems intuitive that pathologies are generally not universal conditions of a universal human mind but are historically situated like the rest of subjective experience, and that the DSM is a deeply political text - and that changes not one goddamn thing about the fact that this deprescribing is yet another weaponization of the US medical system as-fucking-always.
Of all the times and places to philososophize about how some imaginary, better version of US healthcare with no connection to reality would involve fewer medications, this is among of the most foolish, or else the most violently bigoted. As we dismantle the remnants of our welfare state, am I going to see some 
on here equivocating about how, since it was a liberal welfare state, its dissolution might actually be a good thing for the people losing food and housing?
I'd speculate that it's not a dogwhistle, but rather a signifier of a constellation of ideological positions that are getting worse and worse under sharpening contradictions. For as long as I've been using the Web, I've been sympathetic to the idea that the less it's subject to the incentives of capitalism, the better for virtually everyone - same goes for software development. A crucial problem, of course, is that you can't just carve out a space to be exempt from a system of unparalleled expansion and extraction, so eventually you have to either acknowledge that capitalism itself is the problem with tech under capitalism, or you're forced to retreat into idealism.
You know Haiku OS? I've always thought it was neat. Unfortunately, here's a thread of Haiku users being so detached from reality that they're unironically calling mild restrictions on their LLM bickering "fascism" and "a gulag," complete with invocations of a "right of reply" and a user asserting that LLMs are the kind of AI that sci-fi promised.
It is a really good essay, and I think it's a substantial contribution to political education in its particular context. The Black Myths Podcast also interviewed Gabriel Rockhill a couple of weeks ago on the subject of how he sees Who Paid the Pipers of Western Marxism applying to the question of organizing in the US, and it's the only discussion of its kind that I've heard with a focus on the present-day US. It dovetails seamlessly with the practical applications of Nonviolence is Violence Too's focus on situating non/sacrificially-violent struggle dialectically in its materially violent context.
Everyone involved in that interview struck me as uncommonly focused on the question of "What is to be done," and imo that's been characteristic of their work.
[...] Philip Luck, who studies global supply chains at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.
"The Entity List is like whack-a-mole and you've got to keep whacking the moles," Luck said, referring to an arcade game.
Unfortunately, this is the kind of article NYT publishes in order to maintain the credibility they need for their regular use of strategically-timed disinformation.
Citations Needed: The Call to Boycott—and Delegitimize—the New York Times
Tough call. I'd say Too Black.
Calling it a waste misses the point like calling a mass shooting a waste of bullets. Yeah it's a bad use for bullets, but that's because it's a heinous act of terroristic mass violence, not because it wasn't profitable.
But the UN exists in a very different context than parliament, and China denouncing the UN would neither smash nor replace it.
The UN has contained proletarian states since its founding, in which the USSR played a major role. What has given the UN its bourgeois character has not been its form as a suprastate apparatus, but its content of bourgeois states. As the content and character of not just the UN but of the world have been determined by hegemonic imperialism, it is this hegemony that must be dismantled in order to make conditions capable of sustaining international revolutionary solidarity instead of crushing and subverting it.