Such programs continued unperturbed during the First Trump Administration, when a touching project meant to increase transgender visibility in Ukrainian Fashion Week was funded through USAID’s program to “Enhance Non-Governmental Actors and Grassroots Engagement” (ENGAGE) in Ukraine:
…
Don’t worry, homophobes and transphobes; as long as capitalism exists, there will always be a “non-governmental organization” that will be willing to exploit the LGBTQ+ community and “sex workers” for corporate interests.
Vladimir Lenin, as a revolutionary and Marxist thinker, approached most topics through the lens of class struggle, materialism, and the broader social and economic systems. While he did not write or speak extensively about love as a personal or romantic concept, his views on human relationships were likely shaped by his Marxist perspective.
Here’s how Lenin might conceptualize love, based on his ideological framework:
Feminist theory is not just flawed thinking; it is the product of a middle-class view of the world. In the prosperity of the 1960s, radical feminism was marked by its extreme utopian nature. Demands like “smash sexism” and “abolish the family” abounded—with absolutely no program that could win them. Since feminists rejected Marxism and with it the one class that actually has the power to revolutionize society, their utopian maximalist rhetoric dissolved inevitably into the most pragmatic minimalism. In fact, because the reformist strategies of the ’60s—above all the overwhelming support of feminists for the Democratic Party—failed to bear ample fruit, a fertile ground for cynicism was laid. The root of the current feminist support for the thoroughly capitulatory Dworkin is the cynicism born of defeat.
Hello Bolsonaristas who follow me here. Shall we try to learn? Soros is not a COMMUNIST. He financed the FALL of Communism in Europe, and is proud of it, read his text: George Soros and the Fall of Communism in Europe. He preaches the opposite of Communism: Global Governance to access all markets. capisce?
To this must be added the following general consideration.
An oppressed class which does not strive to learn to use arms, to acquire arms, only deserves to be treated like slaves. We cannot, unless we have become bourgeois pacifists or opportunists, forget that we are living in a class society from which there is no way out, nor can there be, save through the class struggle. In every class society, whether based on slavery, serfdom, or, as at present, wage-labor, the oppressor class is always armed. Not only the modern standing army, but even the modern militia—and even in the most democratic bourgeois republics, Switzerland, for instance—represent the bourgeoisie armed against the proletariat. That is such an elementary truth that it is hardly necessary to dwell upon it. Suffice it to point to the use of troops against strikers in all capitalist countries.
But we did not build this society in order to restrict personal liberty but in order that the human individual may feel really free. We built it for the sake of real personal liberty, liberty without quotation marks. It is difficult for me to imagine what “personal liberty” is enjoyed by an unemployed person, who goes about hungry, and cannot find employment.
Real liberty can exist only where exploitation has been abolished, where there is no oppression of some by others, where there is no unemployment and poverty, where a man is not haunted by the fear of being tomorrow deprived of work, of home and of bread. Only in such a society is real, and not paper, personal and every other liberty possible.
Ms. Cat’s Chronicles 
You must be logged in to post a comment.