Casual homophobia coming from libs as usual

That doesn’t make all feces equal. Two shits can be disgusting and one can still be clearly more tasty than the other

Abstract moralism is the luxury of those shielded by imperialism. To condemn Iran in a vacuum like you do, is liberal idealism. The material reality is a state under constant siege by U.S. capital and its Zionist proxy.

While the Islamic Republic is problematic, its resistance objectively fractures imperialist hegemony. Orthodox Marxists offer critical support: we defend Iran’s sovereignty against sanctions and regime change as a blow against the imperial core, while maintaining political independence from their theocratic policies. We can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time.

To ignore the principal contradiction (Imperialism vs. Oppressed Nation) is social-imperialism.

Pentagon preparing for weeks where decades happen

Your liberal idealism mistakes imperialist coercion for “choice” and bourgeois metrics for human progress. The USSR lifted semi-feudal societies to industrial superpower status, defeated fascism, and guaranteed work, housing, and education as right ,not commodities. Contradictions like bureaucracy or Lysenkoism were real, but Marxist-Leninists criticize these as deviations under imperialist siege, not proof of socialism’s failure. The “thriving” of post-Soviet states is measured in GDP for oligarchs and EU core capital, not working-class wellbeing: deindustrialization, demographic collapse, and dependent peripheral status followed the “shock therapy” you praise. Ceaușescu’s lavishness was denounced by Marxists as a betrayal of socialist principle, not its essence. Central planning, imperfect under blockade and scarcity, achieved historic gains without colonial plunder. Your argument conflates the degeneration of a besieged workers’ state with the emancipatory project itself. The lesson isn’t retreat to capital, but to advance the struggle with clearer theory and firmer proletarian democracy.

On an article to article basis dependent on the context. Not as the entire outlet like you suggest. You’re intellectually dishonest to yourself if you do

Whether you like or dislike a source is a personal reaction that doesn’t determine its factual accuracy

Why are you making up what I think?

Because it’s essentially what you’re saying in subtext. You’re free to clarify

I realized that I wrote “state media” when I meant “state-owned.” The media you listed are state-funded, while TASS is state-owned.

Yet either way you try to (re)define it both reflect either states ruling class bias and you arbitrarily decide to dismiss one of those and didn’t even realize about the existence of the other.

I’m saying that some sources are worse than others.

And I’m saying it’s a logical fallacy to dismiss it in it’s entirety, as there exists context where these sources of information are valuable.

State media is biased towards it’s ruling party/class and therefore not trustworthy. I’ll assume whatever media source that confirms my bias is trustworthy

Sounds like an echo chamber

Also

US don’t have state media

PBS, NPR, CSPAN, VoA, RadioFree, etc

Parenti and Chomsky to some degree argue that private corporate media is closely aligned to state interest, due to its intertwining with intelligence services

Your comment reveals a lack of media literacy. There is a fundamental difference between Russian outlets like TASS and RT, which are state-controlled, and Fox News, which is corporate-owned. State media acts as the direct voice of the government, whereas corporate media answers to advertisers and owners. This makes the bias in state media far more explicit regarding national interests; their agenda is transparent. Conversely, Fox News still operates within a framework of journalistic standards and market competition. It contains valuable context depending on the situation, so dismissing it entirely is a mistake

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Republic_of_China#/media/File:中華民國爭議領土-en.svg

You say both are bad yet you default to only trust western sources

No, please enlightenen me. @Cowbee@lemmy.ml posted more than one source, so you have to be specific.

Critically thinking is when Im provided a well sourced argument but I dismiss it as propaganda

Propaganda is when I read something I dont like

+10 piefed social credit

If Israel treated Muslims in Gaza the same way as China does in Xinjiang (providing education and citizenship), Netanjahu would be hailed to no end

If China is a democracy, what opposition parties and media not related to government are in there?

Democracy is if you have political parties, the more you have the democratier it is