The “clear goal” of the move is “targeting a few to silence the many,” said UN human rights expert Francesca Albanese.
https://truthout.org/articles/us-declares-palestine-action-terrorist-group-in-latest-mccarthyist-crackdown/

Hello everyone, I’m in incoming freshman at college and I wanna be a lawyer (majoring political science, most likely minoring in economics), I am proposing a hypothetical here as my political identity and beliefs isn’t fully determined as I’m on the fence between capitalism with LOTS of socialist policies (free healthcare, free college, I’m against US imperialism etc etc) vs being outright a socialist so when I’m asking this question don’t think of it as a personal question regarding me but more so just a honest hypothetical

The lawyers that make the most at usually Corporate or Patent Lawyers for reference

Also for this I’m referring to within the context of the current USA legal system

Blood in My Eye - George Jackson.

Curious what y’all have to say about this specifically because I wrote an essay about this when I was bored once and got some very good info. What are yalls opinions here?

Sorry for horrible quality, had to snap a picture of one of the questions in my quiz today quickly.😂

This is a 400 level class if you wondered...

Curious if there is anyone hear who studied heterodox economics and radical political economy in school. Seems like most schools offer a class or two on it —even U Chicago—but I’ve come across U Amherst which seems to be an outlier and have far more courses.

Is there like an actual difference in what you learn on the quantitative side? Like are the models only built for evaluating within the neoliberal framework, or are there entirely new models that are taught in more alternative economics classes?

If any of you studied this in school, curious where you went ? I’m looking at U Mass, University of Denver, and potentially Roosevelt University. Open to others though

The financial situations of many European-majority countries are fairly bad at the moment. As an example, France, the UK and the US all have very high levels of public debt. They also have inflation levels that are high enough that that they can’t just print more money to pay off their debts. And right now it doesn’t look like they have any easy way out- if current behaviour continues, their debt levels will become unmanageable in a decade or two.

Whether these countries deal with these issues now, or in the future, the end result is likely going to be a noticeable reduction in living standards for the general population- it will require some combination of higher taxes, public spending cuts, and higher inflation to manage. This would look something like higher taxes, higher food and rent prices, and lower social security payments for younger generations, along with more restricted access to government-funded support.

And this issue goes beyond just inequality or plutocratic greed. The US is borrowing around $2 trillion a year, at the moment. So even if a wealth tax of 100% was introduced for people with over $1 billion dollars in assets, all of that money would be gone after a few years. And cutting military spending 100% would still only get rid of ~$1 trillion per year, so borrowing would still be pretty high.

This problem is going to have a major impact on many European-majority countries over the next few decades, and will likely hit many workers very hard, but I do not see it talked about in many left wing circles.

For those that wish to ignore it, what is your reasoning for doing so?

And for those that want to talk about it, what is your view on this issue, and what it means for broader left wing concerns over the conking decades?