CarlMarks

Be ready to board a plane and get out early enough.

The first is about having money. Easier said than done, of course. If you want to be particularly secure, you'd consider having enough gold for it, as it's an inflation hedge and I would not be surprised if hyperinflation coincided with these things. Yes I know that buying gold sounds silly lol.

The second is about deciding when to fight and when to run. Not easy and a personal decision, but people who stay too long if we lose will be in a bad situation.

Yes, this is a good idea. You could also focus on the community-building aspect: these are our neighbors, capitalism has done huge violence to them, and we need to take care of each other because nobody else will. Whatever aid you focus on will likely be useful for more people than just the unhoused, which is ahain good community building.

Choose the right community to start in, too. Suburbsn rich crackerville will probably dehumanize the people you're helping and see it as harmful. I wouldn't do my first action there.

Tie your work to a larger project as well. Build a list of supporters with contact info so you can push a local electoral campaign, hold rallies to pressure politicians, etc. This will help justify and offset costs, as aid $$$ quickly adds up and you will need donations and all opportunities to build power.

Hilarious

Nostalgic nationalism

Red alert! We have an advanced history understander here.

Please notice me

The key is to make fun of them. They are not serious people deserving of respect and they don't respond to argument or fact.

When things ramp up, socialists may need to flee (or get jailed/killed).

It's happened many times before. Also, the fash don't understand our divisions so they'll go after everyone vaguely left. Example: Indonesian DemSocs thought they'd be spared under Suharto since they persued 100% legal and "friendly" means. They were very wrong.

Spend time with comrades, get organized, agitate, snd have an exit plan.

There's nothing to debunk because the claim itself is based on an absurd level of ignorance, they don't even know what they mean by the word communism, and it makes no sense for it to be "tried". The only consistent references that could almost make sense are these

• Communism as a theoretical state of being (classless etc society) posed by ~~me~~ Marx (and some others) as the eventual project and outcome of the dictatorship of the proletariat. As such, it has never been "tried", it can't be "tried", it is more of a goal or state of being rather than a strategy you can adopt. Plus, that project requires that the capitalist class be deposed by the working class such that efforts in that direction could be enacted, which unfortunately has been limited by the extreme and violent reactions of imperialists. It's difficult to do that project when you're just trying to survive the sanctions and wars.

• Communism as in a country run by a communist party. This has been tried, and to great success, with fantastic improvements in quality of life for those living there. What failures we do identify largely fall into two buckets: (1) targeted for destruction by imperialists and they were forced to succumb or (2) fell apart through the former and internal failures to build a robust political system, e.g. someone like Gorbachev should never have even been near the reins of power. Both can be criticized, but neither can be chalked up to, "oh dang commies can't run countries". Alsi, the largest real economy on the planet is run by a communist party and overcame over a century of colonialism and then industrialization to do it.

But really, someone saying this isn't even speaking the same language as us. It's really a conversation between two clueless liberals: one that simplistically craps on "communism" and it "failing" (without pointing to anything concrete) and the other liberal trying to say things like, "well real communism has never been tried".

In both cases, they're in need of a basic education, starting with, "what is a communist?"

I guarantee you that it is blatantly rooted in orientalism and treating 1 billion Asian people as either agencyless victims or buffoonish idiots, and it's never questioned that crackers "joking" about him a yellow cartoon character would be a problem. This is a longstanding trope with roots in Western "race science".

You can also find it in the ethnic rhetoric used against Russians at the moment - "savages", "hordes", "orcs", and the classic false trope of sending masses to die as an attritional strategy (the last one also being literally Nazi rhetoric). You also saw it in the anti-brown islamophobia after 9/12.

When the US wants to target an enemy, they have very little trouble playing on the unquestioned racism of their audience. They often don't even think it's racism at the time - or even afterwards unless sufficiently embarrassed.

FDR was a communist,

I'm actually implying that he was an anticommunist and that The New Deal was an attempt to mollify more radical elements, including militant labor.

If communism is so fucking great why does it fail all the fucking time hey?

Communist countries, i.e. those run by a communist party, have consistently punched above their weight, particularly considering the relentless attacks they face.

For example, compare the struggles of Haiti to those of Cuba. Haiti has suffered under neocolonialism and with basically zero counterweight to the constant imperialism directed at them, including still being forced to pay debts to France for their own liberation from a slave colony and undergoing several Western-supported coups, on top of the constant drain of resources and underpaid labor that come with the territory of exploitation by international capital.

Cuba, despite blanket sanctions and constant targeting by the global seat of capital for over half a century, provides massively better lives for its people, with better literacy and infant mortality than the US. It's still a poor country, understandably, but it teaches a simple lesson about how international capital actually functions for imperialized countries.

Happy to answer more questions.