I’m not going to have time so I’m just going to write this quickly. (Most, if not all, of this will not be new to you. And this is for real life rather than online.)

So it goes something like this…

1. Understand that charm happens when a person feel they are valued

2. We are going to take the genuine position that people are generally intelligent enough, and they intelligently seek narratives that they perceive is beneficial to them (from a marxist perspective, benefits their material conditions pertaining to their class). We will be appealing to their valued intelligence

3. Understand we may not “convince them” but that is not the purpose here, it is about establishing acceptable boundaries of discourse using prinicples they have agreed to ie a sort of immanent critique

4. Number 3, however, is not about “winning them over through establishing their hypocrisy”

5. Think of 3 like this: we may talk one way to parents, another way to your boss, another way to coworkers, another way to friends etc. It’s not hypocritical to do so. They are different “languages” we use for effective daily communication. We are establishing the acceptable anti-imperialist “language” with yourself.

6. Understand you are going to transgress and that you’re not going to do it by “sneaking” it in; remember number 2 - they are intelligent

So working with the fact they already consider “the genocide is real” and that the US goes to war for oil, we can then with them establish:

• it sounds insane but watching the genocide live has turned folks pro-stalin
• we watched a genocide live on our phones and watched the media, acadaemia and state fund/arm/run political cover - we know we are being lied to as we are watching it
• we know the they lied about the reason for the Iraq war - there were no weapons of mass destruction, they did it for “oil” and there are 1 million plus deaths including from ongoing radiation poisoning using depleted uranium
• we know they have lied about every war they have been involved in; they make atrocity proaganda to justify their war
• however, we are still expected to believe every propaganda they make about every single war and all their enemies
• and part of the reason they expect us to go along because we have relative privileges afforded to us as westerners; we at some level benefit from not being in the Global South
• but they have erased the part of history that explains why we have this sense of middle class in the first place
• for centuries there was wealth being generated by workers but workers never got signficant leverage to get a fairer slice of what was taken from them. They petitioned, went on protests and burned down factories but had little to show for it.
• after 1918, across the whole of the west, they got leverage - they got pensions, healthcare (omit if US), weekends, child labour laws, maternity laws, education was more univeralised etc
• so what leverage did they gave they never had before? western workers were able to do this because the leveraged the Soviet Union, the first worker’s state, to threaten domestic revolution
• and this forced investment into “human capital” and upskilling of human labour accelerated the computer science age
• so a state that has lied about every war it has been in is clearly going to do its best to prevent workers from learning how they got that leverage in the first place
• that worker’s state was led by anti-slave leader - Hitler was going to turn Slavs into slaves, and use their land and people to generate wealth for Nazi Germany insspired how the US did it with Manifest destiny and then chattel slavery
• Stalin not only led the defeat against Nazis - he helped wipes our three-quarter of the Nazis and was responsible for saving the most Jews (there’s a reason why Russian is one of the most popular second languages in Israel)
• and he did while under siege from the west and turn a country with about 90% illiteracy to begin with and farming with hand tools, to the first to launching satellites
• but it wasn’t just the west who used this leverage. The worker’s state was so effecgive the Global south used it to gain nominal freedom from formal colonisation, and some countries used the threat of communism to gain concessions from the west for massive investment to stave off socialism
• this was such a real threat to western imperialism that the US went to the ends of the earth to kill socialists, the Jakharta Method where the facilitated the killing of half a million indonesians was an infamous example
• going back to the US, the state even gave concessions to black folks during the civil rights movement because of the threat of marxism spreading like wildfire amongst the descendants of slaves - the state was forced to be more progressive than western civil society, who even after brown vs board was won, carried on with the lynching
• without knowing anything further about Stalin, but knowing we have been lied to about every war especially an ongoing genocide, we know they will be lying about a historical figures that gave workers around the world so much leverage
• even now with the Epstein files we know they are not scared of anyone but communists, it’s communists that are the only real threat and must be purged
• there is no western leader in history with such an impressive resume
• an anti-slave leader who defeated the Nazis, turned his country from illiteracy to space faring, while being the leverage for both western and global south workers against the western imperialist state. No western leader comes even close
• it’s 2026, we are going to find more and more folks openly coming to the same conclusion with everything we know now it is no longer acceptable to hold on to atrocity propaganda fed to previous generations but somehow we are still less progressive than those folks after 1918 who used that leverage to gain concessions, we can’t be less progressive than them
• to be truly anti-imperialist and against the genocide in the 21st century is to be pro-stalin

The above is the outline. Arm yourself if not done already - someone’s already mentioned this - reading both books by Losurdo: on Stalin, and on Liberalism.

You have now set the tone of what is acceptable discourse around you and remember a key rule: positive achievements beats explaining the negative of atrocity propaganda. Everytime you feel you have to explain the latter hit them with a good outcome (eg holodomor - it’s not good enough simply to say it’s Nazi propaganda, it is much more important to say it was the last famine + socialist countries had more calories per person cosumed that capitalist countries with similar stage of development + took wealth from rich farmers and gave it to the poor)

All the while you are doing this you are appealing to their intelligence of seeing through current propaganda and appeal to the collectiveness that many people are in the same boat as them which led them to the pro-stalin conclusions. Stop short just shy of sycophancy; it is charm not subservience we are aiming for.

Hope that helps.