>>158654>First of all it is not true.
Give 1 example of a rich country other than the United States that doesn't have universal healthcare.>after getting rid of almost all production sector dues to being able to move it overseas
That happened in most other rich countries to varying degrees. Also, most rich countries that adopted universal healthcare did so before outsourcing became a big thing.>most of the money that comes into USA is due to USD being main currency of the global market and shitload of intellectual property (that WTO will force you to accept if you want to trade). Meaning that economic power of workers is almost zero, therefor their political power is about the same.
Hmm, not sure what to think of this one>Now fuck off and go read some Marx.
Most of things you mentioned didn't exit in Marx's time>>158657>But Social Liberals like FDR adopting Keynesian Policies met their end in the 70s and the failure of these Social Liberals to adopt to this Reality has allowed Conservative Neoliberalism to still dominate the scene with a giant Monopoly on Mass Media and penetration of both Parties.
But FDR never went as far as your typical European social democrat did.>>158661>The former is clearly an act of class warfare by the middle class and the nascent bourgoise to take control of economic power from either a feudal order, a state-capitalist government or a proletariat dictatorship.
That isn't really how liberal revolutions work anymore. The bourgeoisie is already in charge everywhere.>Meanwhile a colour revolution most of the times doesn't actually serve an economic interest for its participants, only for its foreign sponsors at best, but instead focuses purely on superstructural issues of perceived wrongdoings of the state, or due to internal powerstruggles that more resemble the war of the roses rather than an actual revolution.
Are you referring strictly to glowie revolutions in non-US-aligned countries, or are you referring to something broader?