/edu/ - Education

>Third-Worldism
Third-Worldism is another term for Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, or just Maoism, which situates imperialism as the "primary contradiction" of politics; hence it focuses on people's protracted conflict and the task of nationalism more than class warfare in general; viewing the working class of a ruling hegemon as exploiters of the so-called "Third World" (a sociological term invented during the Cold War to distinguish between the Western First World, Soviet Second World, and undeveloped Third World of geopolitics - so the term "Third World" isn't really applicable today). Practically, Maoism splits the workers' movement into racial grievances against "White People". We can say that the Left has largely substituted Marx for Mao today.
>Third-Positionism
Well, as a Classical Liberal, I consider myself "neither" Communist or Capitalist in orientation, so perhaps I am of the Third Position. In Dugin's "Fourth Political Theory", he counts Liberalism as the First political theory, so that may disqualify it, if we take his authority. In terms of various strands of Fascism, we can compare them against each other more than we can compare them with each other. Gentile and ᴉuᴉlossnW develop Fascism from 1919 onwards as a type of political Hegelianism which they term "totalitarian" by the maxim "all within the state, nothing outside the state". It is radically hostile to any individualism, yet still grants personality in the state Sovereign. It is above all a philosophy of "action" (which we see in Mosley's British Fascism symbolised by the lightning bolt). National Socialism is codefied in 1919 also, by Rudolf Jung, and gives precedence to race and volk more than a political state. Before ᴉuᴉlossnW and Hitler's partnership in 1936, ᴉuᴉlossnW was anti-racial, but afterwards, was a Darwinist, such as we read in the "Manifesto of Race" (1938). So, Fascism was originally non-racial, but unifying in its Nationalism, while Hitler was purifying in his racialism. This is a great divide. Nonetheless, both men believed in life as a violent struggle, which often alludes to Nietzsche's sentiments, but not his conclusions.

>>26296
>What is Third Worldism
It's a strand of maoist thought that considers the "primary contradiction" to be held in the globalization and imperialist characteristics of capitalism, rather than class struggle in the developed countries per se.
Mao's view on contradictions was that they existed into everything, and that at a given point in time there was always a primary contradiction and secundary contradictions, which rested upon the former. Any changes in a object for him reflected the evolution of contradictions, between opposing characteristics with potential to overcome one another. For instance, a lion requires food to live but also risks his life whenever he hunts. The other dilemmas that a lion can face are secundary to the sustenance of his livelyhood (primary/secundary contradiction).
Based on this theory of contradiction, third-worldists think that the "primary contradiction" in modern-day capitalism is the need to export labor in third world countries to have low-costs, whilst simultaneously keeping their conditions inferior to western countries. According to them, if the living conditions in the third world increased, or if the capitalists were unable to export labor there, they would not be able to keep their profit margins and would collapse. Therefore, according to third worldists, the primary issue shouldn't be emancipating labor in the first-world, which they see as contingent on the third world's exploitation, but rather the emancipation of third worlders from first-world capitalists.

>What are your thoughts on Third Positionism?
Doesn't work. You can't reconcile the interests of the working class with that of the bourgeoisie because you either have to abandon for-profit commodity production or retain it. There's no "in-between". This is a simple issue really : you can't simultaneously have workers decide production (otherwise production would be socialized) whilst also allowing the bourgeoisie to decide it aswell. In essence, you can't have 2 bosses telling you 2 different goals and directions. Historically, third-positionnists have tried dividing property up or having strong unions but the logic of capital has so far always been able to overcome these hindrance.

it's when people from the third world exist, or when someone says something nice about the third world like that they shouldn't be killed. meow