/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

This is the regional military commands of the United States and the regional military commands of the People's Republic of China.

Even if you think China has a couple examples of belligerent foreign policy, how do you think these are even remotely comparable?

Meanwhile on bunkerchan….

https://bunkerchan.net/leftypol/res/1326406.html#q1326412

Why does Maoism always attract insane people? Cultural revolution, Khmer rouge, shining path etc

Thoughts on leftcom

A common theme I hear on this site is that America is losing its hegemony and is on the brink of collapse. I generally agree with the former, but I am much more skeptical about the latter. The America has been through a lot of tough shit, like the Civil War, the Long Depression, the Great Depression, and World War II, but managed to get through all of those in one piece. It has also long been an incredibly stable nation in spite of these crises, and has never come close to "collapse". People say the end of the petrodollar resulting from the loss of American hegemony will spell the end of America, but all I see it doing is, at worst, causing a recession. As I said, America has already experienced some big economic crises, so I don't see how a petrodollar crisis would be any worse. There are also issues like Global Warming and the falling rate of profit, but those will hurt every country, not just America.

Disclaimer: I am American, so I am definitely biased here.

A thread for moments when liberals discover through research something painfully obvious to anyone with half a brain.

In today's episode, liberal academics, after undertaking several studies have found that wage is a more motivating factor for employment than company philanthropy. Furthermore, they found that wages are similarly better at motivating workers. These findings are sure to send shockwaves through the academic world.

>Corporate philanthropy is not as successful at attracting and motivating workers as several recent studies have shown, according to new research, with company charity often coming out of potential wages in order to avoid cutting into profits.
>In a study published in the March edition of Games and Economic Behavior, researchers found that higher wages are up to five times more effective at attracting employees than increased corporate philanthropy, and wages are similarly more effective at motivating workers to be more productive.
https://academictimes.com/corporate-charity-can-come-at-expense-of-workers-wages/

When future people are living in a bright socialist future and they're showed history textbooks of the American Empires decline they're going to think this is fake given how cartoonish stupid it is.

The Soviets proved capable of pushing back the Nazis, so why didn't they finish the job and push the remaining capitalist scum into the Atlantic Ocean? Even the British under Churchill knew that the Soviets could beat them in war, as is evidence in their plans for Operation Unthinkable. Besides, communism was popular in Western Europe at that time, so the Soviets would have been greeted as liberators
>b-but muh nukes
Nukes were much weaker at that time, and took a long time to make. Besides, a couple more bomb drops are a small price to pay for world communism.

>We reject any attempt to undermine the political rights of the PCV and the working class. In this sense, we demand that the government of President Nicolás Maduro stops the attacks and slander aimed at criminalizing the fair struggle of the PVC and the workers of Venezuela.

http://www.solidnet.org/article/Slander-and-threats-against-the-Communist-Party-of-Venezuela-are-unacceptable.-Solidarity-with-the-people-the-workers-peoples-movement-and-the-CP-of-Venezuela/

It is interesting to see, that many prominent communist parties refused to sign this letter, although they are technically all in organized in Solidnet. Vietnam, North Korea, China, Cuba…. why didn't they signed this statement?

Let us discuss a year zero for theory.
One of the many problems of the left today is the quasi-religious reverence in which figures from the past (and more to the point, their theories) are held. Instinctively, the left sets its compass by the writings of Marx and Lenin, usually with a good dose of Stalin and Mao, and with a sort of sense of kinship with Hoxha, Tito and the rest. Beyond the year 1985 one will scarcely find a left wing figure who attracts anywhere near such universal approval. (Find for example the debate as to whether China is the world's foremost pragmatist socialist state, or just the epitome of capitalist recuperation.)
The practical problem this raises is that in order for one's analyses to be taken seriously, the perceived need is to root them in the analysis performed by historical figures, not in economic reality or in usefulness for practical organizing. As soon as it is published there will inevitably be a sophist looking for ways in which it fails to accord with Marx instead of whether it truly accords with reality so that he can "debunk" your theory by appealing to the dead hand of a great man.

It can be a point of little contention that Marx was right about a great number of things - whether you want to say 40%, 60%, 80%, 95%, or 99% is of little importance. The problem is that it is an all but inevitable conclusion that he was also wrong about some things, or simply did not comment enough. The same is true to varying degrees about every other major historical figure, all of whom are dead, none of whom were seers. They had great insight, but those that followed have tended to be more like priests than fellow analysts.

And so the slogan: Abandon Marxism - Uphold Marx! (Which could be reframed for all figures: Abandon Leninism - Uphold Lenin!, Abandon Maoism - Uphold Mao!)
By which we mean a theoretical year zero: Drop everything you know and perform an analysis of conditions as they stand from scratch. Do not cross-check how it aligns with existing socialist theory, only cross check how it aligns with reality or aids in practical organization. By such a process, rigorously applied, the truth in what historical figures wrote will inevitably bubble to the top while whatever was false or neglected will be safely abandoned, no longer able to crop up again and again because an atheist bible studies lecturer was clout chasing.

There is a secondary advantage: Such a task is dry and borPost too long. Click here to view the full text.