/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

https://theponzipapers.substack.com/p/i-have-set-myself-on-fire-outside
https://theponzipapers.substack.com/p/dipshit-secrets-of-our-rotten-world

Aight fellas, lets use our chan-tism to dig into this rabbithole.(Shit-Stirrers Pruned)

Emphasis on red. Haven’t seen one of these on here and need a solid leftist redpill thread. Keep the neat infographics to yourself, and post poorly scanned classified documents, images that look like they were made in gimp, or based excerpts. The purpose of this is to have propaganda to send to normalfags and dumbshits. They need easily digestible content.

Marxists and other leftists are ultimately idealists because they have unrealistic aspirations that contradict how this world works on a material basis. Marxists like to believe that their predictions are founded on dispassionate analysis that foretells how history is inevitably going to unfold, that capitalism's contradictions will bring about a revolution for worker's to seize the means of production, but in actuality Marxism at its root is founded on wishful thinking. The origin of your analysis is your dislike of your circumstances, not a desire for truth. You then formulated a prophecy to ameliorate your distress. Your analysis is merely a post-hoc rationalization (cope) for an endresult that you've selected beforehand. Your conclusions are strongly biased by that.

If your political ideology doesn't provide benefits to those with children or try to be of appeal to those with families and children, don't be surprised if your politics fail to haul in much popularity. Parenthood mandates that the parents must believe in the future, and that they must make the world sufficiently decent for those who come after. Is this group not the natural ally of the progressive revolutionary Communists? And what does it say about your ideology's goals, if people abandon it once they have families and people that they must provide for? The revolution always requires the consent of the masses, so don't delude your thoughts into the foolish idea that needed are only small numbers of fanatical fascists and anarchists, because the movies are very often fictional and idealistly, and the history bears out the constant failure of isolated lone wolf tools.

The argument of the video goes:
>mayor of Brussels bans fascist rally
>fascists whine about it
>the victim narrative attracts people
>they do the same thing to the left using this logic
Like, I'm just not convinced that this is what would happen in real life. It certainly makes for a compelling Christian tale, but if there is one thing to take from the post-WW2 history of the Left, it's that political suppression makes you more likely to be (surprise) politically suppressed. They're not wrong that there needs to be a solution to the problems leading people towards fascism, but one of those problems is the fact that fascists are allowed to run rampant without being repressed or humiliated.

Historically, when fascism has taken root in countries like Italy or Germany, it was in large part because the political institutions of those countries were unwilling to beat them up and make them fuck off or supported fascism. I'm no Stalinist, but if you punish fascists, take away their media platforms and break up their gatherings, you can probably keep them from power. Antifa had the right idea during the pre-pandemic time when they would go to protests and show resistance. The Left should be making noise about fascists being allowed to go out in public in the first place and advocating for the state to be used against them if we already know that in the nearest conceivable future there probably won't be a huge revolution sweeping across Europe. Would it keep fascism from sprouting? It would probably still exist. But suppressing it and keeping it away from power is a good idea. Victim narratives don't actually give you a power-up, if your guys get chased away and go home, they won't magically rise up and throw away everything they have. Make them feel unwelcome, make fascism feel repulsive to the average person, and keep people away from it with the threat of state violence. It's not a pretty or long-lasting solution, but it is what our institutions and communities should do and what the Left should advocate for.

Looking for resources on squatting, i.e. websites or pamphlets or books, in the United States. I've been navigating through the squat.net website, but didn't find much resources there except for a couple pop-up shops in Seattle. Curious if anyone online had a reason for this. Are these squatting efforts in the states just not-existent, or are they more localized to private chats and local groups? Thanks.

Music is the biggest lie ever told. Every day, it suckers people out of millions of dollars and untold hours of time. It springs from an infantile desire to be comforted by a mother's lullaby. Music keeps the masses enslaved.
Why do you listen to music? Is it a crutch to get you through the day? When you go to a concert, what on earth do you get out of it? Do you feel "warm fuzzies" when you are walking out of the building? Maybe it makes you feel all happy inside. Well, the real world isn't like that. Music has no answer to the problem of evil. As long as you are a listener, you have no chance of fully participating in a rational discussion.
Ask a professional musician (professional shamster, more like) why he plays his kind of music instead of another and you'll never get a straight answer. What makes a clarinet better than a Japanese koto? Why play jazz instead of classical? "I like it more." "I'm more familiar with it." Non-answers. "They're about the same." Then why play music at all?
Musicians tell you they love their fans… then they sell the T-shirts and CDs at the door. Some even take donations– as long as they can separate the marks from their money, their gig is a success. Music is nothing but an organized scam.
From the beginning of a child's life, her parents indoctrinate her to believe in a myth called "music". They force her to believe that certain arrangements of sounds is somehow more important than other ones. Never in the history of humankind has a more insidious waste of time and money been conspired. Start her on Baby Mozart; buy her "children's music" (the very name betraying the unethical, Orwellian scheme); raise her on piano and jazz, and buy her a Beatles CD on her 16th birthday. The most popular songs lie to you: "All you need is love." Others are simply nonsense: "Bye, bye Miss American Pie." Some songs have no lyrics at all! They do not even make an attempt at meaning. The veil is lifted; the stupidity of the whole exercise is transparent before everyone, and yet they continue listening as if brainwashed.
When I point this out to the thoughtless listeners, they tell me not to argue with something so "beautiful". Can't they see that they are wasting their time on mere noise, that rarely says anything akin to common sense? "Well, Shakespeare, he's in the alley / With his pointed shoes and his bells, / Speaking to some French girl, / Who says she knows me well." What on earth is that supposed to meaPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

Let's talk about boba liberals. That name is so funny to me it sounds just like boba tea. Boba liberals, drinking boba tea, and being stupid ignorant liberals just as they always are.

https://lhsepic.com/9893/in-depth/the-rise-and-fall-of-boba-liberalism/

From what I've seen in most places in Europe the parties are revisionist, disorganized, irrelevant and engaged in the politics of liberal democracy.
The ones who are not revisionist are also barely relevant (perhaps even nonexistent outside the internet) and practically hidden from the public.
Are there any parties from former Eastern Bloc states worth joining today?

I'm peculiarly curious about countries like Bulgaria, Albania, Serbia and Germany. Most of what I can find on the internet shows that whatever 'communist' parties have been left have begun collaboration with nationalist christians and liberal socdems among other bourgeoisie filth in the hopes of gaining relevance once again.
Is there no party left unaffected by the likes of eurocommunism and religious liberalism? Solidnet has a lot of parties listed, but which are worth joining? http://www.solidnet.org/home/

Why are Communism and Marxism as "ideologies" borderline synonymous? Why is it that Marx's economic analysis of 1800s capitalism is treated as an essential building block for how we overthrow capitalism in the 21st century, as though to dispense with his analysis is to dispense with the end-goal of communism as such?
I feel like I often see a trend of reasoning that runs, simplified, that only Marx's analysis renders the collapse of capitalism from internal contradictions and the arrival of communism historically inevitable. But that seems like pretty weak reasoning: If he's wrong and it's not historically inevitable, why give up on it!? Why not try to work towards it instead of waiting for history to do all the work?
Maybe it's just because I've been a frustrated social engineer all my life, but it doesn't seem in any way intuitive to me that one should abandon the notion of a classless, stateless, and moneyless society just because one also accepts Keynes' view that fiscal policy can mitigate capialist downturns, or rejects the tendency of the rate of profit to fall, or indeed, even if one accepts neoliberal doctorines, any more than one should abandon the notion of flying on the grounds that the theory of gravity says earth will try to pull you down again. Theory only tells you how the world works, it's then on you to deploy it to make the world work the way you want it to. Why is there no major branch of leftist ideology which operates around this seemingly obvious principle?

You might say it's because Marx's analysis is so obvious that everyone who reads it agrees - and maybe that's true - but most self-identified communists don't actually read him beyond the manifesto, so that cannot be the explanation.
You might say "oh you mean Ancoms?" but a lot of Ancoms seem to run with Marx's analysis of capitalism - just not with Marxism-Leninism as an overall ideology.

I'm not saying Marx is wrong, don't waste time arguing he's not wrong. His rightness and wrongness -indeed the rightnes and wrongness of any theory - is irrelevant to this thread.
This thread is about the relative absence of a certain kind of person and analysis. If you want the dilemma clearly: "Why does the marketplace of ideology not have any non-Marxist communists in stock?" If you want the dilemma in pretentious economic terms: Why is "Normative" Marxism ("what we should do") so dependent oPost too long. Click here to view the full text.