[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music ] [ meta ] [ GET / ref]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internets about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Password (For file deletion.)

| Catalog | Home

File: 1626754045979.png (192.42 KB, 500x500, y75c6o7gp7c71.png)


I don't see POC complain about ”oppressive governments” and ”totalitarian regimes” to the same extent as these white radlibs do around the clock, maybe if they left their cushy basements and went to the third world and noticed that anarchism wouldn't bring about the instantaneous change that they think it'd, then they wouldn't peddle the nonsense they do. There are regional difference in the extent of which anarchists have formed varying large movements, but nowhere to the scope of necessity for change. At bottom, the issue is that they don't grasp the power dynamics, even by their recognition power is asymmetrical. Bakunin, Kropotkin, et al. tried to come up with theoretical projects to find universally valid solutions to the asymmetries of power and authority, and while they had some contributions to make, they didn't have the insights of political figures like Lenin.


> i don't see POC complain about same issues anarchists do
>what is Magonism
>what is Anarkata
Sage for mindless secretarianism.


lol newfag can't sage


> but nowhere to the scope of necessity for change
Chile 2019



does literally ANYONE know who Magon is? I'm not trying to be inflammatory but he seems to be somewhat forgotten even in Mexico

File: 1626619753405.png (242.38 KB, 1202x1024, Central Asia Map.png)


Seeing that there is no dedicated thread for this part of the world I'm just gonna create one. Feel free to discuss anything happening in this part of the planet here.

I'll start with two things:

-Afghan war situation as of today:

-Kyrgyzstan nationalising an important mine run by Canadians


Know absolutely nothing about Central Asia, but I'd like to know more. I've heard from Hakim, among others, that there were legitimate problems of Soviet chauvinism in the region. Would you all still say that Central Asia was better off under the Soviets?



File: 1626712214174.jpg (74.74 KB, 900x476, RW.jpg)


Anyone pls recommend good/quality left wing news sources to me? Cause right wing media's basically everywhere and I'm kinda "informationally disabled" bcs of that!

7 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


t. seething westoid imperialist


Consortium News
The Analysis News - Paul Jay's & co's new group after Real News was turned into MSNBC Lite
Black Agenda Report
Redacted Tonight - good at finding stories that are weakly reported on, though pretty lame since the pandemic started
WSWS - often does actual journalism and covers stories others aren't, but watch out for their cultish sectarianism of course


Greyzone, mint press, payday report, black agenda report, wsws, naked capitalism


I've been using RT for years, but I mostly just read the headlines


How’s the supporting of military junta going for ya?

File: 1626704447951.jpg (44.45 KB, 640x827, 1626652161061.jpg)

 No.387648[Reply][Last 50 Posts]

What is your justification for not owning a firearm or a weapon for self defence like a knife, spiked bat, molotov cocktail, sledgehammer etc?
104 posts and 21 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


>Did you know that Maduro the president of venezuela made it completely illegal to own firearms for ordinary citizens but allowed some to have their guns back under the condition that they supported him into power?
Maduro is actually cultivating an entire volunteer citizens militia in which everyone is permitted to have a firearm, so this point is moot. Ordinary citizens can have firearms, while pro-imperialist enemies of the state can't, which is honestly how it should be. I'm in support of gun ownership, but providing arms to your enemy also serves no purpose whatsoever besides personal feel good points.


File: 1626737376969.jpeg (7.96 KB, 300x168, download (2).jpeg)

So pretty much anyone that isnt aligned with Maduros beliefs cannot be permitted to defend themselves? Kind of reminds me of something


>So pretty much anyone that isnt aligned with Maduros beliefs cannot be permitted to defend themselves? Kind of reminds me of something
Yes, and that absolutely makes sense politically, particularly in the situation Venezuela is in regarding US intervention. In a situation where a western coup is a real possibility, you arm your allies, and disarm your enemies. Even the US does this domestically in its own way, though it can do so in a more nuanced fashion due to its already extensive state security apparatuses that allows it to defuse things before they even begin.
>Muh Tiananmen square
Did you know that man was actually escorted away rather then being run over.


>>388544 >>388554
Elimination of slavery in the British Empire actually did require extensive violence on the part of its Navy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiSekII0sjw


My landlord would realize I'm a socialist and kick me out.

File: 1626733502446.jpg (130.17 KB, 703x895, 1619741856152.jpg)


>"To the german people, since the foundation of the Reich, for 43 years, it was my and my ancestors hot endeavor to keep the world at peace and to, in peace, support our powerful development. But our enemies envy the success of our labor. All of obvious and secret hostility from east to west, from beyond the sea, we have endured in the awareness of our responsibility and might. But now they want to humiliate us. They demand that we watch with crossed arms as our enemies prepare for a malicious attack. They can't bear that we, in determined loyalty, stay with our allied comrade, that fights for his prestige as a great power, and with whose humiliation, also our power and honour will be lost. The sword has now to decide. In the midst of peace the enemy attacks us. So take up arms! Any wavering, any hesitation would be treason to the fatherland. It's about the existence of our Reich, that was founded anew by our fathers. About the existence of german might and german spirit. We will defend ourselfs to the last breath of man and steed. And we will endure, even in a world of foes. Never was germany defeated when it was united, forward with god, who will be with us, like he was with the fathers."


Kaiser Wilhelm was such a weird faggot


Moved to >>>/b/108536.

File: 1626708234174.jpg (232.93 KB, 1300x858, 20210719_172313.jpg)


what happened to the rebellious youth of the 80s and 90s? Lack of things to rebel against? Not cool anymore? Government subversion? It doesn't make sense that a counterculture like that that was taken for granted as a consequence of society just siddenly dissapeared and that people these days just want to lie in bed and jack off? Maybe it has morphed into something else but I honestly don't see it. Seems like everybody today just wants to "reform" and "bring about change" There is no more militant vulgar anti society outbursts that existed before.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't think this is in any way useful or constructive in the leftist sense, but I believe there is some kind of romantic appeal to the whole "rebel without a cause" thing. I ceel like there are less and less people who want genuine absolute freedom and most just want to change small specific aspects of society. The call of the 21st century is justice. not freedom from rules and norms. You can see it by the movements that do exist (antifa,black bloc, BLM, and various smaller militant movements)

I remember a thread about it back on lainchan and ever since I was wondering about this. What are your takes?
16 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


Maybe, just maybe, capitalism is literally the most fricking awesome system and people no longer fall for anti-capitalist propaganda because they have access to impartial sources thanks to the internet?


File: 1626726075941.jpeg (41.91 KB, 742x560, 1622844213997.jpeg)



>normalize misogyny
Lmao, corporations and the media constantly shill woke progressive feminist bullshit, you delusional neon-haired lesbian


I'm talking about rap music and while I'm not fond of libfeminism, I do think feminism is needed in society


It was reaction to a very vulgar conservatism overtaking politics (neoliberal conservatism of Regan, Thatcher et. al).
Under Trump Antifa grew and became well-known in daily normie discourse.

File: 1625003332172.jpg (48.87 KB, 252x244, fag enabler.jpg)


So I've been reading Lenni Brenner's "Zionism in the Age of Dictators"

Brenner was Jewish, A Trot, and good Friends with Stokely Carmichael, together they founded 'The Comittee Against Zionism and Racism'

In the book, Brenner spells out, in detail, the relationships between the Nazi and Fascist movements and Zionism. He discusses the similarity in ideology, and the Zionist mindset, which he contends is anti semitic, as it inherently sees Jews as a people who will always be othered, and must therefore have a state of their own, rather than assimilating. (This is a tldr of the whole much more fleshed out idea).

As well as this, as I said, he documents their material relationships. As it turns out, the Nazis in a huge way helped build Israel, through the Haavara agreement, a trade deal which saw huge amounts of German capital flow into Israel.

to quote Brenner:

>The top limit through the Ha’avara scheme was 50,000 marks ($20,000 or £4,000) per emigrant, which made the

Ha’avara unattractive to the richest Jews. Therefore only $40,419,000 went to Palestine via Ha’avara, whereas $650
million went to the United States, $60 million to the United Kingdom and other substantial sums elsewhere. Yet if, in
terms of German Jewry’s wealth, Ha’avara was by no means decisive, it was crucial to Zionism. Some 60 per cent of all
capital invested in Palestine between August 1933 and September 1939 was channelled through the agreement with the
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
19 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


Zionism is itself antisemitic, hence why fascists support it.


Israel is as democratic and egalitarian as it gets. Like 30% of Israel's population is Arabic and they have the same rights as Jews. They can study, not get stoned to death, work, etc.
Israel is more leftist than any fascist Muslim shithole.


File: 1626579707968.png (103.67 KB, 316x316, jewish idf.png)



This guy hits it exactly on the head.

You might also say: Israel was founded on the back of the holocaust and its surrounding mythos (not calling it a myth), it is accepted in the global mindset as the refuge for a downtrodden and victimised people, however during that Holocaust, the Zionists shirked at almost every stage their self proclaimed duty to protect world Jewry. Early on, they essentially wrecked boycotts of Nazi goods by American jews and so on. Then they started the above mentioned trade deal with them, certain sects of Zionists also called the "revisionists" (lol that their actual name not just him calling them revisionists) were also outright fascists, who believed ideologically in blut und boden -blood and soil-. Though they were a minority, they were still influential, and one of them, the leader of one of their incarnations, became Prime Minister of Israel after the war.

Anyway, during the war, the Zionists preferred making deals with the Nazis, sacrificing non zionist jews so that zionist jews could be saved. In many cases, such as in poland, the Zionists collaborated openly with the Nazi regime, becoming leaders of Jewish Councils set up by the Nazis to keep the ghettoes in order.

All of this despite the fact that most Jews around the world at the time were assimilationist, that is, they wanted to be absorbed into their country of residence.

Also, because of quotas on immigration set by the British, and upheld by the Zionists, their were price tags on getting in and so the working class were left behind.


Israel is a US military base

File: 1626701390947-0.png (2.3 MB, 2280x1570, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1626701390947-1.png (2.65 MB, 2280x1080, ClipboardImage.png)


what's the Marxist census on Oliver Cromwell, he killed the king and abolished the monarchy 150 years before the French revolution, promoted based on merit rather on birth, all which is based
but he turned England into a Military Pertain Theocracy and the whole ethno-religious cleansing of Irish Catholics

I know Cromwell used to be very strongly admired by British lefties. They viewed him as a symbol of historic English republicanism and therefore a hero to the British left but , however In the later 20th century up until today, British lefties started embracing more progressive values of course, and in particular started cosying up with Irish republicans. So now the British left by-and-large despises Cromwell, The British right is a mixed bag. Most are disdainful of him because he is obviously an anti-monarchist figure, and Tories shag the queen and royal family in general. But there is a minority of Brits on the right that acknowledge what a big role he played in strengthening parliament and therefore British democracy in the long-term, and praise him for that
19 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.


Whoops, didn’t mean to sage


I don't like him per-se but I respect him in a way I respect figures like Mullah Omar, I despise 99% of religious people and don't even find them that interesting but figures like Omar and Cromwell are men of pure will, who truly did believe in what they preached, for better or worse
I can admire that


Well I don't agree with the great man theory and idealism in the /his/ image. The bourgeoisie revolution was inevitable, and probably wouldn't have been meaningfully delayed, even in the Charles wins alternative timeline.

And he's surprised that a king believed in the divine right of kings. Of course he did, that's how (the ruling) ideology works.


It was always inevitable, but I doubt any historian even could have predicted a puritan Military dictator
Cromwell didn't make self king cause he believed in Republicanism, rather his religious ideology of "No Kings but Christ" the only people who supported were members of the New Model Army


This is why there should be a better thread archive, because there was a decent thread on this on the old Bunker boards some years ago.

File: 1626676970964.jpg (86.33 KB, 1280x720, maxresdefault (1).jpg)



>From the department of “They sold that for how much?!” comes today’s story, about an Italian artist who, for the cool price of €15,000 ($18,300), recently auctioned an artwork that is… well, nothing.
13 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.


It's been that way for awhile, just look at the digital economy. I guess it's even less now because at least the code for a $20 mount in WoW had to be created once.


File: 1626701318413.gif (152.55 KB, 322x394, kackel-troll-face with hat.gif)

>its money laundering
confirming this
>The consumer has purchased a feeling of smug satisfaction.
lol, image related


Yes, the value discussed IMO isn’t irrelevant to the process of exchange, but is fundamentally a phenomenon grounded in production. Because it’s not a measure of monetary prices so much as time. The worker has to toil extra time to make the money which feeds their boss.


The LTV is no match for stupidity


File: 1626726071086.webm (1.18 MB, 320x240, 1465559228079.webm)

>capitalist shits themselves
>"But how does Marxism explain this?"

File: 1626602316279.jpg (68.53 KB, 750x665, d2536dc5bd60d92e449861701c….jpg)


I can never quite figure out what Saddam Hussein's regime represented and what it's place in history is.

Most socialists, including Michael Parenti and the hosts of Blowback season 1, paint a picture of Saddam as a mostly opportunistic, non-ideological (except viciously anti-communist) power-hungry dictator who was backed by the CIA and the west until it was no longer convenient for them. This is based on alleged CIA involvement in the Iraqi Ba'ath party's rise to power, support for Saddam's crackdown on the Iraqi communist party and leftists within his own party, and weapons and intelligence provided to Saddam by the west during the Iran-Iraq war.

But this is complicated by the facts that the US also covertly supported Iran during the war, that many countries on both sides of the cold war provided support to both Iran and Iraq, and that Saddam's Iraq was a pretty close ally of the Soviet Union for most of it's time.

Hakim for example (the Iraqi communist youtuber) seems to have a mostly positive view of Saddam and has said that "he was good for Iraq." They are few and far between but there does seem to be some socialists/communists who view Saddam, not as a western puppet who later became a nuisance, but as a semi-socialist left-wing nationalist who was an ally of the Soviets and represented resistance against the US and Israel.

Thoughts? I'm looking for some more nuanced discussion here and not necessarily just if he was "good" or "bad" or "based" or "cringe."
24 posts and 4 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


he's just a nationalist social democrat in the model of Nasser


His vice president was a Kurd


File: 1626720844857.jpg (22.68 KB, 450x300, April_Glaspie,_Sadoun_al-Z….jpg)

Divide and rule. If you read about the U.S. relationship to Saddam in between the Iran-Iraq War and the Persian Gulf War, the U.S. was sending diplomats to buddy up with him, and telling him that his border dispute with Kuwait (which apparently involved slant oil drilling) was none of America's concern, because "we also have our experiences with colonialists."

Context there is that Kuwait was split off from Iraq by the British Empire when they were pulling out, so Saddam saw Kuwait as a colonial artifact. But then he invaded Kuwait and gobbled it up, and the U.S. then went to war with Iraq.

The theory that made sense to me about how this happened, is that the U.S. plays this "tilt," "signal" and "lean" game with countries. The U.S. will "tilt" toward one country, and then "tilt" toward a rival to keep everyone off-balance. So, the U.S. backed the Shah, and when he was overthrown, the U.S. switched sides and supported Saddam, encouraging him to attack Iran. Then during the war, the U.S. discretely (until their cover was blown) ran guns to Iran and used the proceeds to pay Nicaraguan Contras in the "Iran-Contra" scandal. Then once the war was over, the U.S. tilted back toward Iraq.

So the question is, did the U.S. sign off on a full-blown invasion of Kuwait or not? One theory is that Saddam misinterpreted the U.S. "signal" or just had enough of America's games. There's no evidence that the U.S. gave the signal for a full-scale invasion, they just said the border dispute / slant drilling stuff was not America's business, signing off on a limited border incursion, but Saddam going for the whole thing embarrassed the Bush administration and, therefore, he had to pay. This is what the U.S. ambassador told Saddam:

>We have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait. I was in the American embassy in Kuwait during the late 60s. The instruction we had during this period was that we should express no opinion on this issue, and that the issue is not associated with America. James Baker has directed our official spokesmen to emphasize this instruction.

Christopher Hitchens also wrote about this back in the day, when he was more of a leftist. It's interesting to read it:

>Saddam quit the game—he’d had it with tilt and s
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.


You can read about it in William Blum's "Killing Hope" there are a couple of sections on Iraq in it. I would go and find a page reference, maybe I will become bothered. I think there are 2 maybe three chapters (ranging from like 5-10 pages each) on different periods of CIA involvement in Iraq in the that book and it tells the story and is generally pretty well cited so i'm sure its in there. If you really abuse me and call me a liar I might get mad enough to go find the reference but trust its there. I've posted it here before a couple times

You can also watch Michael Parenti say it, although admittedly I haven't seen a source for that video, but when is P daddy wrong? Pretty much never.



Okay so its in here and i was wrong there are 2 specific Iraq chapters but I think Iraq is also included in the "middle east 1957-1958" chapter as well

Delete Post [ ]
[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music ] [ meta ] [ GET / ref]
[ 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 9 / 10 / 11 / 12 / 13 / 14 / 15 / 16 / 17 / 18 / 19 / 20 / 21 / 22 / 23 / 24 / 25 / 26 / 27 / 28 / 29 / 30 / 31 / 32 / 33 / 34 / 35 / 36 ]
| Catalog | Home