[ 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: 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

File: 1626725215807.png (64.62 KB, 200x156, 1626691709425.png)


If cuba goes to shit once socialism falls people will say that socialism worked, if cuba becomes better off that's gonna be the final piece of evidence that suggests that socialism doesnt work


Moved to >>>/b/108401.

File: 1626484991919.jpg (254.43 KB, 2048x1365, 0bf9-2014115-church-dundas….jpg)


>0 fucking mass protests riots or crime
>No ones fucking interested in interacting with each other and learn to stfu and mind their own buissness
>its actually fucking quiet for most of the day meaning you can think for yourself
>easy fucking access to easy and decent paying jobs
15 posts and 4 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


imagine getting your face fucked 24/sev by a billion mosquitos and blackflies. couldn't be me haha, excuse me while i go get some local amenities within walking distance and take a ride on the robust public transport system


File: 1626494475827.jpg (166.29 KB, 1024x682, 20160515CREXPLAINER-slide-….jpg)

After the Great Canadian Proletarian Cultural Revolution you will be marched into the boreal forest at gunpoint to toil alongside the lumberjacks and nickel miners.


How would a socialist revolution even work in canada?


I'm genuinely curious, considering it seems like the Canadian left is deeply divided on the Quebec question. It's kind of funny how the Canadian Maoists are against Quebec independence while the more moderate parties seem more willing to accept it. If any of you guys would like to discuss it, I'd be very interested hear more about the Canadian left and its various factions and prospects. Also rip the FLQ I guess
t. American who has visited Ontario multiple times, but otherwise knows jack shit


File: 1626721363833.jpg (309.05 KB, 1399x933, 90ep1a9oax121.jpg)

t. never had riots on his street

File: 1626643649931.jpg (8.07 KB, 275x183, download.jpg)


Does anyone have that video of the choir singing 'my country tis of thee', but it's being played over images of American capitalism and decayed American culture? Preferably a YouTube link please.


File: 1626643824271.webm (3.93 MB, 680x400, greatest_country_of_the_w….webm)

Don't know if it's on youtube but I have the webm. Also next time you ask for things like this make a thread in /b/, this doesn't really deserve its own thread


YES, THIS ONE Thank you so much!

File: 1626633391626.jpeg (182.55 KB, 960x684, 6091.jpeg)


What makes turkey so loving and accepting of refugees compared to the rest of the planet?
34 posts and 7 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


fuck bro, well RIP cause Afghans are way worse then Syrians
they can survive in the Mountains on there own for decades and they many have heroin addictions and sneak firearms in


Turks hate syrians,it's a fact.

it's honestly shocking to see because most turks have this image of us being a welcoming and warm people and how our ancestors (ottomans) were the most tolerant ppl on the planet etc while absolutely despising syrians lmao


salak orospu


File: 1626711855645.jpg (69.6 KB, 480x480, 1626704815553.jpg)

>it's honestly shocking to see
No it's not

Turks hate syrians for legitimately valid reasons. Syrian refugees have a track record of not actually integrating, showing anger towards turks overall for their influence in syria, committing crime as they are an impoverished minority, and having a culture that would've made sense a long time ago but is considered outdated today in turkish society


Bargain? No, turkey would love to join the EU but not under EU conditions, the EU stopped the process, but then since NATO attacked many ME countries, Turkey took the refugees, as a process to join the EU. Now the EU doesn't want to take the refugees, and turkey uses them as a political leverage.
It's like you think those refugees came from parachutes from the skies for no reason. Turkey is doing wrong, but they are not alone in the process of creating a refugee population to have a "bargain" or "threatening" tool for eurofools.

Turkey is not an EU member.
EU members are: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Republic of Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden.

Some other countries could have multiple treaties beyond simple good relationships.

If you have to cope with the millions of refugees turkey has to deal with, I don't think even Germany would be able to have them in homes. Your point about "wE mUsT hAvE tO bUilD hOmeS REEEE" is just a coping situation from liberals worried about those poor immigrants arriving in the le-free world, but of course, they don't care bombing some innocent children in a dusty place they don't have empathy with.

File: 1626535099182.jpg (30.59 KB, 444x332, ba1906909c55fc6dd918f412b8….jpg)

 No.383737[Reply][Last 50 Posts]

Radlibs be like,
>Socialism failed in days or months.
<So brave. Omg, that's true communism. Fuck the USA with their imperialism overthrowing leftists.
>Socialism works
>lifts millions out of poverty
>raises living conditions
>defends the revolution for decades
>100% literacy
>inclusive democratic institutions
>consistent >90% approval rating of citizens
<Ummm sweetie, that's authoritarian dictatorial state capitalism.

If you don't support AES, you're a lib.

That is all.
110 posts and 11 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


> Anarchists are infantile leftists who haven't read the science of Marxism-Leninism so let's MURDER them.
> Why are people comparing us to fascists?


I refuse to have sex


File: 1626692281460.jpg (37.86 KB, 750x745, laughing emoji mask.jpg)

>the Soviet Union is all but officially reformed


Why didn't the KGB coup the United States instead?


Nice guys to respectable to peace.

File: 1626204728329.png (95.33 KB, 2216x1248, ZrhCiI7.png)


You got any theories on what a balkanized america would be like? For me I would believe southerners would be the big winners with trailer trash and ghetto negros being able to move away from state funded social securities and move towards industrialization and tighter border laws and anti abortion measures leading to rapid population booms for southern proles while the west coast remains an corporatized shithole ran by neoliberal advocating for open borders with canada and the north
64 posts and 12 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


CIA China hawks, antileftist factions want the current US government to collapse. Of course, many Federal agencies are populated by people with leftist or centrist leanings, some armed or capable of organizing weapons production. They will organize a counter revolution. Military divisions defect etc


Also Mossad psychos would assist right wingers.


It wouldn't balkanize along current cultural boarders it would just be what local war lord's would be able to capture, meaning the borders would be geographic and would possibly just be one group taking over the whole country. There's basically no way to predict what the boarders would look like or how many war lord's their'd be because that's highly dependent and how and why the balkanization happens and international reactions to the conflict.


there can be no feudalism if there is nothing left. alhamdulilah the only thing america deserves is to sink into the ocean.


>Then why are you here?
To shit on your circle jerk bitch.

File: 1626649069077-0.png (264.25 KB, 539x369, 1.png)

File: 1626649069077-1.jpeg (156.19 KB, 880x531, 2021.jpeg)


How should communists celebrate this holiday? Under socialism how many scoops of ice cream will be free on this day?

New pic edits are welcome.
4 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.


Leftists don't like sweet things. Leftists are savorychads and bitterchads. Ice cream is cloying decadence.


>ywn taste Soviet ice cream


Baked chicken is good tho


File: 1626656979000.jpg (31.47 KB, 505x490, 215.jpg)

>how many scoops


Chinese celebration of NICD: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOmcnlmg7n4

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