/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

I've been on this site long enough to get a superficial understanding of Marxist politics, but I've officially passed the Dunning-Krueger peak, where I've realized how superficial that knowledge is. So in an attempt to deepen my understanding of the subject, I have a few questions.

People say that gradual reforms won't work, with the cited reason being that, so long as the bourgeois element is allowed to exist in any significant capacity, it will burrow its way into government and reassert control. But doesn't China disprove that? Their entire plan is to gradually reform their market economy into "full" socialism.

On that note, from what I understand, "capitalism has inherent contradictions that will lead to its downfall" is really just a fancy way of saying that the relationship between the bourgeois and proletariat is an antagonistic one, and eventually the proletariat will get fed up with it and assert control. But is this actually a given? I could easily see a scenario where technology allows the bourgeois to assert permanent control, using robots to replace the proletariat and surveillance and weapons to quell any opposition. I could also see the opposite happening, where capitalism keeps rewinding itself to earlier states indefinitely, creating a situation where life is "good enough" that people don't feel the need to rebel.

Dialectics in general confuse me. Every time I think I have a grasp on them, I'll have someone else loudly proclaim that I'm wrong. If I ask for correction, the explanation provided is so long-winded and convoluted that I end up with more questions than answers. Can someone please give me a basic, working definition of what dialectics are in the context of Marxism? They seem so fundamental to Marxist analysis, and without understanding them, I don't feel like I can actually properly understand any of what I'm looking at.

Finally, I frequently hear people say that we're going to be entering a China lead multipolar world order. That sounds like like a (logical) contradiction to me. Doesn't the term "multipolar" imply multiple leaders?

Note that I don't ask these questions with any ideology in mind. I find much of what I read here incredibly confusing, and my ignorance has been punished enough that I figured it's high-time I do something about it.

>inb4 read a book
I plan to do that as well. I just thought I'd come to you guys so I have a startinPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

The more you read into the history of Stalin and Trotsky and their respective followers, the more you will realize that Stalin was right and Trotsky was at best an idealistic retard and at worst a literal fascist collaborator that literally wanted Nazi Germany to destroy the USSR.

Trotsky was basically an Osama Bin Laden type figure that railed against Stalin because Stalin didn't immediately abolish the state, abolish the family, pursue muh "permanent revolution" aka embroil the USSR into ill-fated wars and other idealist bullshit that had no basis in the actual material conditions of the time. How dare that Stalin works worth the material conditions and historical context and develop the state to advance proletarian interests – it's all "bureaucracy" and Trotsky is out of power so therefore Stalin must go and he must literally be assassinated (This Trotsky advocated for).

After all this it becomes clear the justification for Stalin's "purges" of these terrorist assholes trying to destroy the USSR. It's amazing that the USSR survived WW2 and constant subversion from these pseudo-fascist retards. It's a testament to Stalin's strength and competence that this is so.

got mad having to constantly hear from stirnites so i made this to cope. how the fuck does an ideology like this even continue to exist?

literally every time someone even says something pro-com, there's always a fucking stirnite in the corner of the room chuckling to themselves, waiting for their mom to call them home for chicken nuggies and appy juice

🗽UNITED STATES POLITICS 🦅

<HH Happy Holidays Edition

>May Lenin awaken the workers and help them to see the necessity of revolutionary civil war in the United States.

🛠️ Strike Tracker ⚒️
https://striketracker.ilr.cornell.edu/

🇺🇸 Deeds of the Burger Reich 🇺🇸
https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/main/us_atrocities.md
https://williamblum.org/essays/read/overthrowing-other-peoples-governments-the-master-list

📺 Glowie News 📺
(sponsored by the Burger Eagle Freedom Institute (formerly USAID))
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>To my mind, the so-called “socialist society” is not anything immutable. Like all other social formations, it should be conceived in a state of constant flux and change. Its crucial difference from the present order consists naturally in production organized on the basis of common ownership by the nation of all means of production. To begin this reorganization tomorrow, but performing it gradually, seems to me quite feasible. That our workers are capable of it is borne out by their many producer and consumer cooperatives which, whenever they're not deliberately ruined by the police, are equally well and far more honestly run than the bourgeois stock companies.

- Engels, Letter to Otto Von Boenigk In Breslau, August 21, 1890

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1890/letters/90_08_21.htm

"I can't help but believe that in the future we will see in the United States and throughout the Western world an increasing trend toward the next logical step, employee ownership. It is a path that befits a free people." - Ronald Reagan?!

https://www.cesj.org/about-cesj-in-brief/history-accomplishments/pres-reagans-speech-on-project-economic-justice/

This is a thread about organizing cooperatives. It is not about debating the merits or lack thereof of cooperatives. I understand there are critiques of cooperatives, and how they are not enough to bring about proletarian revolution. The same is true of unions, but I still support the creation of unions and worker-owned cooperatives as part of a multi-pronged strategy.

Resources (feel free to add)
https://www.theselc.org/cooperatives-resources
https://www.theselc.org/bite-sized-law
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

someone also replied with this

>My grandparents are like that, they have photos of Abdel Nasser and his family in their living room, treating him like a Saint. But if you were to ask them anything about actual Arab nationalist philosophy, they wouldn't know. All my grandparents know is that things were better back then, my Granddad would be provided a job that supported his family and there wasn't any filth on the streets. To a large extent, things were indeed better back then and that's just how it is for most people, these people believe and worship the State and the Leader, they don't give a shit about Ideology. As long as it's not openly 'heretical' to the values of people, the masses will believe in it

Redpill me on Radio Free Glowrope.

Please provide sources. I will buy everything you say but have in turn libby friends to convince.

I'm personally more interested in what they're up to right now than their historical background. The short and sweet of the latter is by the way nicely provided by wikipedia, which however doesn't say much about the current state of things (which may be for the better).

<Radio Free Europe was created and grew in its early years through the efforts of the National Committee for a Free Europe (NCFE), an anti-communist CIA front organization that was formed by Allen Dulles in New York City in 1949.[17][18] RFE/RL received funds covertly from the CIA until 1972.[11][12]

Why is it that the quote "The right looks for converts, the left looks for heretics", applies so well? Will the left cease to grow in the West for another century? Will there be a left wing revolution in this decade?

I'm not even a Leninist nor do I find Lenin's pamphlet particularly enlightening, but how the fuck do the majority of self-described Leninists misunderstand imperialism as an action that a state takes, instead of it being an economic system, like this is still basic Leninism. It's legitimately baffling, how do these pseuds think the division of the world among capitalist powers being complete is a policy. How the fuck is that even a coherent sentence in the context of a policy, Lenin is so obviously talking about a stage of global capitalist development and not a fucking action.

What are your thoughts on Türkiye?
>inb4 k*rds
They are US-backed and financed. The real threat to America and the wect is a Turkish-Russian-Chinese-Iranian axis.