/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Is ableism fascist?

I look down on people who can't maintain a good diet and exercise properly and in turn into fat fucks with limited mobility. I think that the ideal leftist should be fit and healthy, and that a communist society should promote the proliferation of fit and healthy people. I don't know why that apparently makes me an ableist to some people. What does the theory say about this issue?

Okay, so it's time we look into OPSEC, because most people don't have the first clue about it.

>cell phones
Get a Motorola C123 and flash OsmocomBB on it. This is the only widely working open GSM stack for real phones. Then take a LMS7002M / AD9361, wire it to a board, with ECP5 FPGAs, LiteX SD chips, and so on for a Hybrid-SDR GSM Phone (2G wireless) which is PhD-level work because of timing mismatch and no existing glue layer. You’d basically be writing a GSM PHY from scratch. Let me ground exactly why it jumps to “PhD-level,” because it’s not just complexity—it’s specific hard problems:

1. GSM Layer 1 (PHY) Is the Real Monster
   
   

OsmocomBB handles Layer 2/3 well—but it assumes tight coupling to Calypso DSP and deterministic timing from the original RF chipset. When you replace that with SDR you must implement GMSK modulation/demodulation, burst timing (577 µs slots, exact), frequency correction loops, channel estimation & equalization and TDMA synchronization with tower. That alone is a full research-grade problem.

1. Timing Is Not Forgiving
   
   

GSM is not like Wi-Fi where you can buffer and recover. You’re dealing with microsecond-level TDMA slots, strict uplink timing advance and continuous synchronization with base station. Problem? Linux + FPGA + SDR pipelines introduce latency/jitter. So you need hard real-time logic in FPGA, deterministic buffering, possibly a custom RTOS layer.

1. Calypso ↔ SDR Interface Doesn’t Exist
   
   

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

Very dialectical
You see it here first so Paul Cockshott can't steal it

Only succdem liberals would find something wrong with it. I've explained all of these points in previous posts and ACP even took Anarcho-Stalinism which Haz called libertarian Stalinism

You will not be allowed to achieve class consciousness. they will turn this movement into another pro capitalist movement. the boomers and celebrities are already getting behind it, any talk of higher wages or lowering rents will be removed from the discussion, it's about trump. get evil trump out of the white house and then the democrats will give you all you want, only the democrats can defeat the ebil billionaires.

lol why do people keep falling for this old trick over and over? is everyone really just an NPC cattle golem?

These are issues as to why I think the Western Left will never do anything or succeed at anything. It's not exhaustive, but I do ask why other people here critical of the Western Left, think the Western Left has failed and will continue to fail to enact any sort of change whatsoever?
>Most Leftists are pretty ideologically antisocial, arrogant, elitist, do not like normies (especially working class people) and look down on them.
>Vast majority of what the Left does is ingroup virtue signalling. Every Protest, every newspaper sold, every shouting slogan, every cancellation, all anti-imperialism, isn't really done for a real purpose but virtue signalling and just group activities
>Leftists are holier than thou in the most moronic ways possible, they refuse to use modern PR, modern marketing, modern public speaking skills, Frame Communist and Socialist ideals in ways that are actually appealing and don't sound like a 1917 Larp.
>Because modern Leftism is a alternative scene, rather than a political movement, being a normal person who is charismatic, or works out, or good looking, is actually frowned upon.
>Anti-Imperialism doesn't mean anything or have any goal yet is the raison detre of the modern left.
>Anti-Imperialism never works because the left refuses to actually do anything to put themselves into positions where they have power to do anything actually anti-imperialist. It's mostly just seething and pointing at elites saying "LOOK YOU'RE BAD HYPOCRITS" while they respond "who cares?".
>Too many "Anti-Imperialists" just devolve into vulgar edgy campism. Many also seriously hope the third will will just rise up and save them.
>Shit like mass immigration is only supported because a lot of leftists are genuinely racist against white people and are wildly oikophobic and want to see "white people" suffer out of teenage level spite against boring suburban upbringings. Another is purely just a naieve white saviour complex or orientalism combined with christcuck morality that more "oppressed" groups are more moral.
>Most modern Leftists positions are really driven by peer ingroup "empathy" pressure than Materialism.
>Shitlib TikTok/TPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

Thread for news and discussions of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, its material conditions, the status and health of its socialist tradition, disproving common myths about it, etc.

Archive of the previous DPRK thread:
https://leftypol.org/leftypol_archive/res/12395.html

The world owes an apology to Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, a true proletarian anti-imperialist movement.
Apologize NOW.
(The body was too short or empty)

Peggy McIntosh is widely credited with pioneering the concept of "white privilege" in her 1988 paper, "White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack," yet she notably failed to cite the radical, Marxist origins of the term established decades earlier by Theodore W. Allen. Writing in the 1960s and 70s, Allen developed the "white-skin privilege" framework as a materialist critique of how the ruling class used racial advantages to break labor solidarity. By presenting the concept as a personal "epiphany" born of her experience in Women's Studies, McIntosh effectively erased the decades of organized struggle and class-based analysis that Allen and his contemporaries, such as Noel Ignatiev, had already codified.
This lack of citation resulted in a significant distortion of the concept’s original intent, shifting it from a systemic weapon of class war to a tool for individual psychological reflection. While Allen viewed privilege as a "poison" or a "baited hook" that tricked white workers into betraying their own economic interests, McIntosh reframed it as an "invisible knapsack" of unearned assets and daily conveniences. This transition—often described by critics as the "transubstantiation" of white privilege—stripped the term of its revolutionary potential. By centering the conversation on personal awareness and "checking" one's advantages, McIntosh’s framework allowed the concept to be easily co-opted by liberal institutions and corporate diversity programs, moving the focus away from the abolition of the capitalist structures Allen sought to dismantle.

The "transubstantiation" of radical terminology reflects a broader academic and corporate trend where revolutionary tools are hollowed out and refilled with liberal, individualistic meanings. This process, also known as recuperation, effectively "sanitizes" subversive ideas so they can be integrated into the existing status quo without challenging the underlying structures of power. Just as Peggy McIntosh shifted "white privilege" from a Marxist critique of class warfare to a psychological exercise in personal awareness, other terms like "intersectionality" and "decolonization" have undergone similar transformations. What began as structural analyses of systemic failure or demands for the literal repatriation of land are often reduced to metaphors for "celebrating diversity" or "diversifying a syllabus," shifting the focus from material change to symbolic representation.
This shift serves Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

The ox cart, is pulled by a donkey.

It could also be pulled by a man, but why mistake the man, for a donkey.

Preferred to beat either, the fallacious belief.

Instead, neither; a donkey is the same as a human, but a human could pull the cart.(Off-topic)

>treatler this, treatler that

Marx says it is unrealistic to expect workers in developed societies to live like workers in the least developed societies:

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/wage-labour/ch06.htm
<An appreciable rise in wages presupposes a rapid growth of productive capital. Rapid growth of productive capital calls forth just as rapid a growth of wealth, of luxury, of social needs and social pleasures. Therefore, although the pleasures of the labourer have increased, the social gratification which they afford has fallen in comparison with the increased pleasures of the capitalist, which are inaccessible to the worker, in comparison with the stage of development of society in general. Our wants and pleasures have their origin in society; we therefore measure them in relation to society; we do not measure them in relation to the objects which serve for their gratification. Since they are of a social nature, they are of a relative nature.

Marx denounces "crude communism" based on "envy" which seeks leveling down the standard of living and a total equality of wages rather than abolition of the wages system:

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/epm/3rd.htm
<The crude communist is merely the culmination of this envy and desire to level down on the basis of a preconceived minimum. It has a definite, limited measure. How little this abolition of private property is a true appropriation is shown by the abstract negation of the entire world of culture and civilization, and the return to the unnatural simplicity of the poor, unrefined man who has no needs and who has not yet even reached the stage of private property, let along gone beyond it.

<(For crude communism) the community is simply a community of labor and equality of wages, which are paid out by the communal capital, the community as universal capitalist. Both sides of the relation are raised to an unimaginary universality – labor as the condition in which everyone is placed and capital as the acknowledged universality and power of the community.

Marx poinPost too long. Click here to view the full text.