/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Why did european socialists surrender their nationalist credentials to a bunch of we wuzing porno addict larpers post 1989?
>In the 40 years of People's Poland, we became an industrialised, urbanised, maritime country. The western and northern lands were reclaimed and developed. Revolutionary reforms and socialist transformations freed society from social injustice, unemployment and illiteracy."
>On 29 July Stalin asked Bolesław Bierut, the head of the Soviet-aligned Polish government, to accept in consideration of the large American concessions. The Polish delegation decided to accept a boundary of the administration zone at "somewhere between the western Neisse and the Kwisa". Later that day the Poles changed their mind: "Bierut, accompanied by Rola-Zymierski, returned to Stalin and argued against any compromise with the Americans. Stalin told his Polish protégés that he would defend their position at the conference."

spaceflight doesn't seem very popular among leftists recently. what does /leftypol/ think about it? are the moon and mars just playthings for billionaires? will china do anything differently? is socialist thought relevant to future lives beyond earth or is it all just a scifi obsession?

>"Soviet Union would achieve the full communism in 1980!"

Was Khruschev delusional, or was he a liar who knew he wouldn't have to answer for his words in 1980 due to being dead from old age?

Reading Lenin's works in order is one of the most depressing things. By 1922 he basically admitted that the Soviet Union's state apparatus is a "bourgeois and tsarist hotch-potch" and he previously described it as a state taken away (not smashed) from tsarism and "slightly anointed with Soviet oil."

<It is said that a united apparatus was needed. Where did that assurance come from? Did it not come from that same Russian apparatus which, as I pointed out in one of the preceding sections of my diary, we took over from tsarism and slightly anointed with Soviet oil?
<There is no doubt that that measure should have been delayed somewhat until we could say that we vouched for our apparatus as our own. But now, we must, in all conscience, admit the contrary; the apparatus we call ours is, in fact, still quite alien to us; it is a bourgeois and tsarist hotch-potch and there has been no possibility of getting rid of it in the course of the past five years without the help of other countries and because we have been "busy" most of the time with military engagements and the fight against famine.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1922/dec/testamnt/autonomy.htm

This site is full of Tankies.

remember Stalin killed all the bolchevique leaders that were key to the revolution and photoshopped pictures to remove them.

Lets have a place for serious marxists to talk.

The USA is entering similar conditions to those seen from 1968–1972. These include imperial overreach, the normalization of acts of terror domestically, general disdain for the aging ruling class, stagnating wages, and open talk of civil war.
The main difference between the two periods is this: Gen Z has far more worse material conditions than the Boomers ever did, but at the same time far fewer direct casualties from proxy conflicts. American People aren’t dying in Venezuela, and probably won't unless the rest of the Manduro's party mobilizes the country.
Trump knows that if there is ever a draft, or if US troops start dying in large numbers, that would be the final breaking point. This is why he carried out the swift, public kidnapping of Maduro.
He understands that the US is in a crisis of capitalism, and as a result he is using, and has been using foreign threats (including the tariffs ofc), as an outlet for the interal crisis.

He is deverting internal class conflict within the US, outward onto the rest of the globe.

The main question that should be asked is this; since there is not a general organization of labor like the boomers had, will this cause a rise into smaller, but much more revolutionary organizations?

>the rightoids are calling for an increase in violence
>the liberals are calling for more peace, civility, trust in institutions and VOOOting
>nihilists suddenly show up to tell everyone that everything is doomed, nothing is happening and nothing can be done

If all 3 previous conditions are met then there's a 100% chance that things are indeed happening and its now you duty as a communist to take advantage of the momentum in any way you can. Thanks for reading.

The body was too short or empty. The body was too short or empty. The body was too short or empty. The body was too short or empty. The body was too short or empty.

(a) Anarchism has brought nothing but general phrases against exploitation. These phrases have been current for more than 2000 years. The main problems with anarchism are:

(i) an inadequate understanding of the causes of exploitation, namely the understanding of private property as the basis of commodity production
(ii) a lack of understanding of the laws of development of class society, especially capitalist society, leading to socialism, namely the role of mass-organized industry and production under capitalism
(iii) an insufficient understanding of the class struggle as the basis of the movement of society
(iv) the denial of politics in bourgeois society, namely the subordination of the working class to bourgeois politics under the guise of a denial of politics.
(v) misunderstanding of the role of organization and revolutionary education

(b) Individualism is the foundation of the entire anarchist worldview, namely:

(i) protection of small property and small economy on land - especially small agriculture
(ii) denial of the unifying and organizing power of revolutionary organization
(iii) denial of democratic centralism and majoritarian-Bolshevism.

(c) Anarchism is bourgeois individualism in reverse. Anarchism is the product of the despair of the unbalanced intellectual or vagabond, not the proletarian. The anarchist tactic of refusing political struggle separates proletarians from world-changing historic praxis and turns them into passive participants in bourgeois politics.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

Intellectual production is the media, education, art, etc, that is created in a society. Since intellectual production is a direct extension of material production and because we are in the capitalist mode of production, the bourgeoisie heavily influnces and almost entirely controls intellectual production.

I feel like the internet has changed this although, since everyone has a voice, from the capitalists to us; as a result, I don't know if this definition of intellectual production by Marx still fully applies, idk.