[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

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

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon
leftypol archives

| Catalog | Home

File: 1676765771946.png (146.3 KB, 1488x629, deng on khruschev.png)


Educate me on the Sino-Soviet split.

what is the Chinese perspective on the Sino-Soviet split?

What is the Soviet perspective?

Were the Chinese simply angry that Khrushchev "tore up agreements" like Deng said in that one interview (picrel), or is there more to it?

What led to the Sino-Soviet split?

Were both the USSR and PRC at fault?

Who bears more responsibility for the Sino-Soviet split?

What good books would you recommend to learn about the Sino-Soviet split?
79 posts and 19 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


>limited border tensions in a context of geopolitical disagreement that in good part started because of ussr hindering chinese access to nuke while acting like the ceo of socialism justify nuking their ass
retaded and frankly undefensible position


Lmao you are shameless arent you


Again, Mao wanted to join USA since 1944, what nuke access you are talking about? You are inventing reason to justify chinese agression and they all look fucking petty. USSR saved China's ass from Japan and had zero gratitude for that. Of course tehy were reserved in sharing access to military secrets with someone who was looking to ally with imperialists all the time they were helping them.
Stop projecting, traitorous bitch.


Ok the sinophobic left calling China a capitalist country in 1950 is just too much.


Rightoids always try to play victim when they have no argument. Dengoids are literally no different from /pol/yps who screech about huwite genocide.

File: 1677634197021.jpg (13.47 KB, 312x275, 1673323359121.jpg)



>…the story of capitalism is of a sclerotic system. As Robert Brenner has shown, since the 1970s falling rates of profitability have led to a decline in rates of economic growth. What happens when global economic growth slows, capitalists don’t invest, and the great worker-capitalist compromise collapses? What is to become of democracy once its material foundations die? “I think we’re living in a period where there is a hegemonic crisis of capitalism, but there’s no answer to it because the left is so weak,” Riley said. “Gramsci pointed to some aspects of this in his writings on Caesarism – there is a crisis of authority, and it’s not clear that either the right or left are proposing a way to break out of this, and so you get an extreme personalisation of politics and the emergence of the Caesaristic leaders like Trump or Meloni.”

<In the context of this degenerate hegemony, Riley thinks there is a transition underway to what he calls “political capitalism”, whereby capitalists move away from investing in production but use political means to generate and increase their profits, such as deploying police powers to evict tenants who fail to pay the rent, securing monopolies over intellectual property rights and using legislation to enforce the interests of capital. In many ways, this notion of politically enabled expropriation – what Marx called “extra-economic” exploitation – resembles recent definitions of neo-feudalism associated with economists such as Cédric Durand.

>How should the left respond? The issue for the left, as Riley sees it, is that it has become far too focused on redressing past wrongs at the expense of proposing solutions to the problems of humanity. “I don’t want to be dismissive of either Black Lives Matter or other mobilisations for redistribution, but there is no alternative for what a new kind of society as a whole would look like. What rushes into the vacuum is the concern over justice, and the problem is that justice is firmly backward-looking in its orientation. It’s not that justice is unimportant but it cannot be the lodestar of a project of a new society. As a strategy, it makes the left seem like a group of moralisers, which is not a political winner. Leftists would do well to remember that point, and more genera
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
6 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


I was paraphrasing, but it's from the preface of "A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy.
>No social order is ever destroyed before all the productive forces for which it is sufficient have been developed, and new superior relations of production never replace older ones before the material conditions for their existence have matured within the framework of the old society.


isn't this a case for acceleration?


Not exactly, recall:
>[…]a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes.

Without building working class power, we will face common ruin.


Not really. It's just a statement that you can't build a new society until the old society has created the proper conditions for its own destruction. Whether or not it has done so is very often outside of anybody's control.


All I can do is get the best deal for my client or say fuck this we’re going to trial. I can’t just make up the law. I can’t pavlov the ADAs unless it goes on appeal and I win. ‘Justice’ is inherently reactionary to the laws promulgated by those in power who create the law. I sure as shit am not one of them and it’s not like we are going to ‘just vote!1!!!’ our way into the current political structure. To have this discussion at the higher conceptual level is to have the ‘revolution when?’ discussion all over again. To think electoralism will fix it is a farce. To think those prosecuting or writing the law will fix it is to be Charlie Brown with the football. To think i could fix anything on my own is a farce. I can’t even pay my bills on appointed cases. The avenues for appeal are minimal. The dockets are overloaded. Everyone is out for a buck, you can’t unionize any of them here. It’s all pointless except for the struggle and when I know I actually helped someone. I don’t really know what else to say.

 No.1380268[Reply][Last 50 Posts]

How did it get this bad? It’s not like the problem with obesity in the USA hasn’t been terrible since the 2000s but still this is concerning to look at
142 posts and 22 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


>capitalists are not the problem
You glow


Don't know how real this is but http://achemicalhunger.com/ seems to suggest its chemicals


lobbyists =/= capitalists
Blaming lobbyists is a liberal answer.


apparently there's a golden ratio discovered by corporate food scientists. If you can achieve a certain ratio of sugar to hydrogenated vegetable oil, with the complimentary flavor and texture, the subject will eat far beyond satiation compared to a subject eating unprocessed food. Decades of research went into making the population obese.


Mixing sugar, salt and fat all three together has been a disaster for the population.

File: 1676136818149.mp4 (3.13 MB, 720x1280, Shapiro.mp4)


What's the deal with minorities siding with reactionaries? It seems to be getting much more common, is this just another example of based-cringe dialectics? With black people not wanting to be the cringy, leftoid bluepilled BLM supporter so they turn to reaction to be the based black man and one of the good ones? I mean look at these comments.
54 posts and 11 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


economic factors are the main driving point but it's also fallacious to reduce everything to it. People can have a right to do something like have an abortion but due to cultural reasons not have one which is an aberration of ML 'worldview' Marxism which reduces everything to matter, biology and economics which considers culture as a spook instead of something to democratise, which is a incentive for people to inclined to socialism to be free from wage slavery, so they can pursue their cultural values such as art and spirituality not force everyone to be a atheist philistine fedora tipper and eradicate all personality.


File: 1678134574962.png (44.51 KB, 500x514, black2.png)

Conservative minorities are over-represented online VS real life, just like white /pol/tards. The reason is white boomers love black people to say conservative anti black shit so they subscribe and pump up black conservative channels.

Black republicans are <10% of all black people in America but they've gotten good at gaming the YT algorithms. They're basically just doing the social media version of Candace Owens


best reply in the thread

It all goes back to class. Those black reactionaries are all petite bourgeoisie or bourgeoisie or hope to use their youtube channel to become petite bourgeoisie. Most black people who have to actually experience the black lived experience know better than to trust republicans even if many hold conservative beliefs


File: 1678138826873.jpeg (11.82 KB, 226x223, images.jpeg)

>black lived experience


File: 1678148433918.mp4 (2.36 MB, 640x368, white asian.mp4)

They were conditioned to have an inferiority complex from a young age about not being "white". Instead of rejecting the whiteness like anyone else that's experienced racism, they've accepted it as something to strive for as a coping mechanism


>noooooooooooooo you can't just do vulgar anti-imperialism

>noooooooooooooo you can't just cheer on rival non-hegemonic countries…

>w-what if they became the hegemon, HUH?!?! you should act like they already are! Just to be-s-safe!

>nooooooooooooooooo you can't just say imperialism is the primary contradiction

>noooooooooooooooooooo you can't just heckin make a distinction between the flippin comprador bourgeoisie and the national bourgeoisie

>noooooooooooooooooooooooo you can't just acknowledge unequal development and unequal exchange as the basis for unipolar hegemony

>nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo you can't just say multipolarity will result in more bourgeois infighting, giving socialists opportunities to seize power without as much fear of unipolar coup-mongering

>you have to heckin denounce [insert non-NATO country] for [insert something the imperial core is allegedly more progressive about but not really]

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
89 posts and 32 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


Multipolarist imperialism is better for the communist movement (not the proletariat in of itself, they're gonna be even more wrecked by civil wars and shit) than unipolar imperialism, but both are imperialism.
Sabocat said something along the lines of that, Russia nowadays is like Japan in the 1900's, trying to face western imperialism for it's own benefit, but we all know how that ended up, in Japan allying with the axis.
Western communists are so weak and so full of despair that their best hope is waiting for Russia to become imperialist. Because if Russia (and China) become imperialist, it will be on direct conflict with the west even harder than before and will have the political will to actively oppose it, like Germany did during WW1 giving rise to the first communist country in the world.
That's the hope that multipolaristas have.


Oh things for you in america will be more Rwandan Civil War than First World War



File: 1678077218446.png (27.92 KB, 446x396, ClipboardImage.png)


>The third camp, also known as third camp socialism or third camp Trotskyism, is a branch of socialism that aims to oppose both capitalism and Stalinism by supporting the organised working class as a "third camp".

>The term arose early during World War II and refers to the idea of two "imperialist camps" competing to dominate the world: one led by the United Kingdom and France and supported by the United States, and the other led by Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union and supported by Fascist Italy.

>Dissidents in the Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party, witnessing the collaboration of Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler in the invasion and the partition of Poland and the Soviet invasion of the Baltic states, argued that the Soviet Union had actually emerged as a new social formation, which was neither capitalist nor socialist. Adherents of that view, espoused most explicitly by Max Shachtman and closely following the writings of James Burnham and Bruno Rizzi, argued that the Soviet bureaucratic collectivist regime had in fact entered one of two great imperialist "camps" aiming to wage war to divide the world. The first of the imperialist camps, which Stalin and the Soviet Union were said to have joined as a directly participating ally, was headed by Nazi Germany and included most notably Fascist Italy. In that original analysis, the "second imperialist camp" was headed by England and France, actively supported by the United States.

"You must oppose authoritarian Soviet Imperialism"


File: 1678142022005.png (737.86 KB, 960x960, rwn6n03neiga1.png)

>China is way way way way way way beyond "muh material base".
Yeah, they totally waived the material condition that you need some 2K calories a day to survive… XD


Think about it, the conditions a communist revolution in America would be for creating a third world war rather than a revolution contained in the United States
>countries will rush to maintain the imperial core
>neutral and even antagonistic countries will support America to improve their geopolitical positions post war
>antagonistic countries will rush to accelerate americas down fall
>socialist countries and communist parties will unequivocally support the revolution
It will literally be a war zone containing any country with geopolitical ambitions, regardless if the revolution is successful or not
30 posts and 12 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1678083535305.png (67.52 KB, 330x287, 1655861905231.png)

What the hell is up with all the doomer threads recently? Did the glowies get more funding?
Obviously TRUE Socialists support Pilsudski, Petliura and the Basmachi against the Ru$$ian $ettlers!


The revolution was killed in 1991


There will be national liberation movements in america for self determination. Hawaii will be one of the first.


The OP is stupid but this comparison is even dumber.



 No.1343570[Reply][Last 50 Posts]

Could someone please explain why American socialists still insist on invoking Christianity (Protestant theology in particular) when America is the LEAST Christian it’s ever been?

Church attendance for all denominations is dropping steadily while the number of Americans identifying as “no religion” has gone way up in the past decade or two. It’s gotten to the point where the GOP doesn’t even appeal to fundamentalist Protestantism anymore; now they overwhelmingly appeal to conspiracy theories and short-term outrage. The last midterm elections proved abortion and other “Christian values” issues are a losing bet since the younger generations are far more socially progressive all while the older, more conservative generations are dying off with no one to replace their votes.

With that said, what’s even the point of this “Jesus was a socialist” crap? It seems like Muppet and his followers ultimately want to create some kind of cultural nationalism, like American Protestantism is the American equivalent of the ROC for Russians or Shia Islam for Iranians. But how pragmatic (or true) is that really, when less and less Americans are adhering to Christianity? It makes no fucking sense and comes off as a losing position.
180 posts and 13 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



Christianity is already past its prime, except probably in Latin America, and even there, it will have have the same destiny.



I think I saw that some Christian conspiracy theorists believed that somebody called Sorath caused the Russian Revolution and 'led the Bolsheviks to drive religion out of public life'.

They claim "Sorath will foment opposition through men who are possessed by him, who have strong natures, raving tongues, destructive fury in their emotions, and faces, which outwardly appear like those of animals. They will mock that which is of a spiritual nature" and "Create a new world order without religion in public life, destroying all tradition".

They even claimed that 'Sorath possessed Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Hitler, possibly leading Hitler to his defeat at Stalin's hands'.


-I'm also assuming because of "The Red Sun in the Sky" stuff that drove them to claim that or because of the aesthetics Trotsky made for the Bolsheviks that got ripped off by the fascists? Its honestly hilarious.

File: 1677988794996.png (18.34 KB, 1200x800, ClipboardImage.png)


Since the beginning of my political activity, I have made it
a rule not to curry favour with the bourgeoisie. The political
attitude of that class is marked by the sign of cowardice. It
concerns itself exclusively with order and tranquillity, and we
know in what sense to understand that. I aimed, instead, to
awaken the enthusiasm of the working-class world for my ideas.
The first years of my struggle were therefore concentrated on
the object : win over the worker to the National Socialist Party.

Here's how I set about it:
1. I followed the example of the Marxist parties by putting
up posters in the most striking red.

2. I used propaganda trucks that were literally carpeted
with posters of a flaming red, equipped with equally red flags
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
3 posts and 4 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


not just any bankers/industrialists, AMERIKKKAN bankers/industrialists


Good morning
I hate whiteoid crakkkers


I’d say more accurately that if the bourgeoisie opposed Hitler he would have needed to claw away their power whereas they willingly gave it up

But all the other shit? Most liberal bourgeois countries wouldn’t do anything about that regardless of ideology, none of those things threaten power.


So I'm too tired to go into detail now, but I'll say that the Nazis were remarkably fantastic marketers. If you wish to study Nazism theoretically and derive anything of value from it for The Left, then I suppose it'd be important to study their early years and the strategies they employed.

Fascism is, if anything, opportunistic and adaptable. Given it shamelessly stole ideas and imagery from the Left, then it's only fair to dissect it and harvest whatever organs can be used.

Chief among this, I think, is how Nazis managed to turn being a member of the Nazi Party into a whole way of life. At least early on. The armbands. The branded SA cigarettes. Enthusiastic youth groups. And the thing is, once you have a Party give you such a sense of belonging that you're buying shitty cigarettes to smoke "The Party Brand" then you've got a Party you're more likely to stick with, contribute to, so on. Even if you only get a passively interested Party member who never attends any of the meetings, having a branded set of clothes and other commodities to signal "This is my political camp" gives him a reason to give you money.

Honestly, I'd say one of the biggest issues facing America's left is developing a disciplined party force that can restrain the egos of various individuals involved and direct them towards a unifying project. That and developing a stable source of income.


>they willingly gave it up
They didn't "gave it up", they have put him in as their political figure, the real power was still capitalists. Before they actually started to finance him seriously, he was a leader of a small bavarian party with public approval in the range of statistical error.


Personally I’m really starting to believe many people get a perverted enjoyment out of being malicious and ignorant, like, I think this is most notable in the 4chan meme mocking science for…being correct? Better yet, it is even more notable in the conscious irrationalism of the classical fascists, who explicitly rejected scientific reasoning and modernity.
Connecting this to anticommunism, well, the arguments, claims, and positions of anticommunists are purely nonsensical maliciousness. Even if you do not support the Soviet Union or the government model they promoted around the world, as I do not, it doesn’t actually follow to therefore be an anticommunist, they aren’t the only form of communist to exist, not even the only form of Marxist. Not only that, but the worst actions of the USSR still do not justify capitalism’s existence.

Now, I noted the human thrill in being absurd and vile because, well, I truly believe part of the power of anticommunism is that it fully allows an absurd rejection of rational critique, it fully allows for one to side with power while feeling like a dissident, it allows you to reject facts without engaging with facts; basically, anticommunism feeds the human hunger to be vicious apes.

How can you beat this?
66 posts and 10 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


>What the FUCK was the School of the Americas you retard? How did latinamerican dictators being Zionists imply that the US didn't help them? Don't you retards believe that the USG is literally ZOG?

The CIA supported a different guy, they never supported Pinochet. Learn to read


Superior fire power


ur mad greek anarchists do more praxis in a day than youll accomplish in ur lifetime


You absolutely need to be able to cut through the bullshit and call things for what they are. The average person is reasonable enough that will agree you on the basic issues at hand and using just a bit of dialectics during your talk you can quite reasonably get them to a basic Marxist analysis of capitalism, without ever mentioning the words dialectics, Marx, or communism. You absolutely need to draw parallels to any kind of socialist/popular worker's movement that existed and build upon those ideas while simultaneously pointing out the flaws that they created (but always giving context to those) and comparing them to the failures of the current system.

You also need to be passionate. People do not care about weak-wrist socialist talking about the problematic language Marx uses (as I've had the displeasure to hear during a reading group meeting, instead of focusing on outreach and tactics) – people do not care about navel-gazers. You need to be fierce, call out the bluff of the capitalist, dissect through the media machine and offer a reasonable alternative, always building your platform on the well-being of the proletariat, the degrading state it is finding itself, the injustice it faces – you need to know the woes and ills of the people you're trying to organize.

To this day, there are still some people that remember what I talked about because I was fierce and passionate, not because I drew out a whiteboard and started discussing Hegel. Don't be afraid to be a called a communist or socialist. Own it. Say it proudly and then proclaim what you are fighting for. Say it with passion and heart and people will follow you, not because they are sheep but because the proletariat needs a revolutionary theory in the age of imperialism and it only has two alternatives: communism or fascism. It is your duty to dispel myths about both and offer a coherent theory.

The anticommunists have nothing. Their followers are just a misguided proletariat, their ideologues might have millions at their disposal but you always have the guts to go into the public and proclaim what you are instead of hiding behind layers of mass media and lies. Their worldview breaks down as soon as you start pointing out the contradictions between their words and actions. But you need to know the proletariat for this. Engels lived in the slums of England. Lenin mingled with the working class whenever he wasn't writing theory. Stalin was proletarian. You need Post too long. Click here to view the full text.


How about provide a source for this other man you keep blathering about you belligerent retard and stop making baseless assertions. Even Google when you look up "CIA and Pinochet" gets immediate hits for CIA support of Pinochet.

Have you other considered this other man of yours which you can't even fucking name (which makes me suspicious of what you're even fucking talking about exists), was backed by the CIA while the CIA was also backing Pinochet?


What degree/major should a leftist get if they attend university? Assume you don't get into the trades or unskilled labor for more PROLE cred.

64 posts and 4 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


True but I didn't want to get to the actually working phase of my life yet. Phd is pretty chill if you know how to get yourself out of responsibilities


If practicality for the purposes of revolution is your objective, then it might behoove you to take first aid, or to learn a new language, like Spanish.

But it is likely the case that you want to go for something that would easily sustain you, and therefore it is your objective to have a "real job," for which riches fall at your feet, etc. It would be an imperative to understand that it is often the case that we are not adequately trained for the "job world." In truth, the most they do is trying to make us accept compliance to their capitalist domination, wearing us down, mystifying relations and the material world, etc.


I am principally a code monkey. I have been unemployed since October 2022, save for a few random freelance I.T. gigs that lasted only a few days.


Physics requires like a masters to get a job.

IEEE the stem shortage is a myth.

" liberal-leaning think tank in Washington, D.C., found that more than a third of recent computer science graduates aren’t working in their chosen major; of that group, almost a third say the reason is that there are no jobs available"

The situation is even more grim for those who get a Ph.D. in science, math, or engineering. The Georgetown study states it succinctly: “At the highest levels of educational attainment, STEM wages are not competitive.”


Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]
[ 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