/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Die Oma mal am Joint ziehen lassen gegen die vaterlandslosen Gesellen.

Alter Faden:
>>2363945

Ein paar Links:
https://mlwerke.redflag.ps/
https://www.papyrossa.de/
https://www.marxistische-blaetter.de/
https://www.jungewelt.de/
https://www.unsere-zeit.de/
https://www.klassegegenklasse.org/
https://www.demvolkedienen.org/index.php/de/
https://www.wsws.org/de
https://kommunistische-organisation.de/
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

Have there been any studies done deconstructing the left-to-right ("Saul-to-Paul") political conversion narrative that the right-wing loves to throw around?

I'm talking about people like former CPUSA members who turned state like Whittaker Chambers, Bella Dodd, and Louis Budenz; neocons like Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, and David Horowitz (rest in piss); or contemporary "conversion" stories like those of Abby Johnson. I'm obviously talking about Americans here but I'm sure you can name plenty of examples from other countries. What psychological factors cause someone to abandon leftism and fully embrace the right, and even worse, turn on their former comrades?

Is it simply the case that they upheld leftism as a dogma, so when their "god" died they found another god? Is it because they were always authoritarian assholes and embraced the right when the right gave them a better outlet for being authoritarian assholes? Was it because they found that the left was moving in a direction they didn't approve of, so they gradually became rightist? Or, using the narrative they themselves most often parrot, they felt "betrayed" by the left so in turn they betrayed the left?

Also, why do we rarely see any prominent right-wingers turning to the left?

Sounds crazy, I know, but I think Xi-fans should at least consider the flaws of China's "Do nothing, win" strategy, and how it may paradoxically still lead to its undoing.

The US bourgeoisie knows it can't beat China in head-on conventional warfare. So, it doesn't.

Porky has put a lot of effort since the Vietnam War to avoid making Amerikkkans feels the impacts of US wars of aggression to great success. Despite the amount of conflicts the US is involved in as we speak, anti-war sentiment is negligable. There was nothing like the anti-war movement during Vietnam, which by itself wasn't even strong enough to end the war either. It was the Vietnamese who militarily defeated the US that ended the war.

Amerikkkan reliance on proxies and mercs is the key to maintain the Empire. If they can make China's neighbours fight them in their stead, they they can win, and have East Asia plundered, like they have plundered Eastern Europe since the 90s, to give capitalism another 50 years.

China has failed to counter this problem completely, letting country after country on their borders fall into US hands in recent years. Once friendly countries turned into enemies.
China's rebranded 'socialism in one country' strategy isn't enough to resist US aggression. The US doen't need to do much to blockade Chinese shipping, and block all imports from entering the mainland. Going from "random" drone boats sent from US vallal states, to airstrikes and piracy conducted by US forces themselves, which they have been training for through the recent attacks on Russian and Venezuelan ships.
China can't retaliate against this adequately, due to their lack of bases or proxies of their own around Amerikkkan territory.

China's complete neglegt of this danger may be its downfall. For all their greatness, they cannot last against a neval blockade, land siege and hybrid warfare, the US has been preparing for.

This is why solidarity is so important. Supporting comrades in other countries isn't about kindness. It ensures you will not be attacked by brothers turned against you.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

idk, just a statement I made. A lot of their officially recognized "banners" (they don't use the word flags for some reason) are either too complex or have words. This is just a flag I made in their likeness (and in the American one), yeah that's all, ig

ITT post groups or persons who you think downfall is entirely deserved alongside reasons why you think that is, in relation to the workers movement

Islamists are low hanging fruit but I thought I'd celebrate the recent downfall of Hezbollah as an Arab worker. Blud spent their time in power being IMF cumrags, breaking up strikes, purging non-reformist communists, turning Lebanon into a neoliberal heaven, poisoning workers with drugs, their leader spent his last days begging for de-escalation after sallowing his empty threats from 13th floor bunker while workers were getting slaughtered (not by him this time)

No doubt the Lebanese army would just take over Hezb job in brutalising workers but at least liberals will be exposed as no different than Hezb who they blame for everything while being in bed with. Or perhaps they will re-arm it again if workers aren't pacified.

Last challenge: Name one (1) group that killed more Shia communists than Hezbollah

All in all, rest in piss

Can /leftypol/ answer these questions that I have ?
I consider myself a social-liberal. I've read and understood fairly well marxist literature (mostly read secundary sources though), aswell as most other polsci theory because of my degree.
I don't align with marxism mainly for 3 reasons that I'll formulate as questions:

>1. Why does the dialectical movement have to worsen the proletariat's lives
In essence, if material institutions change because they can't objectively and materially fulfill their purpose (i.e. a company that exists to make profits faces competition which lowers its profit rate), why would these changes and evolution incur a decline in the proletariat's condition and accentuate class antagonism ? I know marxist's economic theories, but they don't explain as to why the new institutions that would emerge from the old ones wouldn't be better.
For example, capitalism's crisis (a contradiction) have lead to the creation of better financial managing, which imo is a better thing than recurring crisis every 10 years.

>2. Why can't the state and different class interests agree on a mutual interest.
I understand that in marxist theory the state essentially only lives as a tool for the bourgeoisie to use. However, in the face of revolutions or class conflict, why couldn't both parties collaborate rather than face off ? Both the bourgeoisie and the proletariat can have an advantage in collaboration and mutual interest rather than pure conflict. I mean, in polsci theory this is the founding basis of the state.

>3. (and a bit more practical) Isn't the whole marxist linguo counter-productive to the ideal you hold ?
For instance, shouldn't you say "workplace democracy" rather than "abolishing private property", given the sentence's long history of being misinterpreted ? Same goes for the dictatorship of the proletariat, the exploitation theory etc.

This is what Marx himself said about the difficulty of Capital. People demand that everything be immediately understandable and approachable. Marx talks about communism enabling an all sided development of the individual. Modern marxists find reading too difficult for them and will not do anything to rectify this.

My impression is that people want Marx to say something else, to confirm their own biases. This leads to "muh dialectical contradiction!" and Marx (and everyone else) suddenly becomes an incoherent schizophrenic, who needs to be explained by other morons. It doesn't help that leftist spaces are dominated by children online, college students and petty bourgeois weirdos who all demonstrably put forth their own middle class interests and everyone is just too lazy and stupid to read Marx and Lenin, their way of reading Marx being the exact same way that creationists will read Darwin. Not understanding the argument, not understanding the year or the context. The fact that Mao is considered easier to read than Marx even though he's nothing but retarded bourgeois platitudes and incoherent philosophical gibberish, just reveals their own class position and what they actually want to say.

"Superbigote es inocente" Edición

#01 https://archive.ph/4Dq3L
#02 https://archive.ph/sntTt
#03 https://archive.ph/AoX8t
#04 https://archive.ph/mHlP7
#05 https://archive.ph/NEiRq
#06 https://archive.ph/bWfbJ
#07 NEVER EXISTED?
#08 DELETED FOR SOME REASON! >>2623774
#09 https://archive.ph/iarMN Senior Numba Nine 03-01-26 13:34:18
#09 https://archive.ph/P84hH Junior Numba Nine 03-01-26 19:13:34
#10 https://archive.ph/kh1wf
#11 https://archive.ph/JvoVM
#12 https://archive.ph/JWBNL
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

It becomes imperative for the various strains of infantile left-deviationists (be they the Bordigist armchairs, the dumpster-diving anarchists, or the idealistic voluntarists still clinging to the metaphysics of spontaneity) to immediately confront the sheer magnitude of their historical illiteracy and sign the attached document with the requisite humility.

It is truly fascinating to watch you petty-bourgeois moralists clutch your pearls over actually existing socialism, entirely ignoring that your axioms are derived purely from liberal ideology and fail to account for the material conditions of a besieged proletarian dictatorship attempting to industrialize a plow-based feudal economy into a nuclear superpower in two decades while facing the combined hostility of the entire capitalist world. This dialectic extends inexorably to the PRC as well; for as it has been aptly noted, the productive forces necessary to defend a revolution must be equal to the productive forces attacking it.

Perhaps if you had actually engaged with Capital instead of merely skimming the back cover of The Conquest of Bread or watching CIA-funded video essays, you would comprehend that a revolution is largely the most organized, centralized, and terrifying thing there is. All that crying about "Red Fascism" because the Soviets didn't immediately dissolve the state apparatus while the Wehrmacht was knocking on the door constitutes a counter-revolutionary betrayal of the proletariat.

So please, put down whatever anarchist, leftcom, or revisionist slop you are currently consuming, stop fetishizing failure, and recognize that your "pure" socialism is a phantom; the Real exists only as the profane, this-worldly, dirty-Jewish muck of class struggle. Formally apologize to the General Secretary for your embarrassing lack of theoretical rigor NOW.

Previous thread: >>2177902

Dump all the seemingly pointless, dubious, and frivolous questions that don't deserve their own shitty threads.

Got a question that's probably been asked a million times before? You're in the right landfill, buddy. Post it here.

Threads that otherwise might go in here will eventually find themselves become merged to this thread.