/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Why was china such a shithole under mao?

https://abolishthedea.com

MODERN DAY BRUTALITY ON A WORLDWIDE SCALE

The policy (the so-called 'War on Drugs') is built on a gross deception: that drugs other than alcohol, tobacco and caffeine comprise a unique group of substances that present an unacceptable risk to health and welfare. This is wholly incorrect: alcohol and tobacco are the most dangerous drugs in existence. The criminalisation of associations with substances other than alcohol, tobacco and caffeine creates a criminal underclass that is the resource for the strategy.

The so-called 'War on Drugs' has absolutely nothing to do with drug use or drug-related harm of any kind: it is purely a worldwide economic system based on intentionally-created crime.

It results in mass imprisonment, fining, asset forfeiture, execution, wars, state-sanctioned murder and endemic violence etc. It provides the pretext under which huge sums of public money are allocated and sustains a massively profitable black market in substances other than alcohol, tobacco and caffeine.

The US oppresses its own citizens under the name of the policy and this oppression extends worldwide, with governments forced to oppress their own citizenry or be chastised and threatened by the US through the United Nations.

Those who profit from or otherwise wish for the so-called 'War on Drugs' to continue constantly proffer the falsehood that the strategy is related to substance use and the prevention and minimisation of drug-related harm. Those who profit from the oppression of others include but are not limited to enforcement organisations and the prison industry, the legal and welfare systems, academia and a plethora of other industries.

The phenomenon continues due to the power and ruthlessness of the US and its ability to generate economic activity. Its true motives are kept hidden via the mass complicity of governments, the press and those who profit from it.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

Communism is neither related to "Leftism" nor "Socialism", in fact these reformist movements are antithetical to Communism.

Before some illiterate dumbass takes this as lazy "sectarianism", this was the key issue the Communist International meant to settle. In fact the entire Comintern was born out of the contradiction between the revolutionary content of Marxism and reformist nature of leftism, the murder of German communists at the hands of their left-socialist "comrades" cemented this seemingly forever (clearly not)

>In this connection all those parties that wish to belong to the Communist International must change their names. Every party that wishes to belong to the Communist International must bear the name Communist Party of this or that country (Section of the Communist International). The question of the name is not formal, but a highly political question of great importance. The Communist International has declared war on the whole bourgeois world and on all yellow social-democratic parties. The difference between the communist parties and the old official 'social-democratic' or 'socialist' parties that have betrayed the banner of the working class must be clear to every simple toiler.
<Twenty-one Conditions, Comintern 1919

Going further back to Marx, this distinction was evident (hence the "communist" manifesto)

>in 1847, socialism was a middle-class movement, communism a working-class movement. Socialism was, on the Continent at least, “respectable”; communism was the very opposite. And as our notion, from the very beginning, was that “the emancipation of the workers must be the act of the working class itself,” there could be no doubt as to which of the two names we must take. Moreover, we have, ever since, been far from repudiating it.
<Preface to the 1872 German Edition

>But why were the terms later used exchangeably by the early days of Lenin?
Simply, they were not. By "social democrats" Lenin was strictly referring to the membership of the SPD and its analogous party in Russia who upheld the doctrine of Marx at the time until the German SPD broke away from it.

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

How was he so based, and why have few socialist leaders even come close to accomplishing what he did? I love 90% of what the guy did, and I really do think that he's greatly underappreciated as both a theoretician and a leader.

Since 2021 the Burmese Communist Party has re-armed and re-entered Burma both from across the border of China and by re-activating sympathetic Communists in the All Burma Federation of Student Unions (a process that started in 2017).

With the start of the civil war, they re-activated and are fighting in an alliance with the People's Defence Forces against the Tatmadaw.

The BCP/PLA follows the principles of Maoism. At the start they had ~1,000 soldiers under their command. Now it is said to be 3,000. They have a presence across most of northern Myanmar (Pale Township, Kan Duak, some areas near the capital, Mandalay, Shan State, Sagaing, Magway and Tanintharyi regions).

None of the territory appears to be governed by the BCP, they collect taxes but as of now have not yet formed liberated zones with their own socialist governance.

Please post any discussion or notes about PLA in Burma here.

Image 1 is from last year, 138 elephants were captured and were to be used for military purposes

Image 2 is from last September, in Northern Shan state during Operation 1027 (a lot of PDF ops are named with numbers for some reason)

Image 3 is Niko :)

Can anyone tell me what dialectical materialism is and how we can use it when analysing history? What do I read to understand it? I did some cursory research and found Plekhanov's essays on history and materialism. But I find Marx's writings on the subject of dialectical materialism too scattered to do a proper study of his texts. After the fall of the Soviet Union, people kind of thought dialectical materialism was woo woo. But I understand that Derrida responded to Fukuyama's thesis that liberalism will be the next world order, and that Marxist analysis and dialectical materialism never came true, but Derrida isn't an outright Marxist and his writings are usually only riffing on Marx rather than looking at history under a materialist lens. Derrida just seems sympathetic rather than using actual Marxist philosophy.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/plekhanov/1893/essays/3-marx.htm

don't bother studying any political theory or philosophy from the 21st century, marx and engels already figured out how the entire world works in 1893. everything that can be learned has been learned, we understand ourselves and our world perfectly and now the only thing to do is put down the books and join the vanguard party. don't overstress your tiny little brain trying to think, it's a waste of time. the men already got it figured it out, sweetheart. the time for critical thought and introspection and empathy for the human condition is over, now it's time for the real work. let's make america great again.

Hello Leftypol! I am currently writing an encyclopedia about the internet and yesterday i created a page about this very site. However, It is a sentence stub and i can not think of any information to add here. Can you guys help out? Thanks!