/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

It seems to me that the most popular political position these days is some form of developmentalist national liberalism. Most people would like a strong but democratic state to intervene in the economy to eliminate the worst excesses of capitalism, direct investment to promote employment growth and modern industry, and generally avoid imperialist meddling or international entanglements. These kinds of positions were very popular in the 1950s and 60s, and people on the street are generally agreeable towards them.

So why do today's ideological arguments not reflect this? Why is everyone cosplaying as a fascist or a communist when their policy positions remain fundamentally liberal? Why are people turning to Sorel or Stalin for theory and not Nehru or Nasser? Why is liberalism constantly disparaged as bankrupt or illegitimate when all the alternatives to it end up looking exactly the same?

Why is no one discussing the true ideological origins of the ideology of the Zionist entity?

Satanyahu and his genocidal settler ilk largely take their genocidal murderous ideology from the teachings of Rabbi Abraham Kook, a late 19th-early 20th century Latvian rabbi. Kook was a rabid Zio who largely based his Zionism in a mix of Talmud, Kabbalah and German idealism, specifically Hegel. He believed the Jews establishing a racialist settled-colony in Palestine was part of a mystical process of “redemption.” He came to Palestine as a settler and ended up dying there in the 1930s when Palestine was illegally occupied by the British. His thought is very Hegelian with highly fascistic overtones, and anyone can defend with Palestine must learn his thought to fully understand the genocidal nature of Isn’treal.

overthrow the US government already you fat fucks im getting bored and my life is progressively getting worst in every aspect because the economy is collapsing

​"True, the productive forces, practice and the economic base generally play the principal and decisive role; whoever denies this is not a materialist. But it must also be admitted that in certain conditions, such aspects as the relations of production, theory and the superstructure in turn manifest themselves in the principal and decisive role."
​Mao Zedong, "On Contradiction" (August 1937)

​"This means that, on the basis of the existing productive forces and within their limits, it is the relations of production that play the decisive role. The whole of Capital, and all the works of Lenin and Mao Zedong, serve as a commentary on this thesis, which has never been recognized by Marxists."
​Louis Althusser, "On the Reproduction of Capital" / "On the Relations of Production" (written 1969-1973, published posthumously).

​"The changes and development of production always begin with changes and development of the productive forces, and in the first place, with changes and development of the instruments of production. Productive forces are therefore the most mobile and revolutionary element of production. First the productive forces of society change and develop, and then, depending on these changes and in conformity with them, men's relations of production, their economic relations, change.
​Relations of production develop depending on the development of the productive forces, but they, in their turn, react upon the development of productive forces, accelerating or retarding it. And it must be noted that the relations of production cannot postpone lagging behind the growth of the productive forces and being in contradiction to them for too long, for the productive forces can develop to the full only when the relations of production correspond to the nature and state of the productive forces and allow full scope for their development."
​Joseph Stalin, "Dialectical and Historical Materialism" (September 1938)

well well well…

We live in capitalist societies, where money and time are the fundamental resources for building power. Almost every other resource can be purchased or built from these, or will be boosted by these. Therefore, it is most vital that you make money and put it to work.

The only real limit to these money-raising methods should be, "how could this negatively affect the movement?" Consider the 1907 Tiflis bank robbery by Bolsheviks - this event's recklessness and harm to civilians seriously damaged the Bolsheviks' reputation in Georgia and among other socialists. Contrast that against the 1906 Helsinki bank robbery, the Dusheti treasury heist and the Bezdany raid by various socialist organizations, which had no citizen casualties.

If you can do so with little risk, you absolutely should be pirating entertainment media, shoplifting and investing in mutual funds.

More so, if you are not publicly affiliated with the socialist movement, and you have the means, you should be buying property, owning factories or being a landlord. If your tenants and workers aren't socialists, it's very important for you to take as much of their money as you pragmatically can and use it to combat capitalism.

Remember: the status quo is destroying more people than you could ever hope to. To do nothing is harmful.

Why are so many modern communists obsessed with liberal concept of indigenous rights? When communists dont believe in land ownership or inheritance.

>Body too short
>Body too short

Hi I am sigmort I am a left chud which means I am a chud if a chud were left




I molest neo liberals,I goon to goth girls, I think about the Vietnam war, and the roman empire

This site has no WHOIS or RDAP available so you know what that means. They sell stahlhelm themed, 3D printed bottle covers. This is exactly the kind of kitsch shit that neofascists love to hock on X.

https://capsalute.shop/

whois capsalute.shop
Notice: Effective May 1, 2026, the WHOIS service has been retired in accordance with ICANN's RDAP transition policy. All registration data queries are now served via RDAP. The Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) base URL is: https://rdap.gmoregistry.net/rdap/

rdap capsalute.shop
# Error: No RDAP servers responded successfully (tried 1 server(s))

I think I finally know Trumps ideology and its called Neo-Bonapartism

Bonapartism describes a state that achieves relative autonomy from any single class by claiming to stand above class conflict entirely ruling personalistically through plebiscitary mass appeal and charismatic authority rather than through a party program or a coherent class coalition, while materially serving capital's interests without capital directly controlling the state apparatus. Bonaparte's actual regime combined: personalist rule bypassing parliamentary/institutional mediation, appeals to a cross-class "people" against both organized labor and the traditional elite, military prestige projects and adventurism as legitimation (the whole Second Empire foreign policy pattern), and state-directed economic development (Haussmann's Paris, railway financing) alongside crushing independent labor organization. That's close to a checklist match for Trump: personalist rule, state economic direction, military/security emphasis as legitimating spectacle, hostility to organized labor and the left, appeal over the heads of institutions to a plebiscitary mass base.

Bonapartism in the Marxist tradition is specifically theorized as arising when class conflict reaches a stalemate where no single class can rule directly, so an autonomous executive arbitrates from above, critically, without needing to make durable concessions to labor the way a genuinely hegemonic class-coalition government would. Gramsci's extension of the concept (he uses “Caesarism” interchangeably) is explicitly about a strong personalist arbiter stepping in during a legitimacy crisis of the ordinary political process, offering national/military grandeur and personal charisma as substitutes for programmatic concession. That's the theoretical explanation for exactly why Trumpism is anti social welfare while pro military spending Bonapartist/Caesarist rule doesn't need to buy off labor, because it's explicitly a crisis arbitration form that draws its legitimacy from personal charisma and national mythology rather than from a stable coalition requiring material payoffs.

So: Bonapartism (Marx's term) or Caesarism (Gramsci's near-synonym) is the actual name for 19th-century style personalist strongman, holistic state-directed military-industrial policy, minimal welfare concession, legitimated by charisma and national grandeur rather than institution-building or class-coalition bargaining. Specifically it explPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

REAL, NOT CLICKBAIT, NOT A DRILL, THE CHICAGO POPE CRACKS DOWN

https://www.vaticannews.va/en/vatican-city/news/2026-07/holy-see-decrees-excommunication-lefebrians-consecrations.html

As a result of escalating tensions revolving around some unapproved bishop appointments, it's officially happened: the Vatican has declared the tradcath Society of Saint Pius X to be schismatic and therefor not just its bishops but lay practitioners too are excommunicated. While the largest amount of tradcaths tend to congregate in America there's still plenty spread out all over the world. What are the implications of this split? Possible Antipope soon?