/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

July 31, 2026

The Postcolonial Volk
By Benjamin Zachariah
Polity, 176 pages, $25

You might have noticed that at some point, progressive types began to use the term “folks” to refer to “people.” There are black folks, queer folks, indigenous folks. The change is significant. Whereas “people” evokes a sense of a universal subject, “folks” is particular. It implies a world of distinctions: different cultures, different experiences, different interests. No people, just “peoples,” all speaking with a different voice. From this perspective, “The political world is a pluriverse, not a universe.”

While the idea of a pluriverse has become increasingly popular within decolonial thought, that last line didn’t come from the tradition’s ever-proliferating ranks of academic adherents. It came from Carl Schmitt, the Nazi jurist. At a time when everything is “literally Hitler,” the comparison can seem overwrought. But it is precisely the comparison between post-colonial particularism and the völkisch right that Benjamin Zachariah reveals with a keen sense of the absurd in his new book, The Postcolonial Volk.

Zachariah critiques the “conglomerate” of postcolonial and decolonial theory clustering around what’s come to be known as “theory from the Global South.” But appearances are deceiving, because it’s not really from the Global South at all. As Zachariah describes, its language and legitimacy claims are crafted in the Global North, exported to the Global South, and then reimported as authentic non-Western knowledge.

And just as it is not really of the Global South, this ostensibly left-wing “postcolonial-decolonial-Global South conglomerate” is not really of the left either. Despite the right’s insistence that the ghost of Karl Marx is currently undertaking a long march through the institutions, Zachariah’s central claim is that the contemporary left actually has far more in common with anti-communist and proto-fascist forces than with the nineteenth-century founder of “scientific socialism.” In important respects, its ethos actually arises from an entirely rival tradition, one that encompasses romantic nationalism, indigenism, cultural organicism, and völkisch thought. It is, Zachariah says, “Romanticism, rather than the much-reviled Enlightenment, that suggests itself as the intellectual basis of the ‘post-Enlightenment’ world that Global Southistan now lays claim to.”

This is why, as Zachariah shows, the poPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

Across the eleven articles, a common narrative emerges: Alberta separatism is no longer being discussed solely as a domestic Canadian political movement. The stories focus on growing connections between some Alberta separatist activists and U.S. Republican political networks, concerns about foreign interference, the role of online organizing, and a broader debate over whether separatist leaders are helping or harming their own cause.

A central theme is a series of reports that Alberta separatist organizers sought contacts with officials and political actors in the United States. According to reporting discussed across multiple outlets, separatist representatives met with U.S. State Department officials and explored how an independent Alberta might build closer economic ties with the United States. Reported ideas included use of the U.S. dollar, expanded energy cooperation, transportation corridors, access to resources, and possible economic support during a transition to independence. However, accounts differed regarding exactly what was discussed, and U.S. officials reportedly denied offering support or commitments. Critics argue that these contacts crossed a political line because the future of Canada should be decided by Canadians, while supporters portray the discussions as diplomacy and strategic planning. [thewalrus.ca], [energi.media]

The question of foreign interference runs throughout the coverage. Several writers argue that while Alberta separatists have the democratic right to advocate for independence, actively seeking assistance from foreign political actors is much more controversial. Political scientist Stewart Prest, writing in The Walrus, compares the current situation to past Canadian reactions to outside involvement in Quebec sovereignty debates. He argues that foreign governments and political movements should not influence decisions about Canada’s territorial future and calls for a clear federal response against external interference. Prest maintains that the issue is not simply separatism itself, but the involvement of American political actors in a Canadian constitutional question. [thewalrus.ca]

At the same time, multiple stories examine whether such actions amount to treason. The general conclusion is that, under Canadian law, the answer is likely no. Critics may describe the conduct as disloyal or a betrayal of Canada, but experts quoted in several articles say the legal definition of treason is much Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

Obviously the Marxist project is modernist.
Obviously it's spooky season so this is a spook thread.
Can there even be a post-modern political project?
How we define the term post-modern seems critical.
Consider it a dialectic which doesn't remove the negated.
If we do this can we even negate "illegitimate" uses of power.
There's no "good" and "evil" here, and mass doesn't help.
Is it just our own good and evil and will to power?
Maybe we even think we're a "good" person.
And use our little power to enforce "good" ends…
But there's just the means available, and our willingness.
Does it come full circle in the end?
Maybe everyone already realizes this.
Except the "establishment" clinging to remnants of modernity.

Why do Leftists/Marxists in particular get upset when capitalist countries oppose them, when their ideology necessarily calls for overthrowing of their governments. When you call for world revolution their are naturally going to be forces that will oppose you.

Marxists argue that capitalists will do whatever is necessary to preserve their power, including supporting or installing fascist regimes. If you therefore believe that violent revolution is ultimately necessary to overthrow the bourgeoisie, why is it surprising when the bourgeoisie commits atrocities in the name of preserving its own power?

This thread is for the discussion of cybercommunism, the planning of the socialist economy by computerized means, including discussions of related topics and creators. Drama belongs in /isg/

Reading
Towards a New Socialism by Paul Cockshott and Allin Cottrell: http://ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell/socialism_book/
Brain of the Firm by Stafford Beer
Cybernetic Revolutionaries by Eden Medina
Cybernetics: Or the Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine and The Human Use of Human Beings (1st edition) by Norbert Wiener
Economic cybernetics by Nikolay Veduta
People's Republic of Walmart by Leigh Phillips and Michal Rozworski
Red Plenty by Francis Spufford
Economics in kind, Total socialisation and A system of socialisation by Otto Neurath (Incommensurability, Ecology, and Planning: Neurath in the Socialist Calculation Debate by Thomas Uebel provides a summary)

Active writers/creators sorted by last name

>Paul Cockshott
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

Back in Jesus's time when politics and religion were firmly merged together and people couldn't even conceptualize politics without god so I guess it must've made sense for a man to develop a political vision and think of it all as a revelation from heavens.

If you calm down and look at Jesus's message thinking of it as a political message then it can be summed up to a sort of proto utopian communism. He advocated for better treatment for slaves (which is really a lukewarm reformist stance), an abandonment of money and instead life in communities where people share their shit and help each other. He also invented the threat of hell to force people to do as he said and his rhetoric and methods had a ton of weaknesses. His insistence of pacifism only made his followers easy to hunt down and for the people in power to distort his ideas.

In the end Jesus's thought was entirely recuperated by the Romans. They took Jesus out of christianity and interpreted everything he said in a way that allowed them to do what they were already doing: kill rape and pillage everyone, which eventually merged (and turned) into christianity itself. Most of christian history of destruction is just an influence of the roman co-opted version Jesus's political movement with very little of Jesus himself, which means Jesus is a catastrophically failed political leader whose life should be interpreted as a failed revolutionary movement, and as all revolutionary movements it should be studied to avoid the same mistakes. For example, he proved that martyrism and pacifism do not work at all, that speaking in vague riddles will just make it easier for your enemies to just distort everything you said in a way that is convenient to themselves, and that communism must be materialist.

If you had to choose 3 essential books to show to baby communists that haven't read shit other than maybe instragram posts or watched breatubers, what books would you pick? for me it'd be

>rius's marxism: a graphic guide
>politzer's elementary principles of philosophy
>carlo cafiero's summarized version of capital

Why? because those are all easy, not too long and kinda get most of the really important things you need to understand before you read everything else.

Poll: China a more positive influence than US in Latin America
The 2026 Latinobarómetro survey showed that for the first time since the annual survey began in 1995, China is seen as a more benign force than the United States. It showed 57 percent of people in Latin America considering the United States to be a positive influence, down from 60 percent in 2020. China, meanwhile, was considered a positive influence by 65 percent of respondents, a jump from the 48 percent it scored six years ago.
https://www.batimes.com.ar/news/latin-america/poll-china-a-more-positive-influence-than-us-in-latin-america.phtml
https://archive.ph/m8x0f

Lula's lead over Bolsonaro narrows ahead of Brazil vote, CNT/MDA poll shows
In a first-round scenario, ​Lula would receive 43.1% of voter support, ​followed by Bolsonaro (38%), Augusto Cury (3.2%), Ronaldo Caiado (3%) ⁠and Renan Santos (1.5%), according to the poll. A September 15 ​poll had Lula at 40.5%, Bolsonaro at 30.4%, ​Cury at 6%, Caiado at 3% and Santos at 2.7%
https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/lulas-lead-over-bolsonaro-narrows-ahead-brazil-vote-cntmda-poll-shows-2026-10-03/

Mexico City March Marks 58 Years Since Tlatelolco Massacre
Thousands marched in Mexico City on Friday to mark 58 years since the 1968 Tlatelolco student massacre, as President Claudia Sheinbaum called for keeping the memory alive and demanded “never again” state repression.
https://www.telesurenglish.net/mexico-city-march-marks-58-years-since-tlatelolco-massacre/

‘This can’t go on’: tens of thousands protest against housing crisis in Spain
Demonstrators on Saturday waved posters calling for a general strike ⁠after the measures drawn up to address mass anger over the eviction of an 87-year-old woman in ⁠Madrid, and other housing issues, were rejected in parPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

Politicians in europe are openly claiming they wish they could have an IDF at home.
Why are Europeans becoming such chuds?
They're going on trips to watch how Israel represses Palestinians in the west and take notes.
The kind of repression Israel uses is what lead to George floyd

Why is it that the surviving members of the George W. Bush administration who acted as the architects of the Iraq War have never faced any legal penalties for what they did?

The 2003 US invasion of Iraq was arguably one of the worst human rights atrocities of the past 50 years. Over 1 million Iraqi CIVILIANS were killed. If that's not a low key genocide similar to Gaza I don't know what is. But it's even worse knowing this war was based entirely on a gigantic lie (a "noble lie" if you will) by some of the slimiest, most diabolical villains ever known to American politics. Yes, Dick Cheney, Colin Powell and Donald Rumsfeld are dead and rotting in hell. But George W Bush, Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith are still alive. Neocons Bill Kristol, Robert Kagan and John Bolton who were the top dogs in PNAC (Project for a New American Century), which called for massive military spending and preemptive attacks (also a "New Pearl Harbor" which conveniently happened on 9/11) are also still alive. WHY HAVEN'T ANY OF THEM EVER BEEN CHARGED AS WAR CRIMINALS?????

The Straussian cabal is very real and still holds loads of ideological power within American politics. Many Neocons from the Bush II era have now since become Democrats and publicly supported Kamala Harris over Trump on the basis Trump wasn't Neocon enough. These people have names and addresses and have to face some kind of legal penalties so the world can finally have closure and the Neocon war criminals can finally reap what they sowed.