/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

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.

Maryland politics

Politics pertaining to maryland

For the discussion maryland and its future

Maryland residents prefered

Why is there no maryland meme flag?

Britpol 's unconcerned with cornish republicanism, we cornu holio have been occupied by brits for 1000s of years, we WANT A REPUBLIC.
FUCK THE UK Kernow Bys Vyken

I've been on this site long enough to get a superficial understanding of Marxist politics, but I've officially passed the Dunning-Krueger peak, where I've realized how superficial that knowledge is. So in an attempt to deepen my understanding of the subject, I have a few questions.

People say that gradual reforms won't work, with the cited reason being that, so long as the bourgeois element is allowed to exist in any significant capacity, it will burrow its way into government and reassert control. But doesn't China disprove that? Their entire plan is to gradually reform their market economy into "full" socialism.

On that note, from what I understand, "capitalism has inherent contradictions that will lead to its downfall" is really just a fancy way of saying that the relationship between the bourgeois and proletariat is an antagonistic one, and eventually the proletariat will get fed up with it and assert control. But is this actually a given? I could easily see a scenario where technology allows the bourgeois to assert permanent control, using robots to replace the proletariat and surveillance and weapons to quell any opposition. I could also see the opposite happening, where capitalism keeps rewinding itself to earlier states indefinitely, creating a situation where life is "good enough" that people don't feel the need to rebel.

Dialectics in general confuse me. Every time I think I have a grasp on them, I'll have someone else loudly proclaim that I'm wrong. If I ask for correction, the explanation provided is so long-winded and convoluted that I end up with more questions than answers. Can someone please give me a basic, working definition of what dialectics are in the context of Marxism? They seem so fundamental to Marxist analysis, and without understanding them, I don't feel like I can actually properly understand any of what I'm looking at.

Finally, I frequently hear people say that we're going to be entering a China lead multipolar world order. That sounds like like a (logical) contradiction to me. Doesn't the term "multipolar" imply multiple leaders?

Note that I don't ask these questions with any ideology in mind. I find much of what I read here incredibly confusing, and my ignorance has been punished enough that I figured it's high-time I do something about it.

>inb4 read a book
I plan to do that as well. I just thought I'd come to you guys so I have a startinPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

The more you read into the history of Stalin and Trotsky and their respective followers, the more you will realize that Stalin was right and Trotsky was at best an idealistic retard and at worst a literal fascist collaborator that literally wanted Nazi Germany to destroy the USSR.

Trotsky was basically an Osama Bin Laden type figure that railed against Stalin because Stalin didn't immediately abolish the state, abolish the family, pursue muh "permanent revolution" aka embroil the USSR into ill-fated wars and other idealist bullshit that had no basis in the actual material conditions of the time. How dare that Stalin works worth the material conditions and historical context and develop the state to advance proletarian interests – it's all "bureaucracy" and Trotsky is out of power so therefore Stalin must go and he must literally be assassinated (This Trotsky advocated for).

After all this it becomes clear the justification for Stalin's "purges" of these terrorist assholes trying to destroy the USSR. It's amazing that the USSR survived WW2 and constant subversion from these pseudo-fascist retards. It's a testament to Stalin's strength and competence that this is so.

What do we think of Anarcho-Synndicaliam, Council Communism, and Anarcho-Communism, basically ideologies in which the proletriat immediately seizes production without seizing the state apparatus.

Personally i really like Pannekoek and also syndicalism although I think both systems can become burecratic and possibly disconnected forming a new classes (such as how after the first revolunary generation lost power in the USSR the vanguard stopped working for the proletriat and formed new methods of exploitation).

got mad having to constantly hear from stirnites so i made this to cope. how the fuck does an ideology like this even continue to exist?

literally every time someone even says something pro-com, there's always a fucking stirnite in the corner of the room chuckling to themselves, waiting for their mom to call them home for chicken nuggies and appy juice

🗽UNITED STATES POLITICS 🦅

<HH Happy Holidays Edition

>May Lenin awaken the workers and help them to see the necessity of revolutionary civil war in the United States.

🛠️ Strike Tracker ⚒️
https://striketracker.ilr.cornell.edu/

🇺🇸 Deeds of the Burger Reich 🇺🇸
https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/main/us_atrocities.md
https://williamblum.org/essays/read/overthrowing-other-peoples-governments-the-master-list

📺 Glowie News 📺
(sponsored by the Burger Eagle Freedom Institute (formerly USAID))
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

🇨🇳🇺🇲🇪🇺 A thread for all-things multipolaroidistical 🇷🇺🇮🇳🇮🇷
Pioneer's edition
In spite of the seething of many supposedly 'leftist comrades', America's unipolar dominance is weakening every day and we move ever closer into a multipolar world. It is clear to any good faith communist that a multipolar world just means that: transitioning from American unipolarity to multipolarity, and that does not automatically mean the expansion and consolidation of socialism. The latter gains more opportunities in this new state of affairs, but nothing is given on a silver platter - communists still have to seize the day. If we make the mistake of thinking multipolarity is socialism, we might as well end up with a multiple poles of fascism and reaction. This is understood by communists, real ones, not agents of NATO clad in 'red aesthetics'. The latter strawman the 'multipolarity=communism' nonsense precisely to then dismantle it and thus ridicule and 'defeat' multipolaristas, doing the work of the NATO Moloch.
'''Multipolaristas, let this thread be a place where all developments concerning the advent of multipolarity is posted and compiled.

https://emmanueltodd.substack.com/p/diverging-populisms :: Diverging populisms, Emmanuel Todd

https://youtu.be/UMgkvvu_pnU :: West's Failure to Adjust to a Multipolar World, John Mearsheimer

https://youtu.be/US7oycLV5ZE :: Avec le PRCF, Rencontre Internationale, faire front anti impérialiste pour la paix et la liberté, Pôle de Renaissance Communiste en France