/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

every major revolutionary or determinist marxist in history:
>the bourgeois/tsarist electorate is the most effective means of organizing the working class, serving as a megaphone, and even in potential victory laying the contradictions of the system bare.
every modern larpy communist org with 1500 members total which hasn't grown in 50 years and does nothing at all except sell pamphlets:
>noo you can't participate in elections that's hecking electoralism that's hecking revisionist
explain this?

https://www.marxists.org/archive/mattick-paul/1975/us-indochina.htm
>The American economy is geared to the world market, of which it requires an increasingly larger share as U.S. capital expands. If this share contracts — and it is bound to contract, should more nations turn away from the American-dominated world market towards a kind of "second world market" which restricts, or excludes, the exploitation of less-developed nations by the developed ones — it will force the internal American development into isolation and in the direction of a state-controlled economy.
Is this prediction basically in the process of being realized given the present conditions of multipolarity and the fact that the American economy has been running on state-subsidized tech bubbles? Does anyone have a statistical QRD of this tendency at hand?

Third worldism taught us that oppressed nations can become oppressors once they snatch a seat at the imperial table. Poles were once white negroes. Now NATO uniforms wash away solidarity. Marx exalted them. Today, the city of COMECON friendship kisses the Pentagon's boot and calls it sovereignty. Yesterday's revolutionary becomes today's border guard.

What is to be done with Poles and other Volkerabfaelle?

I wrote this article on "Dare To Struggle", a front group for the "Organization of Communist Revolutionaries", itself a splinter group of the RCP (Bob Avakian's cult). There is basically nothing on the group on the internet besides its own posts and websites, I decided to change that. Notable things they've done are threatening to kill other leftist groups for being liberals (despite doing materially the same things as them) and somehow never getting in trouble for them, praising the Shining Path more than any other communist group that actually beat the capitalists in their country, and general retardation and LARPing. Would be interested in seeing what other people think about this group.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dare_To_Struggle_-_Organization_of_Communist_Revolutionaries

Look, I used to be deep in the third internationale scene, councilcoms, leftcoms, NEP diehards, the whole united front of 3rd internationalist trash. Spent years on barricades in bavaria that went nowhere but to long jail terms and isolated comrades, who piss workers off.

Here's what nobody wants to say these movements don't actually want liberation. They want perpetual grievance. They'll talk about establishing a socialism in one country blah fucking blah but have you noticed how these never seems to include any plan for what happens after? How the only solution they offer is the destruction of the only social democracy in the region? Germany would become socialist before a bolshevik run russia would.

I'm just saying, i know the weimar regime is fucked, and yes social-democracy has a bad history, but ask yourself who benefits when the left fragments into a dozen purity spirals. Ask yourself why "build the productive forces" gets chanted louder than any concrete demand for soviet power or negotiated production. the third internationalists want open borders in the west but hard authoritarian borders in any region that acts as a hostile force to the west. Some of us are tired of romanticizing resistance that only ever produces more corpses and chauvinist nationalism.

you idiots want to come to terms with reality start by admitting your heroes are running a dangerous disgusting grift.

How do communists prevent capital flight? It seems like the capitalists will make the economy scream if you organize trade unions and put socialists in power. I suppose sanctions are a similar issue at a larger scale if you've smashed the state.

Why does the left not focus on cooperativization rather than nationalization of industries? If we did manage to replace every company with a cooperative, would that not still be some kind of proto-Socialist position, albeit with markets still intact?

Communism is an impossibility, you’re never getting rid of the division of labor. Even if you got rid of entrepreneurs and investors and replaced them with the state you’ll never have factory workers doing brain surgery or high level accounting. Unless you rotate which sector sets the government agenda (which will inevitably benefit itself above the wider community) you’re just going to have a dictatorship of HR departments, which would be worse than the status quo.

Is the whole boomer vs. gen X vs. millennial vs. zoomer thing simply another form of false consciousness?

For example, someone born in 1986 and someone born in 1994 are both “millennials” but someone born in 1997 is a “zoomer” even though someone born in 1994 has a life experience much more like someone born in 1997 than they do someone born in 1986. Likewise, we don’t even know how to define when certain generations end or begin. Is the cut-off for boomers 1963, 1964, or 1965? To what extent does it matter?

It seems like scapegoating “boomers” for everything has become a popular thing to do on social media and I have to ask why is blaming the older generation somehow worthwhile? “Boomers were the hippies who ended up becoming conservative and voting for Reagan” — that doesn’t explain the material factors that lead to the rise of Reagan and neoconservatism in the first place. You can’t simply “blame boomers” when “boomer” exists in a materialist context. Likewise, you can’t blame Gen Xers and millennials for being “vain” or whatever when Gen Xers and millennials also faced material conditions beyond their control. So why are we placing blame on generations? Does it make any sense to do this?

Recently saw a discussion in regards to "Third Worldism" as in MLM + unequal exchange (a non-Wallerstinian branch of world systems theory) having grown in influence in the anglophone/western, largely online, "communist" spaces.
Here is my dialectical engagement, as they were on to something important, not usually recognized, but also partially incorrect. I attempt to correct it ITT.

Unequal exchange, Mao/Chinese aesthetics and purely performative MLM rhetoric has grown in recent years… But with time comes change.

The original 90s ThirdWorldism "movement", centered in north-america diverged from MLM on a variety of theoretical issues, most crucially the revolutionary nature of the proletariat. They supplemented their divergence with integrating post-Marxist turns happening in word-systems theory (which was ongoing in western academia between the 80s and 90s). As ""Maoism" ThirdWorldism" largely accomplished nothing, other than maybe increasing confusion in the communist movement during the era of blackest reaction, we mostly remember them by their cartoony writing and online media available through archives from that era.

So if 90s Third Worldism was a north-american revisionist offshoot from MLM which integrated non-Wallerstinian unequal exchange theory and rejecting revolution in the imperial core for rhetorical "support" of [far off, peripheral countries]… What are the particularities of the contemporary expression?

2020s Third Worldism can be observed as being a north-american right-wing revisionist movement which retains both the non-Wallerstinian unequal exchange theory and the purely symbolic appeals to Mao, but now replacing the "MLM" pretender framing for the simpler, safer state ideology of social-imperialist China; that also just so happens to feign adherence to 'Mao Zedong Thought', even after it was systematically replaced with the Bukharinist-Dengist capitulationist counterrevolution. which is continued today, the true basis for Xi Jinping Thought, as the bureaucrat-monopoly capitalist heading the political line of the party has only deepened the cementation of a new pole in the capitalist imperialist world system since Deng, when neither as many NEZ, stock markets, overall % of bourgeois in the party or billionaires existed in China. Mao Zedong Thought lives on in the rural and urban areas of any militant area of the Post too long. Click here to view the full text.