/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>1942669
>>1942616
>>1942610
>>1942611
all you need to do is google mao zedong thought, it's literally integrated into china's system and mao zedong thought is at it's very core an anti-revisionist ideal

>>1942593
>allow
"zankaria" is "moffin" if you missed the /GET/chan thread

>>1942667
capital is money and means of production used for the purpose of valorization. that's not what the PRC is doing

>>1942690
>Capital is unironically an ideal now
I fucking hate dengoids

>>1942606
Did any of you fags watch this?

this thread is shit, and exists for the cancer left entrist libtards of usa/pol/ to have sour grapes. china is way more based than the west and I'm tired of fat americans pretending it isn't:

>zero genocides
>leaders in green transition
>lifting their people out of poverty
>labor unions represented in government
>development loans without structural adjustment
>oppose us imperialism at home and abroad
>enforcement of corporate law
>oppose israel

they're effortlessly mogging the reactionary liberal west and fake leftist anarkiddies either can't stand it or are feds seeding consensus cracking narratives against actually existing socialism.

don't waste time (you)ing me, I already know you're argument is shit.

>>1942736
Notice how all your defenses of China were brainrot meme comments

>>1942741
>shit argument
you're argument is shit

>>1942753
>good and evil
burgerbrained

>>1942753
lesser evil rhetoric is comparing one genocidal american gangster to another. china is good actually.

you're argument is shit.

you are all proles living under capitalism, shut up and get a job

>>1942772
> the capitalist class is squarely in the control of the communist party
Comrades, are my words getting through?

>>1942815
no, give up loser.

Racist hate campaign being juiced to world historical proportions. Huge victory for anticamps

>>1942815

Well at least there is now an admission that China does indeed have a capitalist class.

>>1942815
Secret third thing enjoyers rise up (against the fucking barista that put real milk in my latte)

>>1942829

The third thing is greek, and its based.

#getmeligalaspilled

>>1942815
if the state controls capital and does not have a class struggle element to the nation then it's a socialist state

>>1942828
if I live to see western capitalists get their back broke like jack ma I can die happy. elon ma winning a six month unplanned vacation from business and public life for reeducation would be good for everyone, especially elon (sadly).

>>1936275
Maduro has won the election, past tense.

>>1942840
>like Jack Ma
Jack Ma is still alive and doing just fine, thoughever. He hasn't even been kicked out of the CPC afaik

>Leftypol goes down
>Immediate "anti-campist" posting on /GET/, .net
>>1942594
>Consensus cracking
>>1942650
>Reddit NAFO memes
>>1942605
>Openly admitting you're only here to troll

It should be clear by now what is going here. And it's not "good-faith discussion by regulars who just happen to have some disagreements with multipolarity"
We saw this shit in the early days of the war. Anyone active elsewhere will have noticed the same lines being posted on reddit, twitter, even non-anglo board (dvatch).

The "anti-campism" promoted in these threads is misinformed at best. Revolutionary defeatism should be applied in a specific context as described by Lenin, by an organized mass movement of workers, in favor of triggering a revolution. It has never been about the adventurism of blowing up random federal buildings or
>all bourgeois wars are imperialist
>all bourgeois states are imperialist
Which was never Lenin's argument. Go ahead, quote the exact book, paragraph, line where he said it. You can't.

Russia isn't AES, Putin isn't a communist. But it doesn't make the dissolution of Ukraine as ethnostate any less progressive. We live under a global system of apartheid (as described by various leading Marxists, including those in the global south like Nkrumah back in the day). And dissolving these national divisions should be cheered on. Just like they were in South Africa, just like it should be in Palestine. So that what are now national struggles become purely struggles between workers and capital. So that capitalists, Capital, cannot exploit the divisions of workers along ethnic lines, and treat some as second class citizens. As seen not only in the west, but also with Central Asian workers in Russia, south Asians in the UAE and Qatar, etc.
Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, were able to analyze bourgeois conflicts and recognize some were historically progressive (in the Marxist) sense. To deny this in favor of quote mining Lenin in order to maintain the status quo is reactionary.

The dissolution of Ukraine is progressive regardless of the bourgeois character of the Russian state, regardless of the reactionary rhetoric in favor of the war, just like the end of the Bantustans was progressive, even as South Africa continued to exist as a bourgeois capitalist state.
To deny this, and misconstrue "workers have no country" (We should have no loyalty to bourgeois states) as "workers should oppose their countries even when they're acting in a progressive manner" is reactionary wrecking.
Nationality continues to matter. And unfortunately so. It shouldn't. But it does. It does for Palestinians in the occupied territories. And even those who have lived for decades now in Arab states as second class citizens or outright stateless nonpersons.
It does for eastern European seasonal workers. It does for central Asians employed in Russia. It does for South Asians treated as slaves in the Gulf States. It does for Thai and Philippine workers treated the same across the middle east. It does for undocumented migrants in the US.

These developments should happen and have happened under socialist leadership. But they remain progressive even when orchestrated by bourgeois powers.
If you want to oppose this because you're a pacifist, that's fine. But don't pretend this stance is Marxist or Leninist. And don't pretend this one specific instance implies the Russian state should be uncritically supported in everything. (like the crackdown in Kazakhstan, mobilization of workers as seen in 2022) Because that was never the argument.

>>1942990
Little shills like you are the reason I'm glad I finally started reading myself. You guys are so revisionist it hurts.

>Revolutionary defeatism should be applied in a specific context, as described by Lenin, by an organized mass movement of workers, in favor of triggering a revolution.
First off, don't even pretend for a second you've read Lenin or adhere to Leninist theory when you are taking the position of the German social democrats he was debating against in the Second International, who were shilling for their own bourgeois government during WW1. It's the same exact leap of logic back then as it is now: "Oh, you don't want Germany to win? Then you must support tsarist Russia! Don’t you know they’re worse?"

You do not understand Lenin's argument at all. Let's go with your bullshit and agree that the ability to conduct a civil war is impossible. Lenin did not say to support the "other side" in this situation. Cite it if I'm wrong, because I'm not. No, Lenin made the case that during a time of great hardship, it is a duty to agitate for socialism and a revolution against the bourgeois that sends them to die for imperialist causes, such as is the case of this capitalist-imperialist vs. capitalist-imperialist war. He *never* said to align with imperialists as a "lesser evil." He was in direct conflict with the opportunists that argued for collaboration (such as yourself).

>adventurism, blowing up federal buildings!
You’re saying that, not us.

>all bourgeois wars are imperialist
>all bourgeois states are imperialist
Irrelevant hyperbole. Russia is imperialist; I wish I didn't have to explain that since it's so clear that they are, but you seem kind of slow, so please read "Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism" for a clear definition and criteria for what constitutes an "imperialist" nation. There’s no criteria saying "If you're not the biggest imperialist, then you get a pass." That is revisionism by fake MLs who are more attracted to the social conservatism of Russia from the Duginist garbage they read.

>Russia isn't AES; Putin isn't a communist.
Thank you; we can go home. There is absolutely no reason to support them then! Though you don't really support them other than being annoying bots on the internet cheerleading for reactionary Putin all day.

>But it doesn't make the dissolution of Ukraine as an ethnostate any less progressive.
>ethnostate
Here you go with the Kremlin propaganda to dehumanize the entire country because of Azov. No, not everyone conscripted to fight against invaders in their country are "neo-nazis." The 2000~ (generous estimate) members of the Azov battalion do not necessarily represent the beliefs of 30 million, you tard.

>you support neo-nazis!
No, dumbass. I don't support them the same way I don't support the neo-Nazis in the USA's border patrol. Obviously, they're bad. However, I do not go out and say that we need to exterminate everyone because those people exist. There is nothing progressive about Ukraine exchanging its imperialist handlers for another imperialist handler.

>is reactionary wrecking.
Misusing that term, "wrecking." Russia is not socialist and is trying to build a stronger imperialist empire. They are reactionary. Being against allying with them is thus not "wrecking." Baby-leftists love this term to shield themselves from their revisionism.

>don't pretend this stance is Marxist or Leninist
You haven't made a single argument on how this is a Marxist or Leninist position to cheerlead for capitalist countries. You're just fangirling for an imperialist power because of their propaganda outlet. This is not a fight for "liberation." They just want control of the land, so your disingenuous larp about the unaligned countries has no weight. It is so historically ignorant, it hurts. The entire justification for it is based on that metaphysical, fascist Eurasian philosophy by Dugin.

And for you crying about people making fun of you, it's because you're unbelievably dumb. You don't deserve any respect because your position is duginoid fascism. You're not leftists, and that's not sectarianism, you are definitively not socialists.
>once they're under the boot of the Eurasian movement, they'll be free!!!
Cringe

>>1943056
He actually wrote about not supporting reactionary classes against imperialists. This is what I meant. People referencing, quote mining Lenin, with no understanding of the context in which he wrote.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/carimarx/5.htm
Supporting the defeat of Czarist Russia did benefit Imperial Germany, but this was fine considering the conditions at the time. German or Czarist victory, it didn't matter, they were going to butcher communists, genocide minorities and set up comprador led bantustans (congress Poland, "independent" Ukraine) either way.

>You’re saying that, not us.
It's literally in the OP.
>"Sabotage of military infrastructure"

>Irrelevant hyperbole. Russia is imperialist;
Show Capital flows. Or will you also argue Malawi and and Bhutan are imperialist? Lol You should actually read the book you're referencing and the research Lenin did, that led him to conclude both the central powers and entente + Russia were imperialist powers. There was a good post recently on .net that also covers Lenin's arguments.
>There is absolutely no reason to support them then
Marx praised the Union against the confederacy, Lenin himself (in the article linked above) talks about not supporting reactionary classes against the imperialists. Your historical illiteracy is embarrassing.
The abolition of national divisions is the opposite of what "Imperialism" has aimed for both pre-WW2 and after WW2 in the form of neocolonialism. it's the exact opopsite of NATO actions in Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and elsewhere.

>Here you go with the Kremlin propaganda
What the fuck are you on about? The USSR was split up along ethnic lines. Many pieces of post-2014 Rada legislation have been about enforcing Ukraine as a uniquely Ukrainian state, based around the Ukrainian language. They've even set up task forces to enforce said language legislation. You're the one bringing nazis into this.
>Exchanging imperialist handlers
Ukraine will be abolished, like the bantustans were abolished. And this is a good thing. Would you have cried too about not-AES South African led by the "Revisionist" Mandela abolishing the independence of Transkei and Bophuthatswana? Look at how committed you are to the divisions of workers along ethnic lines. Insta sperging about nazis too.
>You haven't made a single argument on how this is a Marxist or Leninist position to cheerlead for capitalist countries.
By using the same arguments as Lenin, and 20th century Marxists like Nkrumah, various African communists, including the South African Communist Party at the time of their struggle against apartheid. The division of workers along national lines into bantustans, in favor of a global system of apartheid (in the post-soviet states, Palestine and elsewhere) benefits Capital (which remains free to cross borders), is reactionary and should be opposed.
The violent opposition of anti-communist Ukrainian nationalists to the dissolution of Ukraine and its merger into a multi-ethnic (bourgeois) state should likewise be opposed from a Marxist perspective.
>metaphysical, fascist Eurasian philosophy by Dugin.
Retarded. Especially as these "Russia isn't AES" statements and similar are themselves trite metaphysical vomit. We're talking about processes, movements here, the progressive character of which cannot be reduced to whether the actors or proponents involved are explicitly socialist.

You're becoming hysterical because it's obvious you have some vested interest in the continued existence of Ukraine as a (comprador) nation-state. And this sort of chauvinism has been displayed too by Ukrainian nationalists since the beginning of the war.

Anti Campism, is just propaganda against the remaining socialist states.

It is completely valid to critique the remaining socialist states, but there is no reason to denigrate then.

Anti Campism is propaganda against Anti imperialist (conscious or unconsciously) states.

It is completely valid to critique any of these anti imperialism (consciously or unconsciously) states, but there is no reason to denigrate them.

If you've been listening to rhetoric of the Western Imperialist Bloc, like Josep Borrell and his whole "Garden vs Jungle" trope, or Joe Biden and his "Autocracy vs Democracy" trope, these same arguments are continuing here.

If a world war is heating up, to even vaguely signal an agreement with such rhetoric is just unethical, racist and so on.

Communism and Anti-imperialism is for the freedom for the oppressed, and power for the oppressed.

It's time to end this thread, as it serves no purpose, anti campism isn't even a real position, some people here it seems have no principles, NATO seeks to subjugate the entire world under its iron first for its economic interests and order, you must be against this or you are like a socialist who says the soviets aren't an example to learn from or admire.

>>1942753
>le good and evil
>>1942990
>anyone who disagrees with my dickriding Putin's Russki Mir is a glowie
yet more proof of the necessity of these threads
>>1943127
it's possible to be pro PRC and other AES states while not taking sides in dumb wars like that in Ukraine
>It's time to end this thread, as it serves no purpose
mmm yes give me your tears

Let's move this to the multipolarity thread?

>>1940619
Third woldist bullshit https://web.archive.org/web/20240831122604/https://leftypol.org/leftypol/res/1973461.html

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1914/dec/12a.htm

The objection may be advanced that, besides tsarism and under its wing, another historical force has arisen and become strong, viz., Great-Russian capitalism, which is carrying on progressive work by economically centralising and welding together vast regions. This objection, however, does not excuse, but on the contrary still more condemns our socialist-chauvinists, who should be called tsarist-Purishkevich socialists[7] (just as Marx called the Lassalleans Royal-Prussian socialists).[8] Let us even assume that history will decide in favour of Great-Russian dominant-nation capitalism, and against the hundred and one small nations. That is not impossible, for the entire history of capital is one of violence and plunder, blood and corruption. We do not advocate preserving small nations at all costs; other conditions being equal, we are decidedly for centralisation and are opposed to the petty-bourgeois ideal of federal relationships. Even if our assumption were true, however, it is, firstly, not our business, or that of democrats (let alone of socialists), to help Romanov-Bobrinsky-Purishkevich throttle the Ukraine, etc. In his own Junker fashion, Bismarck accomplished a progressive historical task, but he would be a fine “Marxist” indeed who, on such grounds, thought of justifying socialist support for Bismarck! Moreover, Bismarck promoted economic development by bringing together the disunited Germans, who were being oppressed by other nations. The economic prosperity and rapid development of Great Russia, however, require that the country be liberated from Great-Russian oppression of other nations—that is the difference that our admirers of the true-Russian would-be Bismarcks overlook.

Secondly, if history were to decide in favour of Great Russian dominant-nation capitalism, it follows hence that the socialist role of the Great-Russian proletariat, as the principal driving force of the communist revolution engendered by capitalism, will be all the greater. The proletarian revolution calls for a prolonged education of the workers in the spirit of the fullest national equality and brotherhood. Consequently, the interests of the Great-Russian proletariat require that the masses be systematically educated to champion—most resolutely, consistently, boldly and in a revolutionary manner—complete equality and the right to self-determination for all the nations oppressed by the Great Russians. The interests of the Great Russians’ national pride (understood, not in the slavish sense) coincide with the socialist interests of the Great-Russian (and all other) proletarians. Our model will always be Marx, who, after living in Britain for decades and becoming half-English, demanded freedom and national independence for Ireland in the interests of the socialist movement of the British workers.

In the second hypothetical case we have considered, our home-grown socialist-chauvinists, Plekhanov, etc., etc., will prove traitors, not only to their own country—a free and democratic Great Russia, but also to the proletarian brotherhood of all the nations of Russia, i.e., to the cause of socialism.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1915/jan/09.htm

We have before us two slogans. One is: war against the opportunists and the social-chauvinists, who are traitors. The other is: unity in Russia, in particular with Plekhanov (who, we shall state parenthetically, is behaving with us in exactly the same way as Südekum[2] with the Germans, Hyndman with the British, etc.)

Let us, however, consider in general and in the light of present-day events the meaning of the “unity” slogan. The proletariat’s unity is its greatest weapon in the struggle for the socialist revolution. From this indisputable truth it follows just as indisputably that, when a proletarian party is joined by a considerable number of petty-bourgeois elements capable of hampering the struggle for the socialist revolution, unity with such elements is harmful and perilous to the cause of the proletariat. Present-day events have shown that, on the one hand, the objective conditions are ripe for an imperialist war (i.e., a war reflecting the last and highest stage of capitalism), and, on the other hand, that decades of a so-called peaceful epoch have allowed an accumulation of petty-bourgeois and opportunist junk within the socialist parties of all the European countries. Some fifteen years ago, during the celebrated “Bernsteiniad” in Germany—and even earlier in many other countries—the question of the opportunist and alien elements within the proletarian parties had become a burning issue. There is hardly a single Marxist of note who has not recognised many times and on various occasions that the opportunists are in fact a non-proletarian element hostile to the socialist revolution.

The war has clearly proved that at a moment of crisis (and the imperialist era will undoubtedly be one of all kinds of crises) a sizable mass of opportunists, supported and often directly guided by the bourgeoisie (this is of particular importance!), go over to the latter’s camp, betray socialism, damage the workers’ cause, and attempt to ruin it. In every crisis the bourgeoisie will always aid the opportunists, will always try to suppress the revolutionary section of the proletariat, stopping short of nothing and employing the most unlawful and savage military measures. The opportunists are bourgeois enemies of the proletarian revolution, who in peaceful times carry on their bourgeois work in secret, concealing themselves within the workers’ parties, while in times of crisis they immediately prove to be open allies of the entire united bourgeoisie, from the conservative to the most radical and democratic part of the latter, from the free thinkers, to the religious and clerical sections. Anyone who has failed to understand this truth after the events we have gone through is hopelessly deceiving both himself and the workers. Individual desertions are inevitable under the present conditions, but their significance, it should be remembered, is determined by the existence of a section and current of petty-bourgeois opportunists. Such social-chauvinists, as Hyndman, Vandervelde, Guesde, Plekhanov and Kautsky, would be of no significance whatever if their spineless and banal speeches in defence of bourgeois patriotism were not taken up by the entire social strata of opportunists and by swarms of bourgeois papers and bourgeois politician

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1915/csi/vi.htm

The preceding lines had already been written when Die Neue Zeit of May 28 (No. 9) appeared with Kautsky’s concluding arguments on the “collapse of Social-Democracy” (Section 7 of his reply to Cunow). Kautsky sums up all his old sophisms, and a new one, in defence of social-chauvinism as follows:

>“It is simply untrue to say that the war is a purely imperialist one that at the outbreak of the war the alternative was either imperialism or socialism, that the socialist parties and the proletarian masses of Germany, France and, in many respects, also of Britain, unthinkingly and at the mere call of a handful of parliamentarians, threw themselves into the arms of imperialism, betrayed socialism and thus caused a collapse unexampled in history.”

A new sophism and a new deception of the workers: the war, if you please, is not a “purely” imperialist one!

Kautsky vacillates amazingly on the question of the character and significance of the present war; this party leader evades the precise and formal declarations of the Basle and Chemnitz congresses, as studiedly as a thief keeps away from the place where he has just committed a theft. In his pamphlet, The National State, etc., written in February 1915, Kautsky asserted that “still, in the final analysis”, the war is an “imperialist one” (p. 64). Now a fresh reservation is introduced: it is not a purely imperialist war. What else can it be?

It appears that it is also a national war! Kautsky arrives at this monstrous conclusion by means of the following “Plekhanovist” pseudo-dialectic:

>“The present war is not only the child of imperialism, but also of the Russian revolution.” As early as 1904, he, Kautsky, foresaw that the Russian revolution would revive Pan-Slavism in a new form, that “democratic Russia would, inevitably, greatly fan the desire of the Austrian and Turkish Slavs for national independence… . Then the Polish question would also become acute… . Austria would fall apart because, with the collapse of tsarism, the iron band which at present binds the centrifugal elements together would be destroyed” (Kautsky himself quotes this last phrase from his 1904 article). “The Russian revolution … gave a new and powerful impetus to the national aspirations of the East, adding Asia’s problems to those of Europe. All these problems are making themselves very strongly felt in the present war and are acquiring very decisive significance for the mood of the masses of the people, including the proletarian masses, whereas among the ruling classes imperialist tendencies are predominant” (p. 273, italics ours).

This is another sample of the prostitution of Marxism! Inasmuch as a “democratic Russia” would foster a striving towards freedom in the nations of Eastern Europe (this is indisputable), the present war, which will not liberate a single nation, but, whatever the outcome, will enslave many nations, is not a “purely” imperialist war. Inasmuch as the “collapse of tsarism” would mean the disintegration of Austria, owing to its undemocratic national structure, a temporarily strengthened, and counter-revolutionary tsarism, which is plundering Austria and is bringing still greater oppression to the nations inhabiting Austria, has given “the present war”, not a purely imperialist character but, to a certain degree, a national character. Inasmuch as “the ruling classes” are deluding the stupid petty bourgeois and browbeaten peasants with fables about the national aims of the imperialist war, a man of science, an authority on “Marxism”, and representative of the Second International, is entitled to reconcile the masses to this deception by means of a “formula” which claims that the ruling classes reveal imperialist tendencies, while the “people” and the proletarian masses reveal “national” aspirations.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1915/nov/20b.htm
The transformation of individuals from radical Social-Democrats and revolutionary Marxists into social-chauvinists is a phenomenon common to all the belligerents. The spate of chauvinism is so overwhelming that on all sides it has carried along with it a number of Left-wing Social-Democrats who are spineless or have outlived themselves. Parvus, who showed himself to be an adventurer as far back as the Russian revolution, has now really reached the uttermost limit, this in his little magazine, Die Glocke[1]. With an incredibly brazen air of self-satisfaction, he has taken the German opportunists under his wing. He flouts the beliefs he once cherished, and has forgotten the struggle between the revolutionary and the opportunist trends, and their history in the international Social-Democratic movement. With the bounce of a columnist confident of the bourgeoisie’s approval, he pats Marx on the shoulder, “correcting” him, without a vestige of conscientious or attentive criticism. He treats a certain Engels with undisguised contempt, and defends Britain’s pacifists and internationalists and Germany’s nationalists and jingoists. Rebuking the British social-patriots, whom he calls chauvinists and toadies to the bourgeoisie, he at the same time lauds the German social-patriots as revolutionary Social-Democrats and exchanges embraces with Lensch, Haenisch, Grunwald. He fawns upon Hindenburg, assuring his readers that “the German General Staff has taken a stand for a revolution in Russia”, and publishing servile paeans to this “embodiment of the German people’s soul”, its “mighty revolutionary sentiment”. He promises Germany a painless transition to socialism through an alliance between the conservatives and part of the socialists, and through “bread ration cards”. Like the petty coward he is, he condescendingly semi-approves of the Zimmerwald Conference, pretending not to have noticed in its manifesto the expressions directed against all shades of social-chauvinism, from the Parvus and Plekhanov variety, to that of Kolb and Kautsky.

In this connection another useful aspect of the present war should be noted. Not only are its quick-firing guns killing opportunism and anarchism, but the war itself is stripping the mask off the adventurers and renegades of socialism. It is to the proletariat’s advantage that history has started this preliminary purge of its movement on the eve of the socialist revolution, not during its course.

>>1943134
>No argument
>If you think this very specific instance is progressive you're dickriding Putler!
>Ignore everything else
I'm glad mods woke up at last and decided to bury these shitty threads

>>1943177
it's Great Russian chauvinism under a different name

Interesting, so it seems the mods are now taking a side against anti-campism?

Interesting development if so.

In general, as I have said before, the great split in the communist movement that will define this century will be the Greek-Chinese divide. And it will be about the very foundations of marxism: What do capitalism, socialism & imperialism actually mean and as a consequence, what constitutes revisionism and opportunism?

I salute the Chinese and their sympathizers in this fight, let us truly ideologically rip each other like the rabid dogs we are. And be warned that the "Line of Ελλάς" has sympathizers everywhere.

Major moves towards the China War being made today.

>>1943238
>allowing representation of taiwan does not interfere with the netherland's one china policy

lol??? how??? westoids need to either shit or get off the pot

>>1943222
ideology is largely irrelevant. chyna is building its productive forces, improving standards of living and life expectancy year after year. the imperialized world much prefers trading with it. Marx willing the PRC will swallow them
remember: ultraimperialism is possible, but only under communist leadership. campists being gung-ho about Russian ownership of Ukraine tell on themselves when they don't propose that the biggest extant communist party should be the sole influence in the region
>Interesting, so it seems the mods are now taking a side against anti-campism?
definitely a sign of low energy. we'll just make more threads

>>1943277
China should respond in kind by demanding UN representation for Aruba, Bonaire, Curaçao, Sint Eustatius, Sint Maarten and Saba, and also that the Dutch leave Suriname, and also demanding Flemish representation in the UN just to piss off the Belgians and inflame tensions between the two countries

>>1943222
>Interesting, so it seems the mods are now taking a side against anti-campism?
wait no I thought was joking when I said they were relocating the servers to Moscow

>>1942990
>Russia isn't AES, Putin isn't a communist. But
stopped reading

>>1943666
wait a sec.

>>1943666
>trotskyists
Wait I thought the ACP supported Russia

>>1943666
Kill yourself faggot.

This thread and the anti campist threads are replaced by the new Internationalist General:
https://leftypol.org/leftypol/res/1944320.html