Having a lot of experience with the left and left-adjacent people, I have a lot to say on that. You'd have to reformulate the question to make it worth anyone's while tho.
There are 44 different countries in Europe and they all have different political parties and conditions.
There is no proletariat to form a meaningful left in the first world, they are all either lumpen or bourgeois with nothing between
>>1901539from the bottom of my heart, kill yourself, your third worldism reeks
>>1901540t. Lumpen bourgeois
>>1901531By chance the communists of western Europe are organizing themselves as Marx and Engels said that one must act in a bourgeois election with a revolutionary workers' party that remains firmly independent of the bourgeoisie with an anti-imperialist position without superstition of the state and bourgeois democracy ?
As far as I know, these parties exist and must be supported instead of the lesser evil that I would call the greater evil, which would be capitalist imperialism, which is why economic sovereignty has to be prioritized above all else, therefore the party must be totally anti-EU and anti-Nato without fantasies of reforming these organizations even if the media hates you.
Again I will quote these texts for you:
<Complete abstention from political action is impossible. The abstentionist press participates in politics every day. It is only a question of how one does it, and of what politics one engages in. For the rest, to us abstention is impossible. The working-class party functions as a political party in most countries by now, and it is not for us to ruin it by preaching abstention. Living experience, the political oppression of the existing governments compels the workers to occupy themselves with politics whether they like it or not, be it for political or for social goals. To preach abstention to them is to throw them into the embrace of bourgeois politics. The morning after the Paris Commune, which has made proletarian political action an order of the day, abstention is entirely out of the question.
<We want the abolition of classes. What is the means of achieving it? The only means is political domination of the proletariat. For all this, now that it is acknowledged by one and all, we are told not to meddle with politics. The abstentionists say they are revolutionaries, even revolutionaries par excellence. Yet revolution is a supreme political act and those who want revolution must also want the means of achieving it, that is, political action, which prepares the ground for revolution and provides the workers with the revolutionary training without which they are sure to become the dupes of the Favres and Pyats the morning after the battle. However, our politics must be working-class politics. The workers' party must never be the tagtail of any bourgeois party; it must be independent and have its goal and its own policy.
<The political freedoms, the right of assembly and association, and the freedom of the press — those are our weapons. Are we to sit back and abstain while somebody tries to rob us of them? It is said that a political act on our part implies that we accept the exiting state of affairs. On the contrary, so long as this state of affairs offers us the means of protesting against it, our use of these means does not signify that we recognise the prevailing order.
<Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, "Apropos Of Working-Class Political Action".https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1871/09/21.htm
<Even where there is no prospect of achieving their election the workers must put up their own candidates to preserve their independence, to gauge their own strength and to bring their revolutionary position and party standpoint to public attention. They must not be led astray by the empty phrases of the democrats, who will maintain that the workers’ candidates will split the democratic party and offer the forces of reaction the chance of victory. All such talk means, in the final analysis, that the proletariat is to be swindled. The progress which the proletarian party will make by operating independently in this way is infinitely more important than the disadvantages resulting from the presence of a few reactionaries in the representative body.
<Karl Marx and Frederick Engels , "Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League"https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1850-ad1.htm
>>1901548
>Hungary
lolno
>>1901590yea not hungary, that was a complete mistake for citing them in the list of places that "the left is alive".
>anti-imperialist or anti-american policy
What does it have to do with the left?
>>1901610they want a right-wing party that's against minorities and poor people but is geopolitically against NATO (the height of leftism)
>>1901621>right wing is when opposing americaRadlibGOD trvthke
>>1901623It is theorically impossible to get socialism without mass expropiations and destruction of american operated institutions within the country.
At most you can get a gibs state that funnels money from the public sector into the private one
>>1901610>Anti ImperialismRead Lenin and Marx
>Anti-Americanread literally anything or come out of the rock you've been hiding under for the past century
>>1901659Sounds like radlib third-worldist gobbledygook
>>1901648>It is theorically impossible to get socialism without mass expropiations and destruction of american operated institutions within the country.Yes and that isn't a one step plan, you need infrastructure and people doing stuff to do that. As I said, you can't just Leroy Jenkins it.
>>1901645the nazis were left wing, who knew
>>1901689Most socialist parties in europe are hiperfixated in "preserving democracy" (bureucrats on porkys pocket) rather than ever if at all questioning the american hegemony over their economic and infrastructural institutions
If anything suggesting something like "expropiate wall street bitches" might get you labeled as facist
>>1901531>Is there a left, anyhow, in europe?not really
I'd say that for their size PTB/PVDA in Belgium and Rødt in Norway are fine, there are other ones but they're quite small.
No. In many ways it is even more barren than the Angloid left. The best they can do is some old Boomers wishing the USSR were back.
>>1901545perfect pause frame
>>1901698nazis didnt oppose america, america opposed the nazis
>>1901531Leftism in Europe is becoming more authentic as it deviates from universalist economic populism towards explicit anti-white politics, and as such there is more leftism then there ever was.
(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)
>>1901957>anti-white white people aren't even real. so fighting them is redundant idpol
>>1901698It's right there in the name: national
socialists. Based and gegen burger-pilled!
>>1901957>anti-white politicsUnironically start reading or kill yourself.
>>1901957If race automatically means all people who look the same help each other then why did "whites" kill each other for centuries and centuries and continue to do so today?
>the jews!even before jews became economically powerful white people were still killing each other. britain used to be a bunch of warring tribes. that's why they call it a "united" kingdom because it used to be intensely divided. and even when they united they still oppressed their fellow "whites" in Ireland. "whiteness" is ahistorical. people in the past did not hesitate to kill each other simply because they looked the same.
>>1901957Jump in front of a train please
Unique IPs: 23