/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>We must therefore be clear: to expect communism to emerge organically from this process is a strategic and theoretical error.
this is your problem, to use concept like 'to emerge organically'
You substitute this for the 'will of God'.
All anti-imperialists and communists understand than anti-imperialism is simply what the name means: against imperialism, and that it does not, as a side meal, also automatically offer communism. The point is anti-imperialism is a sine qua non for communism. Not a sufficient condition, but a necessary one.

>>2533547
This is what I have been saying for years. Anti-imperialism has nothing to do with socialism and the movement has been taken over by 3rd world nationalists.

Cope.

>>2533591
t. picrel

>>2533642
This is how I imagine all the retards that cry about "muh third worldism" look like.
Btw OP made this thread after he got BTFO in /PRC/ lol, many such cases
Sad!

Sorry, but the global revolution WILL happen.

>>2533547
Le anti-imperialism is le worst product of imperialism.

Why are you arguing against arguments nobody is making OP?

>>2533573
"Anti imperialism" as leftoids understand and support is just pro imperialism. The only anti imperialism which can exist is anti capitalism, which currently doesn't exist anywhere on the planet.

The Empire Never Ended

>>2534674
communism sublates capitalism and emerges from it through revolution. It is not simply "anti-capitalism." Engels points out there are several forms of "anti-capitalism" which are not Communist:

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm

— 24 —
How do communists differ from socialists?

The so-called socialists are divided into three categories.


[ Reactionary Socialists: ]
The first category consists of adherents of a feudal and patriarchal society which has already been destroyed, and is still daily being destroyed, by big industry and world trade and their creation, bourgeois society. This category concludes, from the evils of existing society, that feudal and patriarchal society must be restored because it was free of such evils. In one way or another, all their proposals are directed to this end.

This category of reactionary socialists, for all their seeming partisanship and their scalding tears for the misery of the proletariat, is nevertheless energetically opposed by the communists for the following reasons:

(i) It strives for something which is entirely impossible.

(ii) It seeks to establish the rule of the aristocracy, the guildmasters, the small producers, and their retinue of absolute or feudal monarchs, officials, soldiers, and priests – a society which was, to be sure, free of the evils of present-day society but which brought it at least as many evils without even offering to the oppressed workers the prospect of liberation through a communist revolution.

(iii) As soon as the proletariat becomes revolutionary and communist, these reactionary socialists show their true colors by immediately making common cause with the bourgeoisie against the proletarians.


[ Bourgeois Socialists: ]
The second category consists of adherents of present-day society who have been frightened for its future by the evils to which it necessarily gives rise. What they want, therefore, is to maintain this society while getting rid of the evils which are an inherent part of it.

To this end, some propose mere welfare measures – while others come forward with grandiose systems of reform which, under the pretense of re-organizing society, are in fact intended to preserve the foundations, and hence the life, of existing society.

Communists must unremittingly struggle against these bourgeois socialists because they work for the enemies of communists and protect the society which communists aim to overthrow.


[ Democratic Socialists: ]
Finally, the third category consists of democratic socialists who favor some of the same measures the communists advocate, as described in Question 18, not as part of the transition to communism, however, but as measures which they believe will be sufficient to abolish the misery and evils of present-day society.

These democratic socialists are either proletarians who are not yet sufficiently clear about the conditions of the liberation of their class, or they are representatives of the petty bourgeoisie, a class which, prior to the achievement of democracy and the socialist measures to which it gives rise, has many interests in common with the proletariat.

It follows that, in moments of action, the communists will have to come to an understanding with these democratic socialists, and in general to follow as far as possible a common policy with them – provided that these socialists do not enter into the service of the ruling bourgeoisie and attack the communists.

It is clear that this form of co-operation in action does not exclude the discussion of differences.

>>2533547
Uhh, yeah, no shit. OP, socialism is a long process of evolving social-economic factors; you can't have a socialist state in an underdeveloped region. Right now they need to negate their feudal-colonial state by creating a local bourgeoisie and market to be able to achieve economic sovereignty while still being part of the international bourgeoisie order, even if it means creating alienation and trauma in the social sphere as a result of capitalism's contradictions.

Only after the market phase is fully exhausted and the contradictions pile up can they negate their own bourgeoisie and establish a socialist state, which would be national communism, i.e., a worker's dictatorship in the form of the previous nation state.

Communism will happen only after the international order is fully negated.

Anti-imperialism is not communism but the road to it.

>>2534697
So you're taking on the Menshevik position, interesting

>>2534703
Taking leaps of faith out of ideological purity is utter nonsense and must be rooted out as anti-revolutionary.

There's a reason why the USSR didn't survive and China did.

>>2534697
There is no anti imperialism any where on the planet, so there is no road to communism

The US will not allow independent development in the Global South and since the 1980s has undermined all efforts at independent reform in Latin America. The US never really gave a fuck about communism, they just care about loyalty. Communist, capitalist, it doesn't matter what these countries call themselves as long as they are friendly to the US and US business interests and allow the US to extract wealth from their country.

>>2533547
>Antiimperialism/National Liberation is not Communism
I don't think anyone here has ever said it was. Pointless thread

>>2534726
Is there any actual evidence of this? The entire west poured billions into industrialising China because their own RoP was declining. To a lesser extent they did the same thing in India and other countries. Many global South countries today are vastly more industrialized and have a higher standard of living than 1980.

Seriously just look at comparisons of life expectancy, infant mortality, industrial stock, electricity production, food production, literacy etc. Virtually all global South countries saw massive improvements in all these categories.

>>2534765 (me)

In fact, the decline/stagnation of living standards in the West in the past 40 years, is the direct result of neoliberal reforms that outsourced industry to the third world. The West colonized itself to benefit global capitalism as a whole (since the Western capitalist class is not nationalist, but globalist).

Now this is ending because of too much resistance in the Western countries, so they're going to end the trade deficit, eliminate immigration and take on a mercantilist approach again like the past.

>>2533547
The problem of "not Communism" is the real issue here. The vast majority of the world's workers, and most of the political left, believe that Communism is undesirable or impractical. Or that it's a mythic end goal at the end of a millennia-long period of national industrial development.

Propagating a clear conception of what Communism is, its pros and cons, and the institutional muscle to make it look achievable is the central and obvious task of the radical left today. That's the only way to fight back against the various right-deviationists that have been hogging the mic on /leftypol/, social media and the like.

>>2534820
>The vast majority of the world's workers, and most of the political left, believe that Communism is undesirable or impractical
vast majority of westoids you mean. Both india and china, some of the most populous countries on earth, have enormous communist parties

>>2534833
dont bother with these people, they will never admit there is a world outside the US and western Europe populated by actual humans and where real process are happening

>>2534833
Apart from the leftcommunist parties, real communist parties don't exist. All of those parties you mention are just bourgeois parties opportunistically using communist symbols and phraseology to pursue national capitalist ends.

>>2534916
He is just a westoid blackpilled by his own intergenerational purity fetish.

>>2534833
All 'official' communist parties, western or not, are Dengist/Eurocommunist parties who advocate national developmentalism. Maybe with a vague in-500-years 'transition to communism.'

>>2535267
and thats a good thing

>>2534916
>is he real unironic leftcom bordigger?
Sadly we have infestation of these people.

OP is somewhat correct. Unfortunately, he is going to the side of Rosa Luxemburg against Lenin on the matters of national-liberation. In the current era of imperialist war, this is in some sense justifiable because of the victory of campism in the majority of the communist movement. However, national liberation can still play a critical part in communist revolution; the peoples fighting against imperialism have the abstract possibility of commecting their struggle with the struggle to overthrow capitalism since the masses are drawn into world-historic political action. How this will happen depends on the communists of said countries. What OP is correct on is that by now, the communist movement should have enough experience to overcome the strategy (not tactic) of stages in revolution.

The strategy of “stages”, the idea that revolutionary movements must first complete a bourgeois-democratic phase before advancing to socialism, dominated the Communist International’s programmatic line after the October Revolution. This approach classified countries according to their level of capitalist development and their place in the imperialist hierarchy, prescribing distinct “paths” to socialism: immediate proletarian revolution for the advanced capitalist states, transitional democratic stages for the semi-developed, and protracted national-democratic periods for the colonial and semi-colonial world.

This framework, however, underestimated the international and universal character of the imperialist epoch, where the basic contradiction between capital and labor has matured in every capitalist country. It treated national development differentials as decisive rather than derivative of global capitalism’s uneven but interconnected structure. By defining revolutionary strategy based on “backwardness” and temporary class alliances instead of the objective antagonism of labor and capital, it delayed and diluted proletarian revolutionary goals.

Historical experience has since proven that the productive forces can advance more under socialist relations of production than under capitalism, as Lenin himself foresaw when he argued that proletarian power can create the very cultural and material conditions needed for socialism. The failure of the stageist approach, which sought intermediate regimes (“people’s democracies,” “anti-monopoly coalitions,” etc.), revealed that such transitional forms only strengthen bourgeois domination and demobilize the working class.

Today, after a century of revolutionary practice and counterrevolutionary setbacks, the communist movement possesses the historical and theoretical experience to transcend the stage theory altogether. The decisive criterion for revolutionary strategy must not be the relative level of productive development or geopolitical dependency, but the fundamental contradiction between capital and labor, whose resolution everywhere requires the direct struggle for proletarian power, the dictatorship of the proletariat, as the immediate goal, not a distant horizon.

In short: the era of imperialism is already the era of socialist revolution. Any retreat to the “stages” conception means a retreat from Marxism itself

>>2547840

The Venezuelan experience under Chávez and Maduro shows the dead end of the stageist strategy of a “national” or “anti-imperialist” phase. The Bolivarian Revolution promised to build “socialism of the 21st century,” that was greeted by many trotskyite, bukharinite and other revisionist, that in one way or another minimize the expirience of 20th century socialism, and adopt reformist "transition programmes", yet it never broke from capitalism. Despite state control over oil and limited redistributive policies, private ownership and class exploitation remained untouched. By subordinating the working class to an alliance with the so-called “national bourgeoisie,” the PSUV transformed the workers’ movement into a base for capitalist management rather than revolutionary transformation.

This approach mirrors the classic reformist illusion that capitalism can be “humanized” or made “sovereign” under national control. In practice, the Bolivarian state became a new form of state capitalism, giving rise to a Bolivarian bourgeoisie enriched through oil rents and state contracts, while workers faced inflation, wage erosion, and repression. The 2013–2019 crisis exposed this reality: the government turned to austerity, privatization, and Special Economic Zones—policies identical to neoliberal adjustment. For Marxists, Venezuela proves that there are no national or democratic stages left in the imperialist epoch. Every revolution that does not aim directly at the dictatorship of the proletariat ends up managing capitalism in new colors.

Ofc, communists have to defend Venezuela from US aggression. This doesn't change the fact the bankruptcy of an alliance with the national bourgeoisie for supposed anti-imperialist goals not only betrays socialism but even these goals, because only the working class is a steady enemy of imperialism, because it is in essence capitalism.

>>2533573
/thread

>>2534726
>The US will not allow independent development in the Global South and since the 1980s has undermined all efforts at independent reform in Latin America
Cunts like you have never read Marx and never will, I hope every last one of you modern nationalist freaks genuinely dies for fucking people’s understanding of capitalism so fucking badly

ITT: MLoids raging yet again that even a single person posting here isn’t a retarded hitlerite holding steadfast to an original sin mythos and redemptive story of a new volkish reich

>>2547982
meds

>>2533547
The principal contradiction depends on the place and time. At a global level and in large swathes of the world, the principal contradiction is between workers and the exploitation of the capitalists. In many parts of the world, the principal contradiction is between the oppressed and imperialism. In the imperial core, I suspect the principal contradiction is between everyone and the idiocy of OP.

>>2547982
If Europeans actually embraced communism on their own instead of spreading their assholes for fascism/neoliberalism and having the Soviets forcing it on half of them at gunpoint. Third Worldism would not be needed.

>>2533642
il forzata meme

>>2548008
>Voluntarist nonsense
<Overt idealism
<Le metaphysical evil
<blood guilt
You will never be a marxist

>>2548149
>Pointing out basic history is "blood guilt".
You will sooner bend over for fascists who will kill scores of Africans, Arab, and Asians for lebensraum and resources than support their fight for independence if they don't prove to be sufficiently adherent to your interpretations of Marx.

>>2535457
Gladly*

>>2548177
>>2548177
>Voluntarist nonsense
<Overt idealism
<Le metaphysical evil
<blood guilt
<moral shaming
<hysteria
You will never be a marxist

>>2548348
Sorry Euroids your resource colonies WILL be declaring their independence.
Said former resource colonies WILL acquire thermonuclear weapons.
The "Aryan Crusade" WILL be met with The People's Atomic Counterattack.
Total Euroid Nuclear Annihilation WILL be enacted.

>>2533547
>Antiimperialism/National Liberation is not Communism
i wonder if that is why they are different words

>>2548353
this