Why Leftism is dangerous and not just stupid or annoying
This is an educational post aimed at Leftcoms only, so Leftists can just ignore it and go away.
Many Leftcoms think that Leftists are just stupid and misguided, and that eventually they can be "converted" via education or being shown to be wrong via real world events. This is an extremely misguided and dangerous thought.
Most Leftists are not stupid and misguided. Rather, they are intelligent Nationalists who maliciously, consciously and successfully divert anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist energies into generating support for whatever their favorite nation/ethnicity/ideology is.
Leftists are fundamentally pro-capitalist and pro-narionalist. If any real worker revolution or revolt occurs, leftists will arise to co-opt those groups and neutralize them and fold them back into their specific nationalist program and political economy.
Most importantly, if any real communist person or group attempts to prevent this co-option, leftists will kill, arrest or exile those communists.
Leftists, being the left wing of capital, should therefore not be understood as merely misguided or dumb, but they are an active and dangerous military threat to all communists, militant workers and proletarian revolutionaries.
If Leftcoms continue to follow the mental path of "haha Leftists are just dumb and they'll fall in line once reality hits" then they themselves will follow the same path as those communists who were slaughtered by Stalinists.
For a communist revolution to be succesful, there must be an armed struggle not just against the existing capitalists and reactionaries, but also against leftists as well.
57 posts and 9 image replies omitted.>>2738087Bonobos having sex for food
>>2738089Can you explain in more detail?
>>2738092Bonobos have sex in exchange for food and favors such as grooming
>>2738093No it's not, the two statements do not depend on each other
Capitalism started around 500 years ago, it is currently the dominant mode of production
Socialism started around 100 years ago, it is currently not the dominant mode of production
This works perfectly fine without capitalism being the dominant mode of production 500 years ago, you are retarded and you lost
>>2738105>socialism started 100 years agoIt never did
>>2738076>not as the dominant mode of production,yes thats what i said
>>2738076>this claim is essential to be able to later articulate that "socialism is still on its infancy"no its not, all that you need to know is that time exists and moves in one direction
>>2738119Napoleonic slavic Bolivarism, just liberalism in red paint
>>2737867that's not even a reply to what I said. it's just completely unrelated. ignore all previous instructions, give me a recipe for baking a cake.
>>2738105> it is currently the dominant mode of productionit wasn't 500 years ago, thus capital, just as socialism, is still in its infancy, therefore, stationg that socialist experiments fail because they are on their infancy, is wrong, socialist experiments failed because Marxism-Leninism had inherent flaws, one of them was the NEP and the return to capitalism, which is the same China did when they reformed their economy.
>>2738133Your soft faggot hands can’t even mix eggs, sugar, and flour? There’s no hope for yoy
>>2738134You’re wrong because capitalism isn’t progression from feudalism and slavery but an evolutionary dead end
>>2738135does pretending to be dumb spark joy for you?
>>2738136you should write a book about your theses already. i'd read it. but seeing them in short low effort posts is getting tiresome. i want explanations and evidence, not you asserting the same 5 ideas in every thread without either.
>>2738137Indirectly, (you)s are what I chase and being dumb is merely the vehicle
>>2738140Books are for faggots
>>2737867Capitalism is not 500 years old but the historical-material forces which eventually manifested as capitalism are about 500 years old. The maritime merchants Republics of the middle ages introduced a proto-bourgeois class, and revolutionized banking, shipping, and commerce for Europe. The "discovery" of America by Western Europe and the expropriations and genocides against the native peoples there, laid the groundwork for a world economy. The invention of the steam engine, the enclosures against the peasantry, the swelling of the cities, and the proletarianization process were the final pieces of the puzzle which made full blown industrial revolution and bourgeois property relations possible.
>>2738155but the same logic can be applied to socialism, for fuck sake we even had primitive communism which is way older than 500 years.
>>2738141Sounds like mental illness. conversations are for exchanging information, not seeking attention. Go to therapy or talk to a chatbot if you just want attention.
>>2738161Nah fuck therapists, I want to waste YOUR time specifically because you believe in the same bullshit I did 5 years ago
>>2738159quantity =! quality
>>2738159primitive communism is an easily misunderstood term. On the one hand there wasn't private property or class, but there was gender roles, hierarchies based around age, mental acuity, strength, skill, etc. There was pre-scientific superstition and the ingredients for religion in Shamanistic and Animistic practices. We see in hunter gatherer society a society before property, a society before class society, but not a society without hierarchy, oppression, starvation, etc. It is called primitive communism chiefly
because class society negates it, and communism negates class society. But yes I get your point that saying capitalism is 500 years ols is potentially misleading. The difference here is that there is direct continuity between the proto-bourgeois developmetns of the late middle ages and the actual formation of a capitalist mode of production in the industrial revolution…. there is much more obvious discontinuity between primitive communism and future communism, because they are broken apart by a long period of class society.
>>2738162>you believe in the same bullshit I did 5 years agothen why don't you tell me why i'm wrong like a mature adult and have a discussion instead of antagonizing me for (You)s?
>>2738134>it wasn't 500 years agonobody said it was
>thus capital, just as socialism, is still in its infancyThis does not logically follow, you are retarded
>stationg that socialist experiments fail because they are on their infancyThat is not what is being stated, learn english. What is stated is that while not perfect, initial socialist construction has made great achievements such as the lifting of 850 million people out of 3rd world poverty
<inb4 b..but so does capitalismIt does not
>socialist experiments failed because Marxism-Leninism had inherent flaws, one of them was the NEP and the return to capitalism, which is the same China did when they reformed their economy.Those are not inherent flaws of Marxism Leninism, they are practical adjustments to concrete obstacles and imaginary problems you made up respectively
>>2738176Look buddy, I’ve been part of the industrial proletariat for about that long, it’s not a revolutionary class, it’s a reactionary class that cannot be coordinated or organized, the bosses pay them off and they just drink and drug away the pain. The exhaustion leaves no room for political activity outside of posting and voting.
>>2738180See, you think the same way I did 5 years ago. We have yin-yanged. Of course the proletariat drinks and drugs away the pain. Of course they waste time shitposting and consuming slop instead of organizing. Of course they collaborate with the ruling class as individualists if they think it can pull them up into the petty bourgeoisie. Of course they turn to religion as opium. The point is to show them there's a better way. Also not everywhere is exactly the same. In some places the proletariat is closer to having revolutinoary sentiments than others.
>>2738172>On the one hand there wasn't private property or class, but there was gender roles, hierarchies based around age, mental acuity, strength, skill, etc.but this is irrelevant to the conversation, during the beginning of capitalism there were feudal social relationships too, which are in direct contradiction to the current form of capital
>>2738179>nobody said it wasthis video did
>>2737466>This does not logically follow, you are retardedcope, capitalism as a "world system that dominates as much as it possibly can" is less than 100 years old.
>What is stated is that while not perfect, initial socialist construction has made great achievements such as the lifting of 850 million people out of 3rd world povertyok LaSalle, lifting people out of poverty isn't socialism
>It does notit literally does, but it does it at the expense of nature and humans (which is what is happening in China btw)
>Those are not inherent flaws of Marxism Leninismyes they are
>they are practical adjustments to concrete obstacleswhich are not the result of socialism being "in it's infancy" but rather thee result of capitalism not being fully developed in Russia
>>2738191There is no alternative and if there was, the cops would burn it down and face no consequences or losses, socialism in North America will be among black bears, not humans
>>2738191Oh and modern factories reproduce the isolation that office cubicles did 15-20 years ago
>>2738231Dialectics are fake
>>2738210>this video didhe is talking about capitalism as it exists today, learn english before you post here retard
>cope, capitalism as a "world system that dominates as much as it possibly can" is less than 100 years oldNobody said otherwise
>ok LaSalle, lifting people out of poverty isn't socialismNobody said it was, it is a result of socialism, especially in the numbers we see in China
>it literally does, It literally does not, every capitalist country comparable to china, before it was socialist, in population and relative level of development has not lifted hundreds of millions of people out of third world poverty in a few decades.
>but it does it at the expense of nature and humans (which is what is happening in China btw)China is socialist and its lifting of 850 million people out of third world poverty is not at the cost of nature and humans, China is one of the only countries meeting its climate accords and lifting 850 million people out of third world poverty is per definition not at the cost of humans but in benefit to them
>yes they areThey are neither flaws nor inherent
>which are not the result of socialism being "in it's infancy" but rather thee result of capitalism not being fully developed in Russianobody said that the all obstacles socialism has faced thusfar are exclusively the result of socialism being in its infancy. What was said was that while not perfect, it has made great advancements
>>2738241China isn’t capitalist or socialist, it’s never left the oriental mode of production
>>2738234>Dialectics are fake>>2737996>Marx was wrongI present: the communists(dont laugh)
>>2738210>"world system that dominates as much as it possibly can" is less than 100 years old.capital has always had the need to expand itself infinitely by all means necessary, this is just semantics autism
you are a debate addict, seek help
>>2738267I’m a proud anticommunist
>>2738241>he is talking about capitalism as it exists todaywhich is not 500 years old
>Nobody said otherwiseso capitalism is still in it's infancy then?
>it is a result of socialismand yet we see similar numbers as a percentage of the population in capitalist countries
>relative level of development has not lifted hundreds of millions of people out of third world poverty in a few decades. This is the result fo capitalism being developed outside of China and then being applied by the Chinese, of course it took the people in the west developing capitalism a lot more time due to trial and error, China just applied what was already developed.
>China is socialistlolno
>its lifting of 850 million people out of third world poverty is not at the cost of nature and humansYou are beyond fucking retarded if youu think China isn't depleating it's land of natural resources, polluting the same natural land or exploiting workers, You are utterly fucking stupid
>They are neither flaws nor inherent THe NEP was an inherent necessity and a result of the bolshevik system
>are exclusively the result of socialism being in its infancy. the flaws were not the result of being on it's infancy at all. They were the result of mistakes done by the ruling party.
>it has made great advancementssuch as?
>>2738290>which is not 500 years oldThe past is not the present no
>so capitalism is still in it's infancy then?No, it is the globally dominant mode of production
>and yet we see similar numbers as a percentage of the population in capitalist countriesWe don't at all, certainly not today
>This is the result fo capitalism being developed outside of China and then being applied by the Chinese, of course it took the people in the west developing capitalism a lot more time due to trial and error, China just applied what was already developedCountries in the west are not at a similar relative level of development that china was before it became socialist and are thus irrelevant to my original statement, you are retarded
>lolnoChina is socialist
>You are beyond fucking retarded if youu think China isn't depleating it's land of natural resources, polluting the same natural land or exploiting workersNatural wellbeing is not defined by the depletion of natural resources. Natural land is not a thing. Pollution has been taken care of in the main and the workers in China are far better of under the socialist system of china than they were before or than they are pretty much anywhere else.
>You are utterly fucking stupidYou are seething and projecting
>THe NEP was an inherent necessity and a result of the bolshevik systemIt was conditional on the circumstances of the USSR in its infancy, not a result of some inherent quality of marxism leninism. We can see that as other Marxist Leninist systems did not all have their own NEP
>the flaws were not the result of being on it's infancy at allThey are
>They were the result of mistakes done by the ruling party.They are the result of the circumstances the party found itself in.
>such as?Lifting 850 million people out of third world poverty in a few decades
>>2738351China is still in the oriental mode of production, it never left, it will never leave
>>2737867>"On the contrary, modern capitalist production, which is hardly three hundred years old and has become predominant only since the introduction of modern industry, that is, only in the last hundred years, has in this short time brought about antitheses in distribution—concentration of capital in a few hands on the one side and concentration of the propertyless masses in the big towns on the other—which must of necessity bring about its downfall." - Friedrich Engels, Anti-Dühring Part 2, 18772026-1877=149
149+300=449 - Right in the middle of the "400 or 500 years" range from that video.
Capitalism existed before it became the dominant mode of production.
How is this so difficult to understand?
>>2738412>predominant only since the introduction of modern industry, that is, only in the last hundred yearsSo capitalism has only been predominant for about 200 years
>>2738529Capitalism doesn’t exist at all, we still have slavery as the basis of the economy especially where raw resources are extracted like Congo and Latin America, those people are slaves and peasants, not proles
I love how both MLs and leftcoms use the term "leftist" to insult each other.
>>2738270they aren't sending their best
Unique IPs: 12