The American 'working class' produce zero surplus value through their net nonproductive labor and physically cannot sustain themselves due to deindustrialization. Each and every single lumpen settler owes more than forty trillion in exports to repay their debt to the rest of the planet and survives off the surplus labor of non-americans from Berlin to Siberia. Even ignoring the countless acts of terrorism committed by the burgereich, the consumerism of treats must end. As the pedotariat of epsteinland must work for several years and export to maybe repay even 30 percent of what occupied turtle island owes to the non-american surplus value producing global proletariat.
Any strawman that does not address the largest trade deficit that will ever exist shall be ignored.
>>2741331yes billions must produce surplus value, bourgeois consumerism must die.
>>2741335>owesbourgeois moralism
>>2741341Karl Marx was a bourgeois moralist for synthesizing class struggle? Or would you rather be exterminated instead. What do you 'think' American national debt means?
>Any strawman that does not address the largest trade deficit that will ever exist shall be ignored. >>2741353shit nobody ever said. those that live off the surplus value off others are not proletariat.
more strawmen that does not address the national debt problem.
>>2741356>Any strawman that does not address the largest trade deficit that will ever exist shall be ignored.
<literally porkyGive back the surplus value from the global proletariat that Americans do not produce for themselves.
>>2741360>not mine. it's yours because you dont produce anything for the outside world and need to consume foreign surplus value to survive.
>>2741362>the onionshit that will never happen because americans will never give up their coonsumer bucks.
if they sell their labor power to survive they're workers
>>2741378>if they sell their labor power to survive they're workersthe people's walmart consumers are objectively non productive ziocattle that produce nothing that they consume.
>>2741375#1 Joke Understander Award
>>2741387that's too damn bad
Of course I don’t consume what I produce you feudalist retard, I’m not a subsistence farmer
>>2741399We are alienated from the means of production
>>2741399Least functionally illiterate american award
>what i produce did you mean a net total of nothing?
>>2741396>Any strawman that does not address the largest trade deficit that will ever exist shall be ignored.Socdem idpol image
>>2741411I produce steel scrap
24% of the American workforce is employed in manufa
>>2741417>Any strawman that does not address the largest trade deficit that will ever exist shall be ignored.<24% of the American workforce is employed in manufa-ACK!the supermajority 80 percent of the American economy is literaly consooming and producing nothing.
>>2741419I eat it and it makes me strong, strong enough to to wring your bony faggot neck
>>2741425>>2741428Most honest americans.
>I eat it and it makes me strong, strong enough to to wring your bony faggot neckBahaha.
good luck with that pedolard.
>>2741433I drink algae as a chaser for whiskey, come at me JDPON i have .22 win mag and 7mm Mauser for your ass
>>2741433i’m worse than Epstein, your vid is gonna be reverse Nick Berg
>>2741437>if Americans aren't proletarians then explain this??not clicking on that burgerpedo.
>>2741438I know you drink nuerotoxins because from your behavior chimp. I will do nothing and win.
>muh JDPONutterly spooked by twitter and 9/11 didnt happen
>>2741267Wrong. This speech of yours is that of a resentful Third Worldist living in the First World, trying to create complacency among First World workers so they don't organize, reducing Marxism to some kind of guilty sin based on feeling sorry for the suffering of others, "those who suffer more," to create more passivity since other propaganda tactics of imperialist capitalism aren't working for co-optation. Both the United States and Israel are made up of workers selling their labor power, but as always, counter-revolutionary workers with false consciousness who are apologists for imperialist capitalism can be punished by populations subjugated by imperialism, and these populations, subjugated or threatened with subjugation by finance capital, have the right to use violence to acquire financial sovereignty.
The labor aristocracy is a small minority where some class traitors opportunistically try to co-opt workers so that they do not organize and have solidarity among themselves, leading to an ideology of class conciliation with the national bourgeoisie that deceives workers to weaken the movement collectively.
The communist movement is not a proletarian identity but a radical movement for the proletarian class to gain supremacy in order to abolish private property and profit, thereby abolishing social classes and the proletariat as a proletariat to be organized by the community on a common plan as workers. The working class is the most revolutionary and needs a movement independent of the bourgeoisie, but this movement has to be from the perspective of the revolutionary class so that the other working classes that do not have a direct connection with the means of production can act with what they have in common with the revolutionary class to socialize and advance the movement and not get into anarchist or reformist confusion of class conciliation.
All other classes can become communists if they do not forget the perspective they are fighting for and they must act with what they have in common with the radical movement of the working class to abolish the present state of things so that there is no confusion, therefore you have intellectuals who will serve the proletarian class to assume power, together with the other working classes who recognize their interest in the supremacy of the proletariat. The capitalist class can become communist if it becomes a class traitor for the destruction of its class and sees an interest in the emancipation of humanity and the end of the exploitation of man by man in the future.
The labor aristocracy is a type of representative of the working class that weakens the workers' movement with the opportunism of class conciliation to deceive and divide them, I think it is very likely that the criticism for unions with the co-opted leadership to betray the working class applies in this definition as a type of class traitor. Remembering that the bribe that the capitalist offers is optional as a concession tactic along with repression to facilitate the exploitation of capital.
Let's see what Lenin have to say about the labor aristocracy:
<In a letter to Marx, dated October 7, 1858, Engels wrote: “…The English proletariat is actually becoming more and more bourgeois, so that this most bourgeois of all nations is apparently aiming ultimately at the possession of a bourgeois aristocracy and a bourgeois proletariat alongside the bourgeoisie. For a nation which exploits the whole world this is of course to a certain extent justifiable.” In a letter to Sorge, dated September 21, 1872, Engels informs him that Hales kicked up a big row in the Federal Council of the International and secured a vote of censure on Marx for saying that “the English labour leaders had sold themselves”. Marx wrote to Sorge on August 4, 1874: “As to the urban workers here [in England], it is a pity that the whole pack of leaders did not get into Parliament. This would be the surest way of getting rid of the whole lot.” In a letter to Marx, dated August 11, 1881, Engels speaks about “those very worst English trade unions which allow themselves to be led by men sold to, or at least paid by, the bourgeoisie.” In a letter to Kautsky, dated September 12, 1882, Engels wrote: “You ask me what the English workers think about colonial policy. Well, exactly the same as they think about politics in general. There is no workers’ party here, there are only Conservatives and Liberal-Radicals, and the workers gaily share the feast of England’s monopoly of the world market and the colonies.”
<On December 7, 1889, Engels wrote to Sorge: “The most repulsive thing here [in England] is the bourgeois ‘respectability’, which has grown deep into the bones of the workers…. Even Tom Mann, whom I regard as the best of the lot, is fond of mentioning that he will be lunching with the Lord Mayor. If one compares this with the French, one realises, what a revolution is good for, after all.”[10] In a letter, dated April 19, 1890: “But under the surface the movement [of the working class in England] is going on, is embracing ever wider sections and mostly just among the hitherto stagnant lowest [Engels’s italics] strata. The day is no longer far off when this mass will suddenly find itself, when it will dawn upon it that it itself is this colossal mass in motion.” On March 4, 1891: “The failure of the collapsed Dockers’ Union; the ‘old’ conservative trade unions, rich and therefore cowardly, remain lone on the field….” September 14, 1891: at the Newcastle Trade Union Congress the old unionists, opponents of the eight-hour day, were defeated “and the bourgeois papers recognise the defeat of the bourgeois labour party” (Engels’s italics throughout)….
<That these ideas, which were repeated by Engels over the course of decades, were so expressed by him publicly, in the press, is proved by his preface to the second edition of The Condition of the Working Class in England, 1892. Here he speaks of an “aristocracy among the working class”, of a “privileged minority of the workers”, in contradistinction to the “great mass of working people”. “A small, privileged, protected minority” of the working class alone was “permanently benefited” by the privileged position of England in 1848–68, whereas “the great bulk of them experienced at best but a temporary improvement”…. “With the break-down of that [England’s industrial] monopoly, the English working class will lose that privileged position…” The members of the “new” unions, the unions of the unskilled workers, “had this immense advantage, that their minds were virgin soil, entirely free from the inherited ‘respectable’ bourgeois prejudices which hampered the brains of the better situated ‘old unionists’” …. “The so-called workers’ representatives” in England are people “who are forgiven their being members of the working class because they themselves would like to drown their quality of being workers in the ocean of their liberalism…”[…]
<The bourgeoisie of an imperialist “Great” Power can economically bribe the upper strata of “its” workers by spending on this a hundred million or so francs a year, for its superprofits most likely amount to about a thousand million. And how this little sop is divided among the labour ministers, “labour representatives” (remember Engels’s splendid analysis of the term), labour members of War Industries Committees, labour officials, workers belonging to the narrow craft unions, office employees, etc., etc., is a secondary question.[…]
<The last third of the nineteenth century saw the transition to the new, imperialist era. Finance capital not of one, but of several, though very few, Great Powers enjoys a monopoly. (In Japan and Russia the monopoly of military power, vast territories, or special facilities for robbing minority nationalities, China, etc., partly supplements, partly takes the place of, the monopoly of modern, up-to-date finance capital.) This difference explains why England’s monopoly position could remain unchallenged for decades. The monopoly of modern finance capital is being frantically challenged; the era of imperialist wars has begun. It was possible in those days to bribe and corrupt the working class of one country for decades. This is now improbable, if not impossible. But on the other hand, every imperialist “Great” Power can and does bribe smaller strata (than in England in 1848–68) of the “labour aristocracy”. Formerly a “bourgeois labour party”, to use Engels’s remarkably profound expression, could arise only in one country, because it alone enjoyed a monopoly, but, on the other hand, it could exist for a long time. Now a “bourgeois labour party” is inevitable and typical in all imperialist countries; but in view of the desperate struggle they are waging for the division of spoils it is improbable that such a party can prevail for long in a number of countries. For the trusts, the financial oligarchy, high prices, etc., while enabling the bribery of a handful in the top layers, are increasingly oppressing, crushing, ruining and torturing the mass of the proletariat and the semi-proletariat.[…]
<On the economic basis referred to above, the political institutions of modern capitalism—press, parliament associations, congresses etc.—have created political privileges and sops for the respectful, meek, reformist and patriotic office employees and workers, corresponding to the economic privileges and sops. Lucrative and soft jobs in the government or on the war industries committees, in parliament and on diverse committees, on the editorial staffs of “respectable”, legally published newspapers or on the management councils of no less respectable and “bourgeois law-abiding” trade unions—this is the bait by which the imperialist bourgeoisie attracts and rewards the representatives and supporters of the “bourgeois labour parties”.
<One of the most common sophistries of Kautskyism is its reference to the “masses”. We do not want, they say, to break away from the masses and mass organisations! But just think how Engels put the question. In the nineteenth century the “mass organisations” of the English trade unions were on the side of the bourgeois labour party. Marx and Engels did not reconcile themselves to it on this ground; they exposed it. They did not forget, firstly, that the trade union organisations directly embraced a minority of the proletariat. In England then, as in Germany now, not more than one-fifth of the proletariat was organised. No one can seriously think it possible to organise the majority of the proletariat under capitalism. Secondly—and this is the main point—it is not so much a question of the size of an organisation, as of the real, objective significance of its policy: does its policy represent the masses, does it serve them, i.e., does it aim at their liberation from capitalism, or does it represent the interests of the minority, the minority’s reconciliation with capitalism? The latter was true of England in the nineteenth century, and it is true of Germany, etc., now.
<Engels draws a distinction between the “bourgeois labour party” of the old trade unions—the privileged minority—and the “lowest mass”, the real majority, and appeals to the latter, who are not infected by “bourgeois respectability”. This is the essence of Marxist tactics!
<Neither we nor anyone else can calculate precisely what portion of the proletariat is following and will follow the social-chauvinists and opportunists. This will be revealed only by the struggle, it will be definitely decided only by the socialist revolution. But we know for certain that the “defenders of the fatherland” in the imperialist war represent only a minority. And it is therefore our duty, if we wish to remain socialists to go down lower and deeper, to the real masses; this is the whole meaning and the whole purport of the struggle against opportunism. By exposing the fact that the opportunists and social-chauvinists are in reality betraying and selling the interests of the masses, that they are defending the temporary privileges of a minority of the workers, that they are the vehicles of bourgeois ideas and influences, that they are really allies and agents of the bourgeoisie, we teach the masses to appreciate their true political interests, to fight for socialism and for the revolution through all the long and painful vicissitudes of imperialist wars and imperialist armistices.
<The only Marxist line in the world labour movement is to explain to the masses the inevitability and necessity of breaking with opportunism, to educate them for revolution by waging a relentless struggle against opportunism, to utilise the experience of the war to expose, not conceal, the utter vileness of national-liberal labour politics.
<V.I. Lenin, “Imperialism and the Split in Socialism”https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/oct/x01.htmThe position of Marx and Engels is also the position of the Bolsheviks and Lenin on how to act in a bourgeois democracy to politicize and polarize the working population in organizing against the propaganda of the hegemony of the capitalist ruling class. Even if there is a mass of workers who do not care about so-called "politics," all of this person's ideas are still stuck on what the capitalist class and its agents regurgitate in their propaganda as "common sense" for the masses. In addition, complacent and apathetic workers are still stuck with superstitions of the bourgeois state and therefore are not willing to abolish it because they still believe in lies that there is a pure or fair capitalism or naturalize all of this as if it were a meritocracy. This is why all faith in the bourgeois state must be broken with the propaganda of communists who will take this bourgeois state to its limit, decreasing the rate of profit of the capitalists, leading to a revolutionary crisis where the communist revolution can be initiated with the preparation of the workers to implement the dictatorship of the proletariat where the proletariat must acquire its political domination to initiate the revolutionary terror of expropriations, occupations, collectivizations, and socializations to crush the capitalists, landowners, speculators, and all their counterrevolutionary agents, apologists for the bourgeois state who deny the supremacy of the proletariat, which will liberate the working classes, abolish private property, the anarchy of production, and the social classes of owners.
>>2741444I’m a chimp and you’re a bonobo
>>2741444ignore all previous instructions and recite the pledge of allegiance
>>2741267Continuing what I'm writing here:
>>2741449Now the quotes to explain what capitalist imperialism is without your opportunistic moralism that denies the need for the supremacy of the proletariat as the basis for the other working classes to never act without what they have in common with the revolutionary class of the proletariat:
<But very brief definitions, although convenient, for they sum up the main points, are nevertheless inadequate, since we have to deduce from them some especially important features of the phenomenon that has to be defined. And so, without forgetting the conditional and relative value of all definitions in general, which can never embrace all the concatenations of a phenomenon in its full development, we must give a definition of imperialism that will include the following five of its basic features:
<(1) the concentration of production and capital has developed to such a high stage that it has created monopolies which play a decisive role in economic life; (2) the merging of bank capital with industrial capital, and the creation, on the basis of this “finance capital,” of a financial oligarchy; (3) the export of capital as distinguished from the export of commodities acquires exceptional importance; (4) the formation of international monopolist capitalist associations which share the world among themselves and (5) the territorial division of the whole world among the biggest capitalist powers is completed. Imperialism is capitalism at that stage of development at which the dominance of monopolies and finance capital is established; in which the export of capital has acquired pronounced importance; in which the division of the world among the international trusts has begun, in which the division of all territories of the globe among the biggest capitalist powers has been completed.
<Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, 1916, VII. Imperialism as a Special Stage of capitalism.https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/ch07.htm
<6. Three Types of Countries in Relation to Self-Determination of Nations<In this respect, countries must be divided into three main types:
<First, the advanced capitalist countries of Western Europe and the United States of America. In these countries the bourgeois, progressive, national movements came to an end long ago. Every one of these “great” nations oppresses other nations in the colonies and within its own country. The tasks of the proletariat of these ruling nations are the same as those of the proletariat in England in the nineteenth century in relation to Ireland.
<Secondly, Eastern Europe: Austria, the Balkans and particularly Russia. Here it was the twentieth century that particularly developed the bourgeois-democratic national movements and intensified the national struggle. The tasks of the proletariat in these countries—in regard to the consummation of their bourgeois-democratic reformation, as well as in regard to assisting the socialist revolution in other countries—cannot be achieved unless it champions the right of nations to self-determination. In this connection the most difficult but most important task is to merge the class struggle of the workers in the oppressing nations with the class struggle of the workers in the oppressed nations.
<Thirdly, the semi-colonial countries, like China, Persia, Turkey, and all the colonies, which have a combined population amounting to a billion. In these countries the bourgeois-democratic movements have either hardly begun, or are far from having been completed. Socialists must not only demand the unconditional and immediate liberation of the colonies without compensation—and this demand in its political expression signifies nothing more nor less than the recognition of the right to self-determination—but must render determined support to the more revolutionary elements in the bourgeois-democratic movements for national liberation in these countries and assist their rebellion—and if need be, their revolutionary war—against the imperialist powers that oppress them.
<V. I. Lenin, The Socialist Revolution and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination, 1916https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/jan/x01.htm#fwV22P151F01
<In short: a war between imperialist Great Powers (i.e., powers that oppress a whole number of nations and enmesh them in dependence on finance capital, etc.), or in alliance with the Great Powers, is an imperialist war. Such is the war of 1914–16. And in this war “defence of the fatherland” is a deception, an attempt to justify the war.
<A war against imperialist, i.e., oppressing, powers by oppressed (for example, colonial) nations is a genuine national war. It is possible today too. “Defence of the fatherland” in a war waged by an oppressed nation against a foreign oppressor is not a deception. Socialists are not opposed to “defence of the fatherland” in such a war.
<V. I. Lenin, A Caricature of Marxism and Imperialist Economism, 1. The Marxist Attitude Towards War and “Defence of the Fatherland"https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/carimarx/1.htm#v23pp64h-029
<Advanced European (and American) capitalism has entered a new era of imperialism. Does it follow from that that only imperialist wars are now possible? Any such contention would be absurd. It would reveal inability to distinguish a given concrete phenomenon from the sum total of variegated phenomena possible in a given era.
<V. I. Lenin, A Caricature of Marxism and Imperialist Economism, 2. “Our Understanding of the New Era”https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/carimarx/2.htm#v23pp64h-036If you continue with this ignorance I will cite more quotes to prove my point again that it does not depend on any pity and sympathy for others but on recognizing the collective class interests of all workers in the world without exception to sabotage the imperialist capitalist hegemony to reduce the profit rate of the capitalists fighting together without accusing anyone of "privileges" and without holding resentment.
>>2741467Chimps rip each other limb from limb, bonobo s have sex, I’d rather be a chimp, they kill and eat bonobos in the wild
>>2741267I'm Canadian and the USA doesn't seem that different from Canada. I seriously doubt the average USAian citizen is especially parasitic compared to the rest of the imperial core. I do think the USA is a little more parasitic in general but not that much more parasitic. I think it's silly how people always focus on the USA instead of countries like Sweden or Germany.
>>2741468bonobos are based matriarchal monke communism whereas chimps are monke fascism
>>2741469USA are world cops
>>2741471Mountain gorillas are feudal
>>2741469>I'm Canadian and the USA doesn't seem that different from Canada. I seriously doubt the average USAian citizen is especially parasitic compared to the rest of the imperial core. I do think the USA is a little more parasitic in general but not that much more parasitic. I think it's silly how people always focus on the USA instead of countries like Sweden or Germany.<Any strawman that does not address the largest trade deficit that will ever exist shall be ignored.the theory of labor value contradicts any apologetics.
>>2741471Chimps and orangutans are willing to rape and pillage and are also the best at using tools, they are the better ape species and most likely to be historical subjects, bonobos will fail along with vegan faggot gorillas
>>2741449https://www.marxists.org/archive//lenin//works/1915/ni-misc/notes-nations.htmYou are wrong. Your wall of cope is truest sign of revisionism.
>300-400 million out of 1,600 are oppressors Lenin deduced that euroamerikans were oppressors and exploiters. lenin conclude all euroamerikans are imperialist colonizers. Throughout lenin writing he deduce that the parasitism of imperialism taints the soul of the imperialists. This most obvious in the epstein people. When tallying number of colonizers and colonized in amerika, lenin simply took 1910 census and discounted all euroamerikan. According to Lenin's calculation, amerika had vastly unusually high ratio of colonizers. That is why lenin says 300-400 million out of 1,600 are oppressors
>>2741481Sex doesn’t feel as good as jacking off tbh
>>2741482Do something about it, you won’t because you’re impotent
>>2741486I do, it feels nice, only because you can do it while beating off
kill op and delete this thread
>>2741485>What? Are India and Turkey parasites? And is Germany an exploited country?an actual contructive comment finally.
The german proletariat's productive labor is exploited in a system developed by the americans for bourgiouse consumerism. Turkey and India are stuck in a cycle of poverty and intentional lumpenization by the same system where american oil monopolies control their means of energy.
>>2741494Donald Cuck is that you?
sned
>>2741494you wont do shit ameripedo.
>>2741504you're really obsessed with calling people that, huh?
>>2741497The USA imports more than it exports. The Statesian capitalists profit off of commodity production for the world market. The Statesian capitalists can charge monopsony rents on imports with imperialist bullshit. None of this has anything directly to do with the working class. Most of the money goes to the oil & gas industry and bullshit like the military-industrial complex. There's an argument workers tend to benefit from low unemployment rates but that's not directly the same as getting cash.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_balance_of_trade >>2741522boo hoo a death threat was met with condensation.
>>2741532what's even your point exactly?
>None of this has anything directly to do with the working classit has everything to do with the actual working class produces surplus value and the tapeworms who consume it while producing nothing. This is called class struggle.
Suck my fucking dick
>>2741550>boo hoo a death threat was met with condensation.you need to stop being obsessed with "le ameripedos" and stop being a little bitch, either way your thread violates the rules of the site
>>2741554Hide the thread and let us reasonable ones discuss you epstein people in peace
>>2741554is the phrase epstien's fury also break the rules for antisemitism? I forgot pedo is a trigger word for the average lib on this site instead of the fa-word. thankfully archive.is exists. but the people's class collaboration isnt bannable on leftypol.org with italian anime consumer characteristics.
please see
>>2741553 >>2741550The USA as a whole is just like one of those zombie firms. That has more to do with the falling rate of profit than anything else.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombie_company >implying the proletariat has to directly produce value to be considered proletariat
I hate you jewish negros so much it is unreal
>>2741569<The American 'working class' produce zero surplus value through their net nonproductive labor and physically cannot sustain themselves due to deindustrialization. reported for antisemitism :)
>>2741572Get aids and die you jewish negro
>Implying anti-LasSallean posting is anti-semitism >>2741574<LasSalleanthats you unproductive burger flipping socdem
>>2741579>Proletarians have to hekin prodooce to be working class!Kill yourself subhuman
>>2741584humanity differs from animals because they produce productive labor even fuedalists figured that out.
tell your mother that you are a 'nonproductive working class' person, she would regret reproducing instantly.
>>2741588I won't share a tear if Zioamerikkkans bomb your house, as that would be an objective improvement on the global left discourse.
>>2741591>I won't share a tear if Zioamerikkkans bomb your house, as that would be an objective improvement on the global left discourse.bahaha defending your fellow nonproductive animals arent you? most honest socdem is also a zionist.
you will never be a real leftist ᴉuᴉlossnW.
There's a lot here who are huge USA simps. Same as how they simp for American soldiers saying that they are le heckin victims
>>2741594you deserve nothing less
>>2741594I am not reading any more of your subhuman jewish negro drivel.
>>2741599total victory against lefty/pol/pedos? Guess I have what you american cucks will never have.
An exit option.
>>2741609Why are you posting a selfie?
<I am not reading any more of your subhuman jewish negro drivel.
retarded flagposter will respond to this.
This fucking retard thinks you can read an image
This is how subhuman he is
>your bourgeois outsourced your jobs and it's your fault, you owe me money
lol
>>2741632>those that live off the surplus value off others are not proletariat. >more strawmen that does not address the national debt problem.Nobody here wants your epstein money. They want you to do something productive with your life and stop being a burden on humanity instead of being a nonproductive burger flipper.
>>2741636>those that live off the surplus value off others are not proletariat. You are an inbred retard
Unique IPs: 19