/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Undeniably TRVE
Everyone needs to read more stalin

“The Essentials of Leninism” and “Anarchism or Socialism” are THE two most important works in Marxism. Marx and Lenin walked so Stalin could run

everybody loves young stalin

Nah, fuck you and your dead men

Oh my fucking god maybe you should actually read him rather than just two propaganda qoutes.

>Anyone who has ever uttered the word "campist" or has said something like "why would I support Russia against NATO
Stalin was a revolutionary defeatist who fought against the Russian imperialist bourgeois during WW1. In what fucking universe would he support the Russian imperialist bourgeois in the modern imperialist war. READ LENIN AND STALIN NOW.

>>2753206
There’s only one empire and only one imperialism you epsteinite ultra baby boiling FAGGOT, fuck you and fuck Gonzalo

>>2753206
>Russian imperialist
Epsteinite detected, there is no such thing as russian imperialism bozo

>>2753147

Very true OP heres another trvthnvke that will melt the skin off of trots, ultras and other degens

As the class struggle within a nation is waged for the readjustment of
unequal distinctions, so war between nations for an honorable cause
will reform the present unjust distinctions. The British Empire is a
millionaire possessing wealth all over the world; and Russia is a great
landowner in occupation of the northern half of the globe. China with
her undeveloped productive forces is one of the proletariat, and she has
the right to declare war on the big monopoly powers. The socialists
of the West contradict themselves when they admit the right of class
struggle to the proletariat at home and at the same time condemn
war, waged by a proletariat among nations, as militarism and
aggression . . . If it is permissible for the working class to unite to
overthrow unjust authority by bloodshed, then unconditional ap
proval ' should be given to China to perfect her army and navy and
make war for the rectification of unjust international frontiers. In the
name of rational scientific socialism China claims possession of Australia
and Eastern Siberia.
-Deng Xiaoping 1980

>>2753207
yet another trvthnvke that will be denied by the treatlerite firsties, we are at a new stage of global imperialism under NATO, an Ultra-imperialism if you will.

>>2753147
I suggest using quotes from Lenin as propaganda to convince the masses of the Marxist anti-imperialist position, to have a similar effect more effectively. Here are the most relevant ones for me, starting with what imperialist capitalism is:

<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

Now let's look at his position on the types of countries as examples at the time Lenin wrote about the self-determination of nations and capitalist imperialism:

<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, 1916

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/jan/x01.htm#fwV22P151F01

Now regarding the issue of wars and the opportunists who obscure the truth by trying to defend imperialist capitalist finance capital that maintains dependency to intensify exploitation. I'm only posting this to avoid confusion if someone is reading what I wrote trying to equate the war of a puppet of imperialist capitalism that uses chauvinism against the Russian population with the right of Palestinians to use violence against Israel to acquire economic sovereignty:

<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

Now a text against those opportunists who equate every war as if it were "inter-imperialist" to defend US hegemony:

<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-036

With all this, it's clear that financing from foreign financial capital is intolerable for any observer or audience in the imperialist core, regardless of whether the puppet of capitalist imperialism collapses or the consequences of this, which will in any case be beneficial for the communist cause, having fewer obstacles to consolidate power.

>>2753147
sorry but i'm not dying for the national bourgeoisie of some third world shithole
give me global communism or fuck off

>>2753391
Westoid proles will establish communism on your land and have you killed and enslaved to boost their extravegent lifestyles, they’re the existential threat, not your own bourgeois which at least needs you alive to exploit you

>>2753391
GIVAS GLOBAL CAMMUNISM
no wonder the western leftist upholds ukkkraine

>>2753391
you VVILL praise ovr great leader mojtaba, the lenin of the iZlamic revolution

>>2753147
Stalin:
>The struggle that the Emir of Afghanistan is waging for the independence of Afghanistan is objectively a revolutionary struggle, for it weakens, disintegrates and undermines imperialism… For the same reasons, the struggle that the Egyptian merchants and bourgeois intellectuals are waging for the independence of Egypt is objectively a revolutionary struggle, despite the bourgeois origin and bourgeois title of the leaders of the Egyptian national movement, despite their opposition to socialism.
Meanwhile Lenin:
> But this Kievsky argument is wrong. Imperialism is as much our “mortal” enemy as is capitalism. That is so. No Marxist will forget, however, that capitalism is progressive compared with feudalism, and that imperialism is progressive compared with pre-monopoly capitalism. Hence, it is not every struggle against imperialism that we should support. We will not support a struggle of the reactionary classes against imperialism; we will not support an uprising of the reactionary classes against imperialism and capitalism.

>>2753805
When Lenin refers to reactionary classes, he is referring to aristocrats who are already integrating themselves in some way with capitalist imperialism in their collaboration, or who fantasize with the clergy about some pre-capitalist economic order of feudal privileges. A country gaining independence and wanting to maintain a developed national bourgeois economy is already progressive compared to a neocolony; if it uses state capitalism, then this act is even more progressive for communists. If you are using Iran as an example in your argument, then you are wrong because Iran has a developed capitalist economy to a certain extent, even with the sanctions, and has a more progressive interest in the Middle East compared to the Gulf monarchies and puppet governments collaborating with American hegemony.

>>2753147
>first quote
>yeah so like there's this shoemaker right
>and he wants to run his own shop right
>but he just can't compete with Big Shoemakers
>so he temporarily shuts down shop so he can work for his competitors
>but only long enough that he can save some scratch to get things up and running
>only he finds out that he gets paid a pittance
>and then he starts thinking to himself that he'd be fine with his slavery as long as he got a few extra good boy points along the way
>so he joins a picket line with his fellow slaves and together they summon captain planet
ok but here's the thing: I don't want to be a wageslave. I will work to support society, provided that the work can't be automated and is a necessary task whose completion the functioning of society requires, but I won't be thrilled about it. that's a necessary evil and I should be adequately compensated and jerked off for my contributions to society.

so basically if we take the means of production and fuck on capitalist fat cats by instead distributing their pile of gold so that we can build infrastructure and gibs people free healthcare, then that makes more sense to me.
>second quote
>yeah so like it doesn't matter who's fighting and what they believe
>all that really matters is whether or not they're taking steps toward defeating imperialism
nah sorry senpai but I don't buy it, I think the outcome of any given military campaign is going to rest very firmly on the intentions of those who are waging it and their vision for a particular outcome that arises as a result of the toppling of their foes. as they say, history is penned by the victor, and so it is true of society.

idk brah I'm a retard, what do I know, but this is what makes sense to me.

>>2753453
Lenin turquic confirmed

>>2753828
He literally said that the Emir of Afghanistan was “progressive” even though he was a literal monarchist because he was fighting imperialism. Apparently, any force that opposes imperialism is automatically “revolutionary” solely by virtue of opposing imperialism, according to Stalin. You can’t get any further away from Leninism than this.

>>2753886
You should read this post
>>2753362

>>2753861
But he’s the guy who created Armenian SSR, laying the groundwork for ethnic cleansing there later

>>2753391
Based and true

Stalin sucks. Read permanent revolution instead

>>2753210
Kill yourself jewish negro, stupid orientophile animal

>>2753241
>>2753207
Kill yourself thirdiephile

>>2753936
If you think that Trotsky will have sympathy with opportunists who do not defend the self-determination of nations and are lackeys of financial capitalism invading their own country then I will give you this quote to prove you wrong:

<In Brazil there now reigns a semifascist regime that every revolutionary can only view with hatred. Let us assume, however, that on the morrow England enters into a military conflict with Brazil. I ask you on whose side of the conflict will the working class be? I will answer for myself personally—in this case I will be on the side of “fascist” Brazil against “democratic” Great Britain. Why? Because in the conflict between them it will not be a question of democracy or fascism. If England should be victorious, she will put another fascist in Rio de Janeiro and will place double chains on Brazil. If Brazil on the contrary should be victorious, it will give a mighty impulse to national and democratic consciousness of the country and will lead to the overthrow of the Vargas dictatorship. The defeat of England will at the same time deliver a blow to British imperialism and will give an impulse to the revolutionary movement of the British proletariat. Truly, one must have an empty head to reduce world antagonisms and military conflicts to the struggle between fascism and democracy. Under all masks one must know how to distinguish exploiters, slave-owners, and robbers!

<Leon Trotsky, Anti-Imperialist Struggle Is Key to Liberation, An Interview with Mateo Fossa (September 1938)

https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1938/09/liberation.htm

>>2753940
you are revisionist. you are infantile leftcom. read lenin and become communist treatlerite.
>What Marx said of capitalism can also be applied to imperialism: monopoly creates competition and competition monopoly. The frantic competition of giant firms, giant banks and multi-millionaires obliged the great financial groups, who were absorbing the small ones, to think up the notion of the cartel. In the same way, the result of the World War between the great imperialist powers may be a federation of the strongest, who renounce their arms race.

>Hence from the purely economic standpoint it is not impossible that capitalism may still Jive through another phase, the translation of cartellization into foreign policy: a phase of ultra-imperialism, which of course we must struggle against as energetically as we do against imperialism, but whose perils lie in another direction, not in that of the arms race and the threat to world peace.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1915/jul/26.htm

>>2753975
Treatlers don't exist you fucking plebbitor, your analysis of society is based on memes you terminally online jewish negro

>>2753959
>"self-determination of nations"…to be a monarchy
lol more like self-determination of the feudal lords. what swill.

>>2753240
based. give china australia NOW

>>2753856
>I will work to support society, provided that the work can't be automated
lol you will work to survive, and the work will be automated eventually. why? because that's how it has always worked.

>>2753210
Russia is an imperailsit oiwer w3aging war against the sovereign natioan of Ukraine because they needed to keep their capital in Ukraine but Ukraine in 2014 said no we want to be with Europe. Shut up moron and read Lenin

>>2753147
We posting Stalin now?

>>2753147
In semi-feudal and colonial conditions such positions made sense but in current reality supporting national bourgeoise in their struggle is just pointless, why proletarians should throw their struggle in name of endless national liberations when in reality these don't even actually bring proletarians closer to DoTP instead it just builds capital of some shitholes in endless struggle for building imperial potential.

<“Obama wants to kill me, to take away the freedom of our country, to take away our free housing, our free medicine, our free education, our free food, and replace it with American style thievery called “capitalism”, but all of us in the Third World know what that means, it means corporations run the countries, run the world. and the people suffer.” - Gaddafi

ALL HAIL (THIRD WORLD) NATIONAL-LASSALLEANISM!