/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>An imperialist foreign Western capitalist who builds a factory and develops the productive forces by outsourcing and transferring technology and capital is infinitely more progressive than a "patriotic" "sovereign" nationalist financial capitalist or service capitalist.
A couple of problems with your analysis. Various Western backed compradors emerged in Africa that sold their countries for a dime and still Western capital didn’t build industry there despite the fact they could have freely chosen to. Why? Because Africa is meant for cheap resource extraction given how much there is and how defenseless Africa is as an underveloped continent. Additionally, the IMF and World Bank directs economic policy of African countries that were desperate enough to take a loan from them, which has led to the obliteration of protectionism in African countries. So they don’t exactly have a choice. Protectionism does in fact help to build industry and competition on the free market is an idealist scam that capitalists themselves don’t believe in. The real capitalists I mean, not delusional workers who have been sold a fantasy. That’s why developed countries themselves put in protectionism. African clothing industry can’t compete with dirt cheap second hand clothing dumped on their shores by the West. And Western bourgs are not interested in building a clothing industry in Africa. Same goes for all the other industries. Africa is meant to be plundered.

>>2786220
Botswana, Mauritius, current day Rwanda all seem to be doing pretty well tho

>>2786227
By what metric are you going off of?

>>2786213
Wrong. Several studies on countries in the Global South that have submitted to the IMF have shown that it has brought no development whatsoever. There has been a loss of technology where any independent technological capacity has been privatized, workers are more intensely exploited, the country becomes even more indebted, always implementing more austerity measures and stripping workers of their rights. Financialization attacks the very democracy of these countries, with blackmail from international organizations that financial capital uses against the sovereign decisions of these countries, demanding more austerity that will lead the population to become indebted. The country deindustrializes, and the lack of technological sovereignty leads to an increase in the cost of everything, with private companies engaging in blackmail, price gouging, overpricing of public works contracts with the government, and siphoning off government subsidies. This inevitably leads governments in the Global South to be unable to raise money and become indebted with immense interest. They also lose control of their national banks, which, upon gaining independence, begin to serve purely the speculators of financial capital.

Let's look at Marxist quotes demonstrating why the nationalization of banks is mandatory and should be demanded by all. communists:

<5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.

<Karl Marx, 1848, Manifesto of the Communist Party, Chapter II. Proletarians and Communists

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch02.htm

<(vi) Centralization of money and credit in the hands of the state through a national bank with state capital, and the suppression of all private banks and bankers.

<Frederick Engels, 1847, The Principles of Communism

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

<10. All private banks will be replaced by a state bank whose bonds will have the character of legal tender.

<This measure will make it possible to regulate credit in the interests of the whole people and will thus undermine the dominance of the large financiers. By gradually replacing gold and silver by paper money, it will cheapen the indispensable instrument of bourgeois trade, the universal means of exchange, and will allow the gold and silver to have an outward effect. Ultimately, this measure is necessary to link the interests of the conservative bourgeoisie to the revolution.

<Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, March 1848, Demands of the Communist Party in Germany

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/03/24.htm

<3. Legal minimum wage, determined each year according to the local price of food, by a workers' statistical commission;

[…]

<11. Annulment of all the contracts that have alienated public property (banks, railways, mines, etc.), and the exploitation of all state-owned workshops to be entrusted to the workers who work there;

<Karl Marx and Jules Guesde, 1880, The Programme of the Parti Ouvrier

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/05/parti-ouvrier.htm

Now let's understand what imperialist capitalism is according to Lenin:

<(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, VII. Imperialism as a Special Stage of capitalism, 1916.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/ch07.htm

Now, the types of countries in Lenin's time for communists to act in, which is useful to know in relation to the self-determination of nations:

<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

Now, a quote for the charlatans here who support capitalist imperialism against "authoritarianism" from abroad, where I say that these people are the ones being reactionary, while the so-called "patriots" are more progressive than these pseudo-leftists co-opted by finance capital:

<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.

<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

Now for the ignorant people who keep saying that all conflicts and wars are inter-imperialist wars:

<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

I am from the Global South and I know this. If you want to come with empty talk to support imperialist capitalism, everything you are saying is a lie.

The primary contradiction is workers vs capitalists, the only solution for this is socialism, collaborating with capitalists for "le national liberation" is classcuckery

>>2786429
But what's happening here is an apology for finance capital to take away the economic sovereignty of other countries, making communists reconcile with imperialist capitalism because there is something called "authoritarian external evil"—this is a reactionary position. The communist position is to defend the economic sovereignty of other countries, opposing any foreign financing through loans, arms sales, aid, etc., that maintains the domination of finance capital to intensify the exploitation of workers and prevent the development of an independent national industry or the control of natural resources by these peripheral countries. This means cutting off all aid to Taiwan, Ukraine, Israel, and any puppets or collaborators in maintaining the hegemony of finance capital, regardless of the consequences or how much you are demonized, called crazy, or a supporter of authoritarianism. Communists cannot romanticize spontaneity; spontaneity must be subjugated to the theory of scientific socialism for the supremacy of the proletariat. This means cutting all free trade agreements, contracts with private companies, and leaving bourgeois organizations that impede financial sovereignty with national banks and their own currency—the European Union being an example of this—which hinders achieving economic sovereignty and prevents member countries from developing a state-run economy. Spontaneity should be used to spread communist propaganda. Liberals seeking to co-opt the masses should not be tolerated; they should be expelled or beaten, even if you are labeled a fascist or authoritarian, to prevent young people and the masses from falling for the false narrative of freeing the market and not intervening in the economy.

Economic sovereignty must be defended even if this hypothetically causes more suffering due to interference from agents of imperialist capitalism. To give up is treason and cowardice.

>economic sovereignity
Thanks ChatGPT, but I don't care about bourgeois sovereignity to freely exploit the proles without imperialist conpetition, I want communism

>>2786213
Not sure if that’s true considering how Thailand, a US-aligned country with a flawed democracy that is pretty industrialised relative to other SEA countries despite having protectionist policies, has a higher HDI than India, another flawed democracy that has heavily financialised whilst skipping industrialisation after the fall of the USSR (its largest trade partner) collapsed which prompted India to economically liberalise, the end result being India a heavily agrarian and extremely poor country with high wealth inequality in spite of the FIRE sector boosting its economic data.

I should also note that most western countries that are now extremely financialised (such as the UK) haven’t ended up in the same boat as India because they are living off from the patrimony of the Frits of their industrial base, itself being able to thrive due to past protectionist policies. China is far more industrialised than most of Europe, which is why it still has tariffs and other protectionist measures to protect its industries.

>>2786213
>The primary contradiction in non-AES Global South countries is not "foreign-bourg vs national-bourg" but rather, it's "industrial capitalist vs financial capitalist".

it amounts to the same thing, since the financial capitalists are the comprador booj in thrall to the imperial core while the indsustrial capitalists are the national booj who wanna develop the productive forces and exercise sovereignty over the natural resources. It basically is the modern equivalent of the difference between tories and patriots in 1776. Loyalty to the metropole of capital vs a national independence movement.

>>2786484
i would quote lenin and stalin on this matter but you hate them so what's the point

>>2786484
Economic sovereignty is necessary to facilitate the socialization of the economy. This means having financial sovereignty, which includes having a state-owned national bank with its own currency to use for cheap credit to encourage cooperatives, controlling workers' wages so they are not affected by inflation (because capitalists will always want to transfer costs to workers), facilitating mass expropriation by capitalists, preventing interest parasitism (the unproductive sector of the economy that supports everything reactionary to speculate with public debt), and financializing the economy so that a country does not control prices in the domestic market, separating the production of goods for the domestic market instead of profiting from the international market.

Technological sovereignty is necessary so that a country is not at the mercy of capitalists who control these technologies. This means state-owned enterprises and research free from the control of capitalist patents. Food sovereignty is necessary, with public control over seeds, tools, fertilizers, and chemical production, to avoid being at the mercy of private companies, landowners, and agribusiness that blackmail and control the countryside, posing a threat to the supremacy of the proletariat. Energy sovereignty is also necessary to create an economic plan that properly manages the economy. This means that energy extraction and production cannot depend on imperialist relations before an environmental plan is developed, meaning that pollution cannot be exported to another country.

State capitalism is superior to private capitalism and small-scale peasant production. If you are interested in a socialist economy, you will see Marx, Engels, and Lenin proposing economic models of state capitalism as progressive, aimed at attacking private property and socializing the economy. Let's look at some examples:

<The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i.e., of the proletariat organised as the ruling class; and to increase the total productive forces as rapidly as possible.

<Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the mode of production.

<These measures will, of course, be different in different countries.

<Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.

<1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
<2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
<3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
<4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
<5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
<6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
<7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
<8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
<9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
<10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &c.

<When, in the course of development, class distinctions have disappeared, and all production has been concentrated in the hands of a vast association of the whole nation, the public power will lose its political character. Political power, properly so called, is merely the organised power of one class for oppressing another. If the proletariat during its contest with the bourgeoisie is compelled, by the force of circumstances, to organise itself as a class, if, by means of a revolution, it makes itself the ruling class, and, as such, sweeps away by force the old conditions of production, then it will, along with these conditions, have swept away the conditions for the existence of class antagonisms and of classes generally, and will thereby have abolished its own supremacy as a class.

<In place of the old bourgeois society, with its classes and class antagonisms, we shall have an association, in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.

<Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party (1848)

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch02.htm

<It is therefore comprehensible that in the economic sphere much was left undone which, according to our view today, the Commune ought to have done. The hardest thing to understand is certainly the holy awe with which they remained standing respectfully outside the gates of the Bank of France. This was also a serious political mistake. The bank in the hands of the Commune – this would have been worth more than 10,000 hostages. It would have meant the pressure of the whole of the French bourgeoisie on the Versailles government in favor of peace with the Commune, but what is still more wonderful is the correctness of so much that was actually done by the Commune, composed as it was of Blanquists and Proudhonists. Naturally, the Proudhonists were chiefly responsible for the economic decrees of the Commune, both for their praiseworthy and their unpraiseworthy aspects; as the Blanquists were for its political actions and omissions. And in both cases the irony of history willed – as is usual when doctrinaires come to the helm – that both did the opposite of what the doctrines of their school proscribed.

<1891 Introduction by Frederick Engels, On the 20th Anniversary of the Paris Commune

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1871/civil-war-france/postscript.htm

<Democracy would be wholly valueless to the proletariat if it were not immediately used as a means for putting through measures directed against private property and ensuring the livelihood of the proletariat. The main measures, emerging as the necessary result of existing relations, are the following:

<(i) Limitation of private property through progressive taxation, heavy inheritance taxes, abolition of inheritance through collateral lines (brothers, nephews, etc.) forced loans, etc.

<(ii) Gradual expropriation of landowners, industrialists, railroad magnates and shipowners, partly through competition by state industry, partly directly through compensation in the form of bonds.

<(iii) Confiscation of the possessions of all emigrants and rebels against the majority of the people.

<(iv) Organization of labor or employment of proletarians on publicly owned land, in factories and workshops, with competition among the workers being abolished and with the factory owners, in so far as they still exist, being obliged to pay the same high wages as those paid by the state.

<(v) An equal obligation on all members of society to work until such time as private property has been completely abolished. Formation of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

<(vi) Centralization of money and credit in the hands of the state through a national bank with state capital, and the suppression of all private banks and bankers.

<(vii) Increase in the number of national factories, workshops, railroads, ships; bringing new lands into cultivation and improvement of land already under cultivation – all in proportion to the growth of the capital and labor force at the disposal of the nation.

<(viii) Education of all children, from the moment they can leave their mother’s care, in national establishments at national cost. Education and production together.

<(ix) Construction, on public lands, of great palaces as communal dwellings for associated groups of citizens engaged in both industry and agriculture and combining in their way of life the advantages of urban and rural conditions while avoiding the one-sidedness and drawbacks of each.

<(x) Destruction of all unhealthy and jerry-built dwellings in urban districts.

<(xi) Equal inheritance rights for children born in and out of wedlock.

<(xii) Concentration of all means of transportation in the hands of the nation.

<It is impossible, of course, to carry out all these measures at once. But one will always bring others in its wake. Once the first radical attack on private property has been launched, the proletariat will find itself forced to go ever further, to concentrate increasingly in the hands of the state all capital, all agriculture, all transport, all trade. All the foregoing measures are directed to this end; and they will become practicable and feasible, capable of producing their centralizing effects to precisely the degree that the proletariat, through its labor, multiplies the country’s productive forces.

<Finally, when all capital, all production, all exchange have been brought together in the hands of the nation, private property will disappear of its own accord, money will become superfluous, and production will so expand and man so change that society will be able to slough off whatever of its old economic habits may remain.

<Frederick Engels, 1847, The Principles of Communism

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

<For socialism is merely the next step forward from state-capitalist monopoly. Or, in other words, socialism is merely state-capitalist monopoly which is made to serve the interests of the whole people and has to that extent ceased to be capitalist monopoly.

<There is no middle course here. The objective process of development is such that it is impossible to advance from monopolies (and the war has magnified their number, role and importance tenfold) without advancing towards socialism.

[…]

<Imperialist war is the eve of socialist revolution. And this not only because the horrors of the war give rise to proletarian revolt—no revolt can bring about socialism unless the economic conditions for socialism are ripe—but because state-monopoly capitalism is a complete material preparation for socialism, the threshold of socialism, a rung on the ladder of history between which and the rung called socialism there are no intermediate rungs.

<V. I. Lenin, 1917, The Impending Catastrophe and How to Combat It, Can We Go Forward If We Fear To Advance Towards Socialism?

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/ichtci/11.htm

>>2786538
>>2786416
correct anon, based anon, good post

The primary class conflict has always been industry vs financial capital

>>2786429
>The primary contradiction is workers vs capitalists, the only solution for this is socialism, collaborating with capitalists for "le national liberation" is classcuckery
a country can't have its own 1917 until it has its own 1776. that is why the CPC collaborated with the kuomintang until the japanese were kicked out.

revolution happens on a regional basis rather than across the whole world simultaneously. successful socialist revolutions become regional strongholds of socialism while the world revolution progresses.

>>2786542
that's bait and an overcorrection of an incorrect tendency

>>2786546
Prole vs bourg had never been the primary contradiction and never will be

>>2786538
So why did the USSR fail then?

>>2786545
And as a result, China was not able to establish socialism

>>2786549
reminder this anon is a petty booj failson who hurt his ankle and takes out his pain on this website by his own admission. he always repeats his dogshit opinions like they'll become true through repetition, but he has no args, no prescribed action, and no alternatives, so he's just a doomer.
>>2786551
revisionism, liberalism, strangled by an arms race
>>2786553
your opinion doesn't matter and neither does mine

>>2786555
The status quo we find ourselves in is the evidence, thankfully my foot is better now but I fucked my arms up pulling weeds, worst type of landscaping work never volunteer for it if you have any alternative

>>2786538
*What I meant is that with a state-owned bank with its own currency, you can facilitate the expropriation of bankrupt capitalists so that their properties can be occupied by workers, or even nationalized as expropriation to become cooperatives or state-owned public property. You can also prevent the financialization of the country by separating what is produced for consumption in the domestic market from what is produced for profit in the international market. Furthermore, the suppression of private banking is possible, and the market can be flooded with goods produced by state-owned companies competing against private companies, driving them into bankruptcy.

>>2786559
>recovered just to instantly get another health issue
I also suffer this curse

>>2786588
It’s not an injury, just soreness, thank god for drugs and alcohol

>>2786555
>revisionism, liberalism
Caused by state capitalism
>your opinion doesn't matter and neither does mine
It's not an opinion that China has commodity production, it's a fact.

>>2786220
they don't want to repeat the "mistake" in Africa that they made of early 20th century China and mid 19th century Japan, where both countries were rapidly developed by the imperial core until they became near-peer rivals rather than suppressed and underdeveloped neocolonies. to rapidly develop the people you are exploiting is to give them the tools of their own eventual liberation.

>>2786636
>It's not an opinion that China has commodity production, it's a fact.

how is an individual country supposed to abolish use value and exchange value globally? these AES nations are outposts of a future socialism in a capitalist world, in the same way that the mercantile republics of the middle ages were outposts of a future capitalism in a feudal world. your expectations of them are beyond the scope of what they are capable of. build your own disciplined organizations in the imperial core that have even 1/100th the practical (not merely ideological) commitment to socialism as the CPC and maybe people will find you worth listening to.

>>2786647
The source of an argument doesn’t change how true or not said argument is, I could be an anime fascist who does nothing but jerk off all day and I’d still be correct in saying China is ruled by money and the US is imperialist

>The primary contradiction in non-AES Global South countries is not "foreign-bourg vs national-bourg" but rather, it's "industrial capitalist vs financial capitalist".
uhh pretty sure its the proletarian-bourgeois ""contradiction""

lol this whole thread is midwits pretending capitalism hasnt been fully developed everywhere for quite a while, and no, development doesnt mean "being a rich country" jfc

>>2786654
I think you have the wrong goalpost and absurd expectations. goals are supposed to be specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound. while all you do is cry that a country on the other side of the earth hasn't abolished commodities. it's retarded. What are your actual strategic goals here and now? you have none because you are all theory and no practice. you are as useful to the real movement as book critic.

>>2786667
there are still pockets of hunter-gatherers, serfs, and even slaves.

>>2786551
The lack of vigilance and complacency in maintaining socialist principles, the failure to uphold the supremacy of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the fear of using revolutionary terror to counter-revolutionary forces, and the capitalist-funded puppets to co-opt the masses allowed opportunists to degrade the dictatorship of the proletariat over time, enabling someone like Gorbachev to step in and carry out a capitalist restoration, useful to imperialist capitalism, which has always been involved in fighting against the enemies of finance capital and capitalist hegemony. This is the reason—and it has nothing to do with your petty-bourgeois sentimentality of not wanting to be authoritarian in order to crush those who deny the supremacy of the proletarian class—lowering your guard and clinging to peace, forgetting about the imperialists, leads to betrayal, as they take advantage of your naiveté, which will be exploited by various direct and indirect capitalist puppets.

>>2786713
That’s shifting the conversation, who I am and what I’m doing have nothing to do with the validity of the argument

>>2786713
The least glowie thing you can do is to call China a normal capitalist country, what actually gives America its justification is the idea of the red menace

>>2786720
Fascism arises from the co-opting of reactionary groups to serve finance capital. Neoliberalism adopted all the useful aspects of fascism, such as debt dependency, privatization of workers' organizations and pensions for financial speculation, and unions being tamed by the government to serve capitalists. You are falling for the false narrative that the bourgeois state of Germany during the Weimar era did not use state capitalism by social democrats and conservatives until the Nazis arrived, when the truth is that these state-owned companies were privatized to serve capitalists, with indebtedness used to fund the war by the Nazis. You can look at the annexation of Austria, which proves my point about the Austrian school as lackeys of finance capital against workers, just as fascists used anti-communism and intensified capital accumulation, going against bourgeois democracy to serve finance capital.

Marx never used any of these words

>>2786912
Marx was a drunk adulterer who sucked my tiny dick

>>2786758
>That’s shifting the conversation, who I am and what I’m doing have nothing to do with the validity of the argument
your argument is stupid and I already said why
<waaaaaaaaah waaaaaaaaaah why are the few remaining socialist countries that are under eternal siege playing it safe and participating in theglobal capitalist economy instead of lashing out suicidally in the name of ideological purity
>>2786761
>The least glowie thing you can do is to call China a normal capitalist country, what actually gives America its justification is the idea of the red menace
no you fucking retard, america will coup you whether or not there is a red menace. america couped fucking AUSTRALIA in the 70s for electing a reformist liberal. you have to be a complete idealist to confuse their justification with their ability. they would do have the ability to do this shit whether or not they had a convincing justification

>>2787100
So why pretend to be communist or nationalist or anything else other than the US?

>>2787109
>pretend
maybe they're not pretending but doing what makes the most strategic sense for them based on the current situation

>>2787117
Bullshit, it’s all kayfabe, all pretend

>>2787117
If you have nukes, the only rational move is to use them preemptively against the US if what you’re saying is true

>>2786213
industrial capitalists are outperformed by a cpp like goverment

>>2787156
If that were true they would have won instead of being BTFO by the Marcos regime

>>2786743
>This is the reason—and it has nothing to do with your petty-bourgeois sentimentality of not wanting to be authoritarian in order to crush those who deny the supremacy of the proletarian class
You are wrong ChatGPT, I'd make Stalin look like fucking Ghandi

>>2786713
>What are your actual strategic goals here and now?
My goals are to remind you that China is not socialist.

>>2786647
>how is an individual country supposed to abolish use value and exchange value globally?
You explain me that, you are the imbecile MLoid.