/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>2789576
Very good comrade, I expect you to know the most important works of Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Luxemburg by next Monday. The ideology shop is in room 208.

>>2789579
Mao Zedong — 'To read too many books is harmful.'

>its not left vs right, its worker vs owner
Thats what left vs right broadly represents anon.

>leftists play in symbolism, communists take action.
the Trvke that destroyed the "communism is the left wing of capital" retard

>>2789588
>trvke
That's barely an anecdote
>retard
It's not one guy
>communism is the left wing of capital
Bolshevik and Maoist attempts at least were

>>2789586
Lol not in the modern American political context. Left vs right is idpol vs idpol

Welcome to the club of professional haters.

>>2789576
Now become a trot

>>2789579
What important works from Luxembourg?

>leftists play in symbolism, communists take action.
You're not going to be able to cooparate in a party without yearning for 131,072 more trot splits, because the minute symbolism of the word "leftist" matters to you that much.

>its not left vs right, its worker vs owner
>its not changing minds, its changing material conditions
>its not culture war, its class war
>leftists play in symbolism, communists take action.
Isn't "its not X, its Y" LLM-speak? I saw one post saying it the other day and I am now very paranoid, and most times it is.
The rest of the post doesn't seem LLM-generated but… (above)

>>2789619
Identity politics isnt necessary a bad thing in itself, or unrelated to socialist project. A marginalised minority is going to have additional political/social/economical demands, in addition to common working class interest, and if socialist movement refuse to address them they will flock to someone else who will. While even left wing identity politics can be coopted by conservative forces, so can everything else. Fascists often attempt to coopt class struggle.

>>2789652
turbo lib

>>2789652
>if socialist movement refuse to address them they will flock to someone else who will.
They are minorities, they don't matter that much. If 5% of non-cishets become fascists (won't happen, since most are proles) it doesn't matter

>>2789619
Left vs right isn't the same as liberal versus conservative. Go find one worthwhile 'right wing' communist/socialist, you won't be able to.

>>2789666
This road leads directly to patsoc hell. Besides which, just because only 5% of people might not be cis, that doesn't mean every cis person will support trans genocide. If you diminish people's rights you only end up in the company of scoundrels.

>>2789672
>>2789652
>>2789666
Ok but look, here's the real redpill. We cannot just allow the rights of minorities to be trampled. At the same time there's nothing wrong with appealing to the sensibilities of the majority. I think the family as a concept is reactionary cringe but if the socialist party has to present itself as pro family to get support, whatever. A middle ground on some things isn't that bad. Any socialist who is worth anything will not be racist against black people but also he will not be going around "fucking cis white males" this and that. The revolution must be egalitarian, it cannot be any other way.

>>2789666
5% here, 5% there, remove gender or sexual minorities, migrants, ethnic minorities, women, disabled, elderly, students, unemployed, poor, druggies, and what are you going to be left with is itself going to be a minority. And more importantly, it is the most marginalised people in society that have the most vested interest in societal change. The cishet suburbanite with stable job and 2.5 children is not going to be a working class vanguard.

>>2789652
Radlib

>>2789650
Nah some people just have overly academic speech patterns. The real indicator that it's an LLM is the wojak. A real user would've been more creative in finding an image to attach to their message.

>>2789720
I rest my case

>>2789576
>from ideology to ideology, left and right,
I dont trust these people.

>>2789576
If you're serious about actually understanding Marxism, not the liberalized, toothless version that treats worker co-ops as the end goal, you need to ground yourself in foundational theory to be able to do class analysis and better understand it, so as to avoid the errors propagated by liberals, opportunists, and reformists.

Start with Engels for a solid orientation:

"Principles of Communism" lays out the basics in Q&A format: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm

"Socialism: Utopian and Scientific" helps contrast real scientific socialism with moralistic daydreams: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/Engels_Socialism_Utopian_and_Scientific.pdf

Before diving into Capital, it's worth getting a grip on Marx’s political economy:

"Value, Price and Profit", dissects surplus value and wages under capitalism: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/value-price-profit.pdf

"Wage Labor and Capital", earlier and simpler, good to pair with the above: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/wage-labour-capital.pdf

To clarify the transition from capitalism to socialism and the current stages of communism (hint: socialism is not “co-ops in a free market in competition”), Marx’s “Critique of the Gotha Programme” is essential: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/Marx_Critque_of_the_Gotha_Programme.pdf

If Engels' intro texts speak to you, level up with "Anti-Dühring", it covers philosophy, political economy, and socialism in a comprehensive Marxist framework: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/anti_duhring.pdf

A text that is important to read and understand the dictatorship of the proletariat and the Paris Commune, which had its errors that Marx criticized and which served as a lesson for carrying out a successful communist revolution, as was done by the Bolsheviks, based on what was learned in the text called "The Civil War in France." The lesson is the opposite of decentralization, fear of acting, or fear of appropriating banks and controlling them for the sake of the domination of the proletariat for fear of causing chaos:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1871/civil-war-france/

Another text that analyzes the class struggle in France with the 1848 revolution also helps to understand the dictatorship of the proletariat and what happens to the petty bourgeoisie when it considers itself superior to the proletarians, betraying them, not seeing their common interest, and what its reward is for wanting to identify with the bourgeoisie, which is to be discarded by the bourgeoisie. The text is called "The Class Struggles in France, 1848 to 1850" with the link below:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1850/class-struggles-france/

Then there’s Lenin, essential for anyone who doesn’t want to be co-opted by reformists afraid of revolution:

"The State and Revolution", the real Marxist theory of the state and dictatorship of the proletariat: https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/

"Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism", explains monopoly capital and financial domination: https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/

"What Is To Be Done?", revolutionary organization and building a vanguard party: https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1901/witbd/

"Left-Wing Communism: an Infantile Disorder", a guide to dealing with pseudo-left idealists and opportunists: https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/lwc/

>>2789652
The first sign that an opportunist has no revolutionary plan, no plan with the workers for the class struggle, and no solidarity with the workers of the world is when this individual resorts to identitarianism to deceive middle-class youth into serving the bourgeoisie; this I observed in my country in the Global South.

>>2789679
The first sign that an opportunist has no revolutionary plan, no plan with the workers for the class struggle, nor solidarity with the workers of the world, is when this individual resorts to identitarianism to deceive middle-class youth into serving the bourgeoisie; this I observed in my country in the Global South.

The lumpenproletariat has no revolutionary interest; desperation leads to individualistic reactionism to be used by finance capital against the workers. The lumpenproletariat has a reactionary, not revolutionary, tendency; some of them can be used as soldiers if they accept the supremacy of the proletariat and are disciplined by the revolutionary communist party to minimize the individualistic narcissism they may normally possess. I do not tolerate the weakness of people who are unprepared for the chaos of revolution, who believe in superstitions about the bourgeois state, or who cling to the idea that they have some natural right (a fantasy that does not exist). Fear of confrontation, class struggle, and being hated is expected; clinging to the bourgeois state to save them means betraying the proletariat.

Scientific socialist theory is not based on the moralism and emotionalism of those who suffer most, but rather on recognizing the common class interests and the need to act collectively for the political supremacy of the proletariat, to socialize the economy, abolishing private property, anarchy of production, and social classes. Any minority of the working classes that is not the proletariat must act according to what they have in common with the proletariat, not their petty interests. Minorities that are bourgeois are enemies who will have to be re-educated or eliminated; their opinion is irrelevant. A proletarian who wants to be bourgeois or petty-bourgeois is also irrelevant to the communist cause, regardless of whether they are in the minority or not, because they will be treated as a liberal, reactionary, or reformist, and will be opposed.

Furthermore, the lumpenproletariat can be convinced to follow communists simply by presenting a program of guaranteed employment, wage equalization, and the typical political programs that Marx, Engels, and Lenin used for agitation in elections in bourgeois democracy.

>>2789652
Not really. What communists do is fulfill the demands that the workers of different groups have and crush the separate idpol movement. Zionists are still seething about the Soviet Union on these grounds.

>>2789801
And where is the Soviet Union today?

>>2789685
>Nah some people just have overly academic speech patterns.
"It's not X, it's Y." is not a overly academic speech though,
>>2789672
>trans genocide
Communists aren't doing trans genocide. That's idpol

>>2789679
What do you think I am?
>remove gender or sexual minorities,
they are not going to be "removed" retard. It just that we shouldn't make getting cheap doxyprep the goal of revolution (i am homosexual)
>migrants, ethnic minorities,
these are proles, shouldn't be centered tho
>women,
readmarx
> disabled,
many are proles
>elderly, students,
yeah sure, the leaders of revolution and the ones working the means of production
>unemployed, poor, druggies
are you retarded

>>2789576
>i think i might be becoming a commie
Politics are what you do, not what you believe nor the stories you tell about yourself.

>>2789652
>left wing identity politics can be coopted by conservative forces
I think the reality is that identity politics is inherently or originally used as a means of oppression, thus making liberatory politics around identity necessary, but the most visible form of "left" identity politics is ultra-left controlled opposition that distracts from liberatory politics.

Like the trans issue: conservatives want a sexed division of labor and every prole to live in multi-generational housing so that the capitalists/state doesn't need to pay retirement or childcare. Gays and by extension trans break this mold by virtue of their existence, making them a political "issue". So they have a politics native to themselves which is that they want equal rights to be employed, housed, given healthcare, served in businesses, and have basic social guarantees. Liberals come along and confound the issue by creating nonsense demands like "what if trans women wanted to helicopter their dicks and tits at the same time in the women's locker room - that would be good actually". They do this just to shock the conservative base into doubling down on "trans people are subhuman degenerates who shouldn't exist in polite society with the rest of us". So there are three types of identity politics, and two are capitalist and designed to grow a feedback loop of mutual outrage, distraction, and social division.

I wouldn't really call the other one, the liberatory politics of an oppressed or "problem" minority, identity politics, because it doesn't function within this outrage loop that is what most people talk about when condemning idpol. All real identity oppressions are an obfuscated class issue, so it's equally fine to call that class politics. Trans liberation requires a higher standard of living for everyone, making it a class issue. Black liberation requires abolishing the underclass of criminalized, under-educated, indebted, etc. low paid and immiserated workers. Immigrant liberation requires something similar. And so on. These identity-obfuscated-class issues can be tackled both ways, either class-first or identity-first, so long as they end up including both. There are historical failings on both sides, both identity struggles being co-opted by bourgeois elements and defanged, and class struggles failing to address the real mechanisms because many specific immeserating factors that impact only certain minorities but in sum are the oppression of the working class.

>>2789666
Straight white men are a minority. Why pander to them specifically? The answer is because the bourgeoisie want you to because they are the chosen ones to be granted privilege within the caste system, they are who everyone else aspires to be treated like, they are the ones who are expected to fight to defend the system.

>>2789576
I just want to say why I'm a communist, too:
>1) Because during capitalist crisis there are two solution - the working class unites to dispossess the wealthy, or a section of the working class unites with the wealthy to dispossess their working class neighbors. This is socialism and fascism, and I choose socialism.
<2) Because I am part of the working class and I want what is best for myself and the people around me.
>3) If we had a democracy that was actually responsive to the majority, i.e. the working class, eventually we would make a transition to socialism step by step. E.g. from regulations on business to enforcing the regulations strongly, which ultimately means expropriation by the state; from state owned enterprises competing with the market in order to keep prices reasonable, to a fully state owned economy; etc.
<4) You can break it down like this: a) grievances, b) policy to fix the problems, c) strategy to get policies implemented, d) tactics of said strategy. My grievances are of lack of business regulation, lack of social guarantees for workers, oppression of minority groups i fall into, fear of state violence, state suppression (e.g. of certain production, of types of construction, of certain regulations, etc.) that retards development and a good life, etc. The policy to address these issues is nationalization, removing state aid to monopolies, state owned enterprises, social guarantees from the state, democracy and accountability of the state, etc. The strategy options to implement socialism are social democracy (i.e. work within the existing state to slowly transition it towards socialism) or communism (i.e. armed revolution). All attempts at social democracy have ended in coup either from outside or inside, so to my understanding attempting democratic transition to socialism has to at least be accompanied by preparation for armed defense against fascism and illegal military repression, and this is no different from preparing for revolution, so between social democracy and communism I have to be a communist, knowing the history I know. And as far as tactics, there is much to be learned from Clausewitz, Lenin, Mao, and maybe modern reactionary insurgencies. In imperial core countries, the cities will have to be taken first, first won over politically slowly over time then won over militarily in an insurrectionary moment, and from there suburbs and rural areas will have to be made subservient to the cities. Reverse of Mao's formula for China, but still following the three strategic stages (defensive, stalemate, and offensive).

>>2789576
Becoming class conscious will make you more miserable for a time.

>>2789970
>gay/trans
I'd like to add that being gay is a non-issue outside of the US, Russia, and MENA.
Trans is a non issue outside the US&UK, and most of asia/mena is actually ahead of the anglophone world on that issue.

>>2790003
well, jamaica is pretty homophobic too. Kinda weird for a nation of stoners tbh

>>2790003
Being gay is an issue in a bunch of African countries.

>>2790010
and in asia too. sure most of them dont violently hate gay people like evangelical xtians but most of them keep them off TV and so on.

>>2790025
in my understanding it's simply not discussed. which would mean that it's not a political wedge issue.

>>2790010
doesn't the A in MENA stand for Africa?
Otherwise, sorry, you are correct. I was using it as an umbrella term.

>>2789970
>Straight white men are a minority. Why pander to them specifically?
I pander to the proletariat

>>2790043
>I pander to the proletariat
You attempt to pander to an abstraction of proletariat, not real people, you cant distill a single quality from rest of the person.

>>2790045
I pander to proletarians, regardless of identitarian characteristics. I do not prefer cishets to transhomos

>>2789576
You wana trade places bro? I want to be from this gulag.

>>2790049
>I do not prefer cishets to transhomos
Ok, so for example, are you for providing healthcare to trans people for transitioning?

>>2790028
It's only North Africa

>>2789652
>Fascists often attempt to coopt class struggle.
Don't fascists outright reject class struggle? Isn't that the whole point?

>>2789630
Reform and revolution, the national question, junius pamphlet, her writings on the russian revolution. Honestly everything she has on marxists org is worth reading

>>2790154
The people will decide

>>2790454
Well people have decided that they dont want socialism either. I am asking you.

>>2790530
Personally I would want too

>>2789675
>there's nothing wrong with appealing to the sensibilities of the majority.
tailing a reactionary majority is the opportunist strategy of a reformist bourgeois party. the rest of your post is just equivocating around this point to dress it up nice

>>2790454
>The people
>>2790530
>people have decided that they dont want
muh people this
muh people that
bourgeois interclass project
socialism is a class dictatorship of the proletariat, not the wider "people" which includes the lumpenproletariat, the petty bourgeoisie, and the bourgeoisie. Bourgeois opportunism tries to create a false unity among "the people"

>>2790565
non-proletarians aren't people

>>2790564
This is such bullshit, too, because they're just ASSUMING the proles (or "people") are reactionary. Like how do you know that?

>>2789580
that's a trad buddhist bit he lifted from the Chan (Zen) tradition, it once meant that reading can get in the way of esoteric knowledge. Here I think it was just a pseudopragmatic thing he said in his late late years that I don't put much stock into.