[ overboard / cytube] [ leftypol / b / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music ] [ meta ] [ GET / ref]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internets about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Password (For file deletion.)

File: 1608525394510.jpeg (403.67 KB, 2157x1600, media_EUR0EfZWkAEkX2F.jpg….jpeg)

 No.4557[Last 50 Posts]

Last thread: >>983378

Why did the Soviet Union annex Moldova but not Romania, eventually at least? Might as well have gone all out and annexed all Romanian-speaking lands.


But I was reading this piece and it said that the Black Panther Party handling out food for kids was mutual aid.


A dictatorship of the proletariat is simply a worker's state; how it's organized will depend on the different theories proposed by different Marxists on how said state should function.

The way most people differentiate the two is that collective property tends to be more used for coops and public ownership is social property.


File: 1608525510407.jpg (40.49 KB, 473x430, 7pr8sdud69g41.jpg)

Someone told me that the USSR had a plan to flood USA with drugs at some point, is there any truth to this? Google is giving me nothing.


The CIA flooded america with drugs like crack though. They also give weapons to the cartels in mexico via the midwest depot.


I know that, but did the USSR do the same at some point, or even plan to? That's what I'm asking.


Sounds like anti-communist propaganda, most likely fake as shit


Idk but tell them about the midwest depot and ask them why all the cartels have american automatic weapons


Yeah I thought so, like I said google is not even giving me some BS propaganda, I think the guy just made it up on the spot


does anyone have that meme image about “communism oppressed my family and took our family business”?


reasking this


Execute everyone but Jeb


Stalin would be one of the guys blowing up ATMs during the riots


Stalin 2 is probably somewhere out there setting fire to a Chase as we speak.


i posted in a thread i now cant find, so here we go again.
im a foreign English teacher in China trying to organize my fellow English teachers to get better conditions and that which is in our contract to actually be given to us. does anyone know how labour relations work in china? ive heard you are only allowed to unionise with the.government run union. would trying to bargain collectively get me in trouble for doing union shit?


The only legal union is the state union, so yes chances are you would be in trouble if you attempt to unionize independently from the state


File: 1608525515342.gif (162.24 KB, 261x310, 8fbb96d9a9caa9488939b08a92….gif)

Why did the people living under Mao still had a fondness for Mao even though there was famine?


I imagine it must've been a combination of Mao's role before and during the formation of the PRC and the influence his cult of personality had on the people.


That there was a famine in one year doesn't cancel all the achievements of his era. Have you seen what China was like before Mao?


>Have you seen what China was like before Mao?
No, i just watched a documentary on Mao.


Famines were frequent up to that point and there was another huge one earlier in the century, they probably cared more that they stopped afterwards.


Who the hell cares? This question matters almost not at all.


>responding to a bot post


Can the dictatorship of the proletariat (and the vanguard party) be decentralized and more libertarian in nature? I like the idea of ML but all I hear is that it’s authoritarian and one-sided


Some Marxists have suggested more decentralized alternatives: a very common one is to organize the state through workers' councils (technically this was supposed to be the Soviet model but ultimately the councils were subservient to the party).


I heard a rumor that it took a 10 years process to own a car in the USSR?


File: 1608525516195-0.png (15.85 KB, 468x186, yooo2.png)

File: 1608525516195-1.png (1.39 MB, 1460x1280, yooo1.png)

Where do you think this guy's father is?


I’m not all about labels and stuff, but if I said I was ML most people would think of the one party thing. Is the workers council thing the intended outcome? Or just a more decentralized alternative


It was supposed to be the intended form of government of the USSR, but we know how that turned out. Ultimately that discussion leads to another question about the role of the party itself (since we're referring particularly to a vanguard party model).




File: 1608525518498.png (16.43 KB, 220x149, 220px-De_Facto_People's_Re….png)

Donetsk and Luhansk Peoples Republics. Give me a rundown on them.


In what order should I read Marx's works


from beginning to end


start with wage labor and capital


das capital ad infinitum


Russian puppet states


If you were to legalize prostitution and drug dealing would they still be lumpenproles? Would they become petit-bourgeois? Does integrating the "informal" economy help revolution in any way?


File: 1608525536261.png (297.18 KB, 988x1270, America_1794.png)

Why was it that anglo americq came to dominate hispan8c America? Why didn't Mexico or Brazil become what the USA did?


What are the material bases for Islam? Would the Middle East be different were it not for Muhammad? Is the existence of Islam major evidence for Great Man Theory, since basically one guy ended up influencing the entire modern Islamic world?


File: 1608525536782.jpg (255.73 KB, 2100x1525, t7v6f4p4yz311.jpg)

The Mediterranean being the front of a jihad for more than a thousand years must've changed something


>slavery is jihad
Ah yes, those Russians waging jihad encouraging slavery up until the 1600s/


File: 1608525536961.png (36.61 KB, 250x315, Territories_of_the_Knights….png)

Clearly it wasn't a one sided conflict but a strong factor for motivation was a zeal to wage holy war, crusades or jihad
Why do you think there a crusader state appeared between Italy and libya?


You realise the Knights of Malta weren't fighting crusade against the North Africans by the 1700s, right? They were just a feudal hangover in the age of Absolutism. Actually read some history of the Mediterranean, most conflict even by the time of the Siege of Vienna was regular geopolitical confrontations: sometimes with a religious flair for clout, nothing more.


No but when it was founded 8ts focus was at freeing Christian slaves and capturing Muslim slaves as well as stopping raids against Christian lands and raiding Muslim lands.
And even if they have other reasons conflicts may be made possible or inspire more followers thanks to religion. Why else would western Christians go as far as to fight the turks first at nicopolis and then varna?


Congrats my friend, literally nothing you just said is correct or makes any sense. I am kinda impressed.


So what nonreligi9us reasons did French knights have to go fight in the balkans for one regional power vs another?


Money, Titles, Social advancement? You realise that by the time of the fourth crusade most of the knightly orders were mercenary companies of failsons. They weren't doing it out of some "cultural slavery war"…


May you not tell me more exactly what reason the French had to send their armies all the way to the balkans, where anything won would be contested by the other Christian powers, other than religious zeal 1396?


asking again


Is there any good source disputing the idea the US had to drop two or even any bombs?


Why do you guys despise the "eternal anglos", how are they the elite? Aren't racial elites inaccurate?


File: 1608525548047.jpg (8.03 KB, 177x177, hibernian.jpg)

pic related


it's just a meme man


bro it's based on a hilarious, contradictory, turbo-meme propaganda film from the Nazi era. The best way to subvert rightoids' delusional ideology is to meme it to death.


anglo detected


Is Zizek a dengoid?


As far as I know he doesn't like China, so no


How can I radicalize telemarketers?


meme stolen from pol


First get a job as telemarketer, you'll need the inside experience to know exactly what buttons to press and how
Hang in there and if you manage to last on the job for more than 2 months start organizing a union
You'll probably get fired for doing that but at that point being fired will be a joyful affair


China to him is part of "the new authoritarian capitalism" which will dominate if a new left movement fails to emerge


He's nuanced this a little more recently I think
I have a vague memory of hearing him talk about the liberals projecting onto China in the last year or two iirc


Isn't it an /int/ meme?


is minimalism a bourgeois pursuit? i find these type of people insufferable btw


Can somebody explain why venezuela lured those oil executives to their country to jail them?

With just this context it seems like a wrong thing to do.

Is there more context? What did they do? Was this a big brained extradition without actually being an extradition?


are you trying to prove anything with this? does surgery spook you that much?
yeah you get your humor from facebook, we're aware of that.


File: 1608525573870-0.jpg (845.59 KB, 1080x1497, Screenshot_20201123-233349….jpg)

File: 1608525573870-1.jpg (525.18 KB, 1080x1131, Screenshot_20201123-233413….jpg)

File: 1608525573870-2.jpg (698.87 KB, 1080x1082, Screenshot_20201123-233448….jpg)

why is Mexico like this

are we just retarded?

t. US born Chicano


Bring the link.


File: 1608525574271.jpg (24.63 KB, 449x401, Alunya-cat-Rodina-Laugh.jpg)

>he thinks that there aren't ghettos that look the same like this in the U.S.
Now tell me, do you feel superior in some way?


does anyone have any books regarding Chinese education or curriculum ? is it still based on the proletarian academic system?


During overproduction why are commodities destroyed rather than stored?


>venezuela lured those oil executives to their country to jail them
I wish we lived in the world rightoids think we do.


How do i make a text big and red?


It isn't just the storage cost. You can think up some ebin demand curve, with different potential consumers right now having a different price maximum they would tolerate. But since you aren't offering a service, you can't really charge one price to one guy and a totally different price to another guy, not on a big scale at least. People can buy and resell your stuff. So, imagining we actually have a good estimate curve of this willingness to buy this or that amount at the moment at this or that alternative price and imagining we can't segment people to make them different offers, but just have one price for all, you can see that forcing yourself to make the price so low that you sell everything can yield a lower total sum than selling at a higher price and having to destroy some stock. This is a general problem with profit-oriented production. (In a labor-voucher system, the point is to get the stuff to people, so you lower the prices as much as necessary for that instead of destroying the stuff.)

If your market is oligopolistic, you have to also consider that you influence the typical prices, you condition people to expect that this amount is just the price that this kind of thing costs and that they put aside in their budget. You can piss off some people more by making something cheaper for a while and then getting back to the old price than by never lowering the price.


Anyone have sources for specifically child porn being legalized once the Soviet Union fell?


jesus christ, that is depressing. I would be amazed if you came out healthy and well-adjusted, growing up in that environment.


Did Che really execute gays?


Charging rent if your parents genuinely need you to contribute to the household is okay, but your petit booj parents are just greedy pieces of shit. Once you make it out of there, cut them the fuck off. There is no value in family if they are not lovin and supportive of each other, and that includes financial support to some degree. I wish you the best anon




I don't have any, though if I understand what you're referring to, it's not that child pornography was legalized in Russia after the USSR fell, but that since Russia in the 90s was such a clusterfuck of poverty and lawlessness that it became a hotspot for cp in Eastern Europe
No, it's just propaganda. What happened in Cuba was that gay people were put in labor camps, which obviously was and is wrong, however this was done after Che had already left Cuba; he himself was never involved in that shit.


can somebody link me that marxist version of wikipedia?


what is market socialism and how is it different than state socialism? Regardless of which is more efficient, which is better at securing workers rights and the public ownership of the means of production?


>No, it's just propaganda. What happened in Cuba was that gay people were put in labor camps, which obviously was and is wrong, however this was done after Che had already left Cuba; he himself was never involved in that shit.
Also Many other countries such as America at the time were throwing gays in prison. Fidel himself later apologized for the treatment of gays, and today Cuba is fairly good for LGBT rights, especially compared to their neighbors.


The belief comes first, the justifications come second. You don't argue with a reactionary using logic, you use aesthetics.


>like in North Korea if everyone just starved to death how do they even still exist.

I’d like to add that they went into apocalypse not once but TWO TIMES. You’d think that the unhappy citizens of the evil totalitarian government would have organized a resistance during the arduous march

But nothing, They rebuilt the country within 20 years. This is why porky is so bent on their fall


>Is it like, do reactionaries just make shit up?
Yes, it's pretty much literally all they do.


Could've stopped a few words earlier. You don't argue with a reactionary.
You eliminate them.


Imagine Homestar Runner explaining communism to you.


I still can't get over when I made the mistake (though this was before I knew) of trying to talk about history with my /pol/ supervisor at work. The topic of communism/labor movements in the US came up and I was like (this was before I started posting here and got uber redpilled too), in response to him talking about how the right is oppressed: "bruh McCarthyism literally cleaned all the communists out of the country" and he was like "no it didn't"

Also tried to convince me that California was a Russian colony (which is partly true, but not to the much larger extent that Spain/Mexico) when he made a snide comment about Mexicans ruining the state (despite being half Mexican himself, LMAO)

He will also frequently lie to my face about things that literally happened minutes before.

I hate these people. Never met a /pol/tard IRL if you can help it, it's fucking shit.

>use aesthetics
examples of this?


Also, how the fuck do I know guys like Michael Parenti or Richard Wolff aren't just shysters trying to trick me into having empty store shelves and six to the power of ten thousand trillion billion dead people in the same way Shen Bapiro or Jordan Balthazar Peterson are trying to trick me into embracing the free market?

Alternatively, how do I know that Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro, Richard Spencer, Lauren Southern, Dennis Prager and et al actually aren't the good guys fighting a heroic struggle against breadlines and forced feminization as specified in Carl Reichmarks "The Long March Through the Capitalist Institutions: How to subvert the Free Market, Smash The Family Unit, and turn Proud Men Into Cum Guzzling Sissies"?


What's the difference between a soviet and a (confederation of) unions?


Just come off as cooler than them. I know quite a few former /pol/lacks who just found commie memes funnier in the end of like..2020 or something.


File: 1608525603996-0.jpg (383.25 KB, 750x387, image0-26.jpg)

File: 1608525603996-1.jpg (58.93 KB, 800x600, confederate socialist stat….jpg)

A soviet is a workers' council, a soviet union is a collection of workers' councils. Unions are a bargaining chip for better wages.
The soviet union was literally a confederacy of independent soviets.




Thank you!


What are the theoretical contributions of Hoxhaism? What are the theoretical contributions of Stalinism, my understanding being that Hoxhaists are among the most insistent in asserting that Stalin had any at all, as opposed to being basically "applied Leninism" plus his own quirks/choices made based on the USSR's conditions at the time?


Oh, I hadn't noticed your response. Thanks, that much was already clear to me, but I was also wondering why some communist tendencies are against unions as a revolutionary component.

Are mass strikes considered bad praxis? Are people of the opinion that unions, by their very nature, are incapable of being against capitalism rather than wanting to reform it? Could a union, it being a mass, presumably confederated, organization of workers, not be "turned into" a soviet?

I'm sorry for bombarding you with these questions, but I'm quite confused on what some people's problem with unions seems to be. I guess it's just hard for me to believe that working within the system always means tacit approval.


These are the posts that make me not like you. The confederacy, the south's whole fucking culture is centered and grew around slavery. Tfu. Good riddance.

Now I just need to figure out how your shit accents came because your homies back in the day put nigs in chains.


asking this again :\ Agent Kochinski pretty much said on a Twitter poll that he is a market socialist and people equate it to being "just capitalism"


Market socialism is when the entire economy is composed of coops. It is literally capitalism, the only thing that changes is that all the workers of the business are now the owner. Doesn't change how they operate the business at all though; their is no functional difference between private business owned by one CEO vs one owned collectively.


What is was the NEP in layman's terms?


An improvisation of the Bolsheviks. In Marxist theory, only a properly developed capitalist society has the means to develop socialism, however Russia in the 20s wasn't nearly as developed to begin this transformation, so the Bolsheviks allowed this period of restricted capitalism to aid this development before transitioning to a socialist economy.


Does this mean capitalism is more efficient than socialism? Why can't the Bolsheviks have used socialism to develop their economy instead?


less than 10% of the Russian Empire was industrial prole workers. The great majority were peasants.


Because you can't skip a mode of production. To transition from semi-feudalism (Russia in the 20s) to socialism would be impossible without at least some form of capitalist development.


Why exactly? Economies can be socialist and work, right?


You're not understanding me, a necessary prerequisite to socialism is capitalism. It's not that socialism doesn't work, socialism requires the infrastructure productive forces of capitalism. Think of it as a building, you can't build the third floor without having built the second one.


infrastructure and productive forces*


Why can't socialism build infrastructure? If anything the Soviets developed the infrastructure in their country plentifully.


It can, they have different functions. Just because socialism can do something doesn't mean you can just discard the necessary advancements of a previous mode of production. They're all necessary.


How exactly is capitalism necessary as a prerequisite? What kinds of infrastructure or other economic bases can it build that socialism can't (or at least nearly as well)?


Every mode of production develops the productive forces which shape and develop the base. For a mode of production to advance into a new one the full development of the productive forces are necessary. In the case of Russia, skipping from feudalism to socialism would've been impossible. How can you socialize an industry that doesn't exist for example? That's why the NEP was necessary, some form of restrained capitalism had to take place before the full socialization of the economy could take place.


Why can't the existing industry be socialized and then expanded under a socialist plan? Industry isn't inherently capitalist.


No, but in semi-feudal Russia restrained capitalism was necessary to develop and expand their industry.


What film?


Der Ewige Jude


File: 1608525637487.png (825.59 KB, 1343x715, 1589250544678.PNG)

What would be /leftypol/'s refutation on how right-wingers interpret the Tragedy of the Commons?


It can, that's the difference between Orthodox Marxism and Marxism-Leninism


Without businesses/companies, what would the daily life of a socialist society look like? Where would you buy stuff from, and from who?


Why did South Korea and Taiwan experience such fast growth?


Capital investment and technology transfer from already developed countries.


thanks am retard


BTW the USSR and China (less so USSR) also benefited from foreign investment and technology transfer. The USSR was able to purchase important technologies from the west during the great depression due to desperation of western corporations, China received investment and technology transfer twice, first in the 1950s from the USSR and later from 1978 to the present from the west.


Shops. See Cockshott's Towards a New Socialism for a modern portrayal of a socialism with computerised planning.


why is trump trying to remove section 230?



so he can sue twitter or whatever


How come dutchland became so much richer than Portugal when both acquired so much wealth looting asia?


Dutch invented the modern stock market and the VOC was basically the first publicly traded multinational conglomerate, the VOC, attracting a lot of foreign direct investment further fueling Dutch trade and imperialism, both at least partially undertaken by the VOC.

The Portuguese just looted but the Dutch basically invented modern capitalism and some of its most instrumental financial institutions on top of looting.


Is there an economic analysis that takes the perspective of commodities consuming humans?
For example, instead of saying "Joe consumed of 4 hours of TV shows" I would say "TV shows consumed (based on average human lifespan) 0.0006% of Joe today"


Can an mL give me a good answer on why it was based for the NKVD to work with the gestapo in Poland? And also why the various massacres and killings in Poland were also based?


Why justify when you can deny?


Source on the first bit? I imagine since you say Gestapo you are implying the NKVD helped them round up Jews but this seems like bull unless you can provide a good source. When Germany and the USSR partitioned Poland they each stayed on their own side of their promised occupation zones. Once the germans had occuppied the entire country they pulled back to their agreed zone and let the Soviets occupy their promised zone. There was no further "cooperation" than that.

For your second question, it was "based" because the Polish officers executed by the NKVD were rightoids who were in charge of overseeing and conducting the persecution of minorities in Poland before the Germans invaded. They were fascists lite essentially, they deserved it.


I dm'd some "radical leftist" dude 2000 words of cringe on a dating site a couple nights ago. Do you guys think he'll respond?


Because the Polish state was just as reactionary as the Reich




I hate being in cringe limbo.


If it makes you feel any better I think guys have to pay money to respond on dating apps and this doesn't come up till someone messages them


File: 1608525728733.jpg (40.68 KB, 636x636, 1606432556433.jpg)

So no one else even knows who Thay is? Buddhistanons? Vietanons?


This one's 100% free to use, so it's not that. It's honestly more the cringe at this point than anything else, if he replies and acts as if what I wrote was completely normal, it's going to take some effort to convince myself he's not a retard. Groucho Marx problems


what did you write??


lol I don't know how to even start explaining that, for proper context I'd have to post the whole thing along with his profile and that seems like a bad idea. I wish I could give you the basic idea somehow cause it's actually funny. One part of it is that I am just an uncomfortably earnest person, and I didn't really even try to contain that. I might easily have come off as psychotically eager.


Are people living far from society in rural communes because they don't work for a wage individualists and nihilists?
For example people stealing and producing their own food, who try to consume as less as possible, or people living in squats and refusing to work, mostly anarchists that gave up on changing the system and only caring about their individual impact on the environment.


File: 1608525748908.jpg (952.85 KB, 3000x4000, to punish and enslave.jpg)

Isn't the lumpenproletariat a moralist category?


o, it's a useful term. marx's original conception isn't useful, it included exploiters who are clearly better identified with the (petite) bourgeoisie. but the category is meaningful enough that it has survived being coined in a dumb way.

there's plenty of categories that get at something it's interesting and meaningful to talk about, that have a tendency to invite prejudice (which is always moralistic, and the form unjustifiable moral judgments take) from some people. take addicts, for example. doesn't mean you shouldn't have a word for them, though. just means you need to take care to not to let anyone's moralistic sentiments derail your discussions.

t. lumpen lump, definitely not of the proletariat proper




Aren't Israels nationalist policies somewhat justified by the fact Jews got kicked out of almost every Arab country after 1948?


Can you explain to me how that would "somewhat" justify them?


That's why distinctions like lumpenbourgeoisie are useful. Maybe not when talking to normies, however when discussing between other Marxists it helps making that distinction, as you mention clearly it would be ridiculous to argue a cartel leader and a homeless drug addict have the same class interests.


Guys who are https://www.globalresearch.ca/latest-news-and-top-stories

Are they a lefty news source? They have decent takes on imperialism, just wondering if they’re /ourguys





I looked him up and sources are saying the owner is a ‘conspiracy nut’ for saying Osama was a cia asset. The wikipedia page on him paints him as some “pro russian”. Seems like he might have the booj upset no?


I was idly 'surfing the web', as one is inclined to do, when I came across this abandoned weebly page.

The usage of terms such as "socialised healthcare" and totalitarian as a byword for socialism (or the burger interpretation thereto, which is Obama) is of note. On this page, I found this:


How would you respond to these "arguments" if this gentleman accosted you with them?


1. Meme

2. Fake, if he means very heavily restricted immigration and borders it's for security reasons. If imperialists weren't so keen on destroying every socialist nation it wouldn't be necessary

3.>No source

4. Meme

5. All countries do this, the fact this retard believes socialist countries do it more or by default they act in an insencere and lying manner is due to anti-communist propaganda

6. Why take a small portion of the country instead of all of it? The point of socialism isn't to liberate some workers, but to liberate all

7. The "ruling class" (not a class in the Marxist sense of the word but it's not as if this mong would even know that) is just the portion of the working class which are the most well versed in theoretical knowledge and political expertise to guide a revolution and safeguard socialism. Not everyone wants to be a politician, it's not about being elitist, but practical. This faggot wouldn't know the difference of course

8. >Somalia basically ancapistan
Retarded statement with no backing at all

9. >muh voluntary

10. I don't even know what this is supposed to mean


What's the rub on organizing gig workers? Co-op based alternative services? Tenants unions? Giving up and becoming a third worldist?


File: 1608525914714-0.jpg (169.88 KB, 500x700, steamengine1.jpg)

File: 1608525914714-1.jpg (58.8 KB, 600x440, 74e2c9fdb83d058cfd2a925f22….jpg)

I saw someone in a separate thread, talking about how not only was the steam engine developed in Rome, but it was actively refused by the emperor because he believed that there was an overabundance in labor already and automation would curb work for even more slaves? Can I get some more info on this and even some sources? Much appreciated!


That's a myth, the aeolipile was merely a curiosity, it was useless for any kind of work. Further, the romans had no aversion to using machines.


You're in luck, the big man himself wrote an essay on the topic



What do you guys thinks of kantbot and his podcast?


If you're a leftist do you have to support feminism?


You can also be a fan at a children's cartoon show focussed on ponies

We're a big tent




cool, thank you.


Women workers are fellow workers all the same.


I have no problem with women working or women workers. It's just 3rd wave feminism that i personally don't like, they discriminate against the male gender.


Did China ever solve their locust problem?


how well did agriculture do under lysenko were there any benefits at all i had heard the claim that agriculture didn't actually do that badly thx


This is probably going to sound like a troll post or loaded question, but i don't mean it to. You've probably gotten some version of this question by /pol/ posters. Anyways, Communist say that evil acts are enabled by capitalism, but in totalitarian "communist"/socialist countries evil acts like genocide or a socialist "ruling elite" (like in dictatorships) are enabled by the totalitarian governments. What are the communist defense of these peculiarities?


Name one example


Specifically for communism if that wasn't clear from the flag


Pol pot's Cambodian genocide.




If the US is a settler-colonial state (which I think it is) wouldn't Russia be one too (Caleb Maupin just indirectly claimed live that it isn't). The Rus all colonialized east from the approximate region of what is today Belarus, didn't they?


File: 1608526033346.jpg (2.24 MB, 810x9694, zoinks.jpg)

Is this anything to worry about?


There are hundreds (if not thousands) of far-right fbi.gov groups. Nothing of note here, IMO.


Is the Marxist definition of capitalism better compared to the "free, voluntary exchange of goods and services" definition and why?




>with the right funds
Its grift


They are relating to different concepts so to say one is better than another is to compare apples to chairs. One isn't "better" than the other. More answers in the thread you made: >>1210585


Everybody alwawys talks about transition from capitalism to socialism

But I'm more interested in late stage communism.

I'm a newbie and I'm baffled on how such a large scale behavior modification be done? What did Marx, Engles write on how to transform society into a cashless, stateless, etc society?

What books? Did the modern communists lenin, stalin, mao, castro think that ahead of implementing it?

When I imagine late stage communism I'm always stuck on the idea of counter-revolutionaries and regression back into capitalism

I simply don't get how that can be stopped without arms and nukes. A century under capitalist powers yet people strive for communism. How would the clock be stopped from turning back

I want to read the books on bringing about full communism. What are the best ones.
I don't care about economics of it all really. I'm more interested in the human, societal aspect of it all


I'm someone who on some level believes that capitalism is wrong and communism/socialism may be the better system however I am also an edgelord/conspiracist at heart and that really affects how I learn and develop opinions in that I will go. So for example, I'm watching videos of people justify stalin, justify mao, justify 'anti imperialism' i.e supporting iran and north korea against america, but I'm worried that I'm falling for rhetoric and lies which may impact my intellectual development later on.
How can I avoid this? I always knew about tankies but some sources I've been looking at, for example the TheFinnishBolshevik has me confused.
Thanks for any help.


If capitalism doesn't really hate fascism, why are the Nazis so much more hated and made the icon of evil above communists? There's much less anti-communist propaganda than anti-fascist, but isn't capitalism more afraid of communism?


Communists are no longer a significant threat in the 21st century.


Hell most gaming servers from that site is pretty much just filled with rightiods.


The only way to be sure of your beliefs (which you imply you aren't) is to read more. Don't worry so much about falling for "rhetoric", but if you think people are lying to you, continually ask about the topic on this thread/board/wherever and look at the sources people who you think are lying use. Doing your own research will massively help you form your own, solid beliefs.


>But I'm more interested in late stage communism.
What a good question and I both thank you and commend you for this question! Rudimentary, owning the means of production would very likely be co-operatives and direct democracy (in government, commerce and workplace to name a few). Hypothetically, worker co-operatives in later stage communism might resort to price gouging and unscrupulous practices belonging to the former capitalist age and culminating an increase in consumer co-operatives. If worker and consumer co-operatives "price gouge" and become unscrupulous the more anarchist forms of structures would arise. For example the means of productions become owned by "stakeholders" (workers, consumers, community and government) and even complete autonomy whereby its a DYI (Do-It-Yoursef) utopia and civil.
What books? Did the modern communists lenin, stalin, mao, castro think that ahead of implementing it?
Maybe Bakunin, Bordiga… not well versed in that, hopefully it entices someone to refer you to the books. Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Castro may have considered a late stage communism era by inferring to it and not elucidating it.
>When I imagine late stage communism I'm always stuck on the idea of counter-revolutionaries and regression back into capitalism
The USSR didnt undergo late-stage communism and became revisionist since Khrushchev thereby by proxy destalinisation. The USSR instituted, instated and codified many laws and rights which were very difficult for the revisionists to abolish in short period so it was done over a long-long period. Still, there might be a tendency by some to revel in the capitalist age (some revel in medieval times and cosplay as such) also there would be a tendency for comprehensive reform and even revolution.
>I want to read the books on bringing about full communism
I remember a few times here the "What is to be done?" by Lenin being mentioned.
>I'm more interested in the human, societal aspect of it all
Cultural capitalism besides ceremonial aspects could be superseded by a new cultural norm. In feudalism for example if you were a raised in a farming family and you wanted to be a baker, you just were obliged (more or less) to marry into a baker family. Pretty much the way people treat commodities and property would change, if commodities and property were deified it could be that commodities and property would be treated as existing to serve people.



If you've seen this or are able to cab you guys give me your thoughts on it.


So, why is this revisionism and not applying Marxism to China's current conditions?


What are some examples of idealism? Aren't many instances of 'idealism' really just wrong materialist analysis? E.g. scientific racism, which seeks to justify racism by using things like environmental differences of different group of people; or the belief that an aristocracy should rule, given the material basis that aristocrats have more resources at their disposal in order to become educated and thus more fit for ruling the lower classes.


the basic example is the progressive liberal enlightenment narrative that justifies bourgeois revolutions with noble ideals and pretends you're supposed to take seriously analysis like "the united states abolished slavery because it was the morally right thing to do".


libs like to point a finger at the nazis because they can, because they went to war to defeat them. it's not real of course, they were fine with nazis on principle until the very moment they invaded france and bombed britain. when nazi atrocities were revealed, it was a huge pr victory they are still milking it to this day. look at this evil shit that we put an end to, because we're the good guys who put an end to evil shit! excellent way to distract from how you consistently do evil shit yourself, and in fact refuse to prosecute most nazi war criminals, leave most nazi party members in charge of the german government, and hire all the nazis who are particularly good at being evil to work on your post-ww2 world order.

it's just not as easy to make communists out to be evil, because they weren't. they were an ally in that same war, and did about 95% of the work and sacrifice it took to defeat the nazis. during ww2 everyone knew communists were the true enemies of nazis, before the war began in full, liberal democracies were rooting for the nazis.

>There's much less anti-communist propaganda than anti-fascist

this is inaccurate. 20th century history is pretty much all anti-communist propaganda. education in general has a lot of it. there is no anti-fascist propaganda at all, there is anti-nazi propaganda which is really pro-american or pro-liberal propaganda, which means it's also pro-fascist.


Are the concepts of cadre and party member synonyms or is there a distinction between the two?


Can eugenics exist in socialism?


Nonmember answer communist parties aren't fronts for criminal organisations most of the time


Yes and it should be…
But not under communism.State-enforced transhumanism is great idea


how to convert neolibs?


Make them display their fascism overtly instead of covertly and you've got a chance

Otherwise make them penniless, starving and homeless with no support is about the only thing that would change the smug disingenuous fucks


File: 1608526907296.jpg (139.77 KB, 1043x1600, 05 bob-marley.jpg)

Is there any reason to believe that the CIA killed Bob Marley? The CIA does have ties with Jamaican criminal gangs that were enemies of Prime Minister Michael Manley, who was one of those social democrats that got along with Fidel. Could they have innected his foot with cancer cells like they did to Hugo Chavez?


File: 1608526924716.png (14.23 KB, 794x105, brave_yRHmIQKzqm.png)

Why are Green-New-Deal-types wrong when they say that the problem with capitalism (in relation to climate change) is that it requires "endless growth"? I saw a post on here the other day that explained why growth isn't necessarily bad in-of-itself (pretty obvious conclusion) and not the reason why capitalism can't deal with ecology. Picrel is from this god awful Guardian piece. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/15/china-scaling-up-weather-modification-programme-we-should-be-worried


Anybody remembers who had a quote that went something like:

"The powerful must not be limited in their use of power over the weak"

Can't find who it was and it gnaws me.


Why does America give foreign aid to impoverished countries, including North Korea? Is this legitimately out of goodwill or does this money instead go to government officials, which bribes them into acting a certain way?


They're not wrong at all, stop listening to that imbecile who presumes everyone is a Malthusian.


>everyone has a home
>but where are all the billionaires? checkmate gommunists

You can't have capitalism without incessant growth.

That growth is consumption, not necessarily only population.


What's wrong with a growth in production then? The problem with capitalism and ecology isn't just that it produces endless growth, it's that it doesn't manage where growth comes from (doesn't manage externalities).

Your comment feels more directed at the lib who wrote the article I linked, of course you're right though.


what's the real reason I shouldn't think of marxism as a political religion?


After ww1, Lenin advised Polish communists to dial back their rhetoric and put forward a reformist platform. Why, and will appearing more moderate win anyone over?


The strong do what they can, the weak suffer what they must.



File: 1608527092228.png (169 KB, 442x401, Screenshot from 2020-12-17….png)

What is her name?


Why would it be a religion? In what ways is it simular to a religion?
Don't try.
Propaganda and control. The US also blockades food to counties they also give aid. It's about making countries their bitch. They also use the infrastructure to smuggle drugs, money, people, and weapons.


The Insufferable Unfunny Liberal


Don't be a retard, man.


Reasking this. Is foreign aid by western countries really altruistic?


Why did the Soviet Union fall? It seems like most socialist countries fall because their means of income (oil for venezuela, sugar for Cuba) are no longer feasible and so they can't support their social policies. Is it because they spent all their money on the space race?


Because they had a coup.


After 1988, perestroika effectively brought back private property and destroyed central planning. Gorbachev and co not only refused to recognize the situation and reverse it, but made it worse and soon the situation turned catastrophic.


File: 1608527228017.jpg (45.89 KB, 550x814, 343688_550x814.jpg)

Guys, I need your help. I want to watch this movie, but it's censored in the EU (for obvious reasons). Does anyone has an idea how to watch it?


How did people get riled up into letting the union collapse? What were they dissatisfied with?


paste this magnet link (720p) into your torrent client



They voted in a referendum to keep it, had an attempted counter-coup to depose Gorbachev, and rioted during the breakup. The capitalist tide was too strong.


File: 1608527237374.jpg (90.64 KB, 574x561, ESP2r_bUUAAcgTs.jpg)



No, almost never. If you look hard enough you can probably find a few exceptions of the rule but generally it's used as a destabilizing tool for geopolitical interests. A good example of this is something which happened at the near end of the DDR's existance. I can't remember too well if it was West Germans or American police/soldiers who did this but they would pass Coke bottles (for free) through holes and such of the Berlin Wall. Maybe this can't really be considered "aid" but the function is the same: you buy the trust of the opposition, in this case the East German population by fueling their desires at the moment (consumerism). The rest is history. This works basically the same way when providing actual humanitarian aid but I'd say it's even more effective in those cases, since the desperation of these people out of situations (usually caused by these same Western countries ie sanctions for example) is so great that this "help" will help secure their loyalty. As Sankara said "he who feeds you controls you".


Not at all altruistic. Sankara rejected foreign aid for a reason.


Hey man, thanks again for helping me. You really did me a great favor!


Any concrete examples of foreign aid being used as leverage?




The one I gave about East Germany, there's also Venezuela, which Maduro rightly blockaded, though there are rumors the "aid" were actually weapons to be given to the opposition, so not really the situation I'm explaining. Pretty much all African countries, and the DPRK too iirc, the UN used to give them agricultural equipment thought that was a couple of years ago, they probably don't use them anymore and developed their own.


I've head about Venezuela, but how exactly would aid convince people? Do the crates have American flags on them or something?


I have no econ background but I still want to make an attempt to argue this - though ultimately I think preferring the LTV is more about how much you want to focus on the kinda philosophical aspects of it, as markets are no ""natural state"".

First of all, wages are distorted because of exploitation of the workers. To really see the differential you would need to look at the output, i.e. revenue generated by a specific type of worker once he is employed. The issue then becomes that due to imperfections in measuring the output of a single worker can ""spike"" immensely, ontop of the worker falling anywhere on a (usually) normal distribution. So you have to use aggregates.

Then again, you were okay with using aggregate wages. Also, we are running into issues of really getting statistics for the true value here, since the portion of work any one person contributes to an industry can't be measured really well. Think of construction where the work cannot be done without architects, yet the vast majority of physical labor is done by the workers.

Second of all, the amount of labor to produce an engineering major and arts major seems superficially similar, but in reality they are very different.
While the work for the professor to train any one student may be the same, the demands on the students (GPA) are very different, courses have different entry levels and failure rates.

Here we run into issues of accounting for individuals in what is a batch-process. Also, in an asinine way, you could say you need to produce more humans to get more engineering graduates.
[21:39] Cool3303: :rolling_eyes: To me the core of the issue of the LTV is not any of the problems with measuring it or evaluating its output in a market though.
Any company does cost-benefit analysis, including what they have to (or are willing to) pay the worker. Arguing that labor output is too hard to calculate when it is already being done

To me the core of the issue of the LTV is not any of the problems with measuring it or evaluating its output in a market though.
Any company does cost-benefit analysis, including what they have to (or are willing to) pay the worker. Arguing that labor output is too hard to calculate when it is already being done is disingenuous at best.

That holds true even in services where the cost to reproduce them is marginal, or the chance to create a product is low (such as in research).

To boot this is being done in a market system, where it is incredible difficult and ineffecient.
Incredible amounts of redundant evaluations and calculations are being made, as it is in the interest of each individual actor to keep their market research or plans to themselves and to not only extract surplus value from their workers, but also each individual in the supply chain below them, rather than to equitably share surplus value, or invest into each other to optimize production. (note, this is also why econ research is in a sorry state)

No, but really the core issue of the LTV for me is more along the lines of where you cannot distinguish between what is and isn't socially necessary.
For example Calculators can only be effectively used by people knowing math. Should we thus redistribute profits of the calculator industry to teachers?

In that sense the LTV is often approached too narrowly. After all, the value of most commodities in our hyper-specialized society depends on society itself to be derived.
And when we look at it from the perspective of Utilitarianism can we cleanly separate exploitative from beneficial work?

If we for example look at Diamonds, which derive a lot of their value from being a monopolized and highly marketed good (how much does the difference in luster from something like Zirconium really matter), can we cleanly separate the harm done by that monopolistic action versus the joy produced by creating rituals around them, like gifting a diamond ring?


Where's that PDF about fascism coming to the midwest and other rural and post industrial areas in the next decade? Looking at the results for places like Montana and Indiana in the 2020 gubernatorial election has got me really fearing for the future. I want to escape the technocratic globohomo on the coast, but then it seems like ht other option is a rural militias keeping out anyone who wouldn't fit in, and I doubt they'd let me in anyway. The book is called Hinterlands, or something.


make a new thread


This is probably the answer that is correct. They CIA loves them boomer clubs that they can bring out to threaten protesters, but will probably not want actual criminals who just joined the aryan brotherhood to smoke meth.


Did Marx ever say anything about proles that were placated by higher wages? Basically, did Marx ever talk about the so-called "labor aristocracy"?


Where do you guys go for your scholarly studies, do you know any good scholarly search engines?


What is a lumpen prole?


Where go for studies
scholar.google.com is good for search


What did Engels think about being a capitalis? Did he ever say anything about it?


What is eurocommunism? Were they just spooked anti-Soviet liberals/socdems? Or is there a more substantive distinction?


>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.

Can anyone explain this quote? Why is the abolition of cities needed for communism?


Are the elite against the family?


Does anyone have that "hypercapitalism" or super capitalism or whatever it was meme? The one that basically calls communism "super capitalism" as a joke


Do you know any reading specifically about the bourgeois and their identity?


How can labor vouchers account for socially necessary labor time?


Measure the average time required to produce a commodity.


Yes, but since the average time changes every time an commodity is made, isn‘t it too difficult to measure?


Why would the average change every time the commodity is made? That calculation would come from thousands of samples and data points to pull from, it's not your individual average.


Because “average” implies that all factors are taken into account, so the “average time” changes every time a commodity is produced. Otherwise, how do you make sure that people are accurately compensated?


Neet's basically the unemployed.


I swear to god. Why is it every time when someone argues against LTV are retards with stupid as fuck responses?
Seriously, if you search LTV threads, about all of the OP are dumbshit.


saving from last page


Anyone has some critical approach to Mao's On Contradiction? I've been studying it lately, but want to expand my knowledge by reading a critique of it.




Nope, the CIA was flooding the states with drugs, why would the USSR try to also do it?


What is meant by "commodification of social relations"? What would be an example of this?
In a book I am reading is the following paragraph:
>Perry Anderson attributes the political and cultural vitality of much of the third world in the 20th century to a relatively late commodification of social relations
and I feel like I don't really grasp what this process entails.


Consuming pop music which is a commodity vs singing your songs for example


What is the Marxist explanation for why some degrees are so useless in getting employment?


In general? Because degrees aren't supposed to get you employment.


You could get an entry level job in many fields if you had a degree in the 1950s or 60s. That's not the case now, or at least trending towards not being the case. Many people have noticed this


Before where you'd, say, ask a neighbor to help you fix your car, now you take it to a shop. A worker doesn't have time to teach himself plumbing, or doesn't own property and so doesn't do it himself anyway, so he has to pay a plumber. When someone needs their kids watched, they don't leave them with a neighbor or relative, but with a daycare or babysitting service they have to pay for.

Basically exactly what it sounds like, that social relations have been reduced to transactions in place of human relationships.

Again, the purpose of getting a degree even then wasn't to find employment. It started to turn into that around that time with all the GIs returning home and using the GI Bill to go to college and university, but outside of really specialized fields you didn't need a degree, hell, you didn't even need a high school diploma, to get a job. That's why they were called entry level positions, because they were intended (in theory) for you to enter there and work your way up. Getting a degree wasn't job training, it was to show that you were educated and had a versatile background of information and experience. The expectation was that you would be trained to do the job your employer wanted you to do.

And even now, getting a job isn't the point of getting a degree, but to put you into debt. A degree is a slave collar showing that you're a) obedient and b) loaded with debt, two things that are highly valuable to employers because you're less likely to fuck around if you're staring down the barrel of $100,000 in student loans.

You can see this in the sort of ads companies put out for entry level workers. They want you to have a degree, but in what it doesn't matter as long as its a bachelors, ie, is sufficiently expensive. If you want to teach English in Japan or China, you can as long as you have a bachelors degree. It doesn't have to be in Japanese, or Chinese, or English, or Teaching, or anything relevant to teaching a language in a foreign country. It just has to be a bachelors degree, because it's not the degree that's important, but the leverage you come packaged with that gives your employer a reasonable assumption that you'll take what crumbs you're offered because you need the fucking money.

Degrees were never about getting employment. The sort of people that got degrees before WW2 were well to do enough not to have to worry about that shit. They aren't even about that now. There are more kids now with degrees than ever before, and it isn't doing them very much good at all, but then it was never intended to.


I'm politically confused. I kinda lean right(so i've been told) I just support freedom as long as you don't harm another person. I support gays because i'm into that stuff but i don't like people grooming kids. I'm on the fence on abortion because I think that is a life but i lean towards it's ultimately the woman's choice to do what ever she want's.

I have the communist manifesto and mein kampf and i don't think i like either. is there any baby step leftist literature you could recommend?

Please help me


I would recommend something by Chomsky, don't know which work exactly though. Manufacturing Consent maybe cause it's short.


File: 1610216371485-0.pdf (3.28 MB, argumentsforsocialism_cock….pdf)

File: 1610216371485-1.epub (1.26 MB, Marx 200_ A review of Mar….epub)



File: 1610216768887.png (50.81 KB, 1567x475, leftypol 101.png)




interesting thank you all


I'm reading society of the spectacle. Why does debord number all of his paragraphs? is that of some kind of esoteric importance or is it just a weird 60s thing?


Every single paragraph is a thesis. Martin Luther did the same 400 years earlier so not a 1960s thing.


>We are revolutionary leftists, but we only ever larp or at most riot and not do anything that will ever pose a real threat to those in power. Those who suggest we do otherwise are glowfaggots.
Cue the "glow harder faggot" comments.


Glow harder faggot.


Got any ideas?


Industrialization came to the United States first. The United states then used its massive industrial prowess to dominate other countries via the Monroe Doctrine.


You actually think Race and Class are hand in hand? Prove it, stupid class reductionists.


How does this board feel about zizek? While I find his anti capitalist philosophy interesting, it’s just philosophy, nothing material. His role in the downfall of Yugoslavia (however minor) is also a blemish on his record.


What the fuck does this even mean? Do you think class doesn't exist or something?

Zizek is based. His out look on the world has pretty much lead me to the point I am at today. I have no idea what roll he played in the down fall of Yugoslavia, though.


It's mixed. I like a lot of his work, even if I disagree with some. I've learned a lot through him.


>but but voting bad! both sides are bad! elections bad!
So Biden's plan to increase minimum wage and provide universal healthcare is not "caring" about the poor and not embraced by the Democratic party?


Before Mao, China had spent the previous 110 years in a protracted state of decay and internecine warfare as it was subjugated into a quazi-colonial possession of the European powers. If you think the famine was bad, just take a look at stuff like the Taiping Rebellion, the Warlord Period, or just what Japan did to China. Mao and the CCP ended what basically amounts to more than a century of governmental mismanagement and oppression, civil war, peasant exploitation, colonial exploitation, and drug addiction.


>What would be /leftypol/'s refutation on how right-wingers interpret the Tragedy of the Commons?

That the originator of the "theory" just made it up, first of all.


Second, we have real world examples, documentary evidence of what happens when people have some sort of common means of subsistence, and that's to come up with rules to try and maintain it and care for it. The only time we see the sort of hyper exploitation-unto-destruction that the "Tragedy of the Commons" imagines is when common resources are made private.

The commons functioned well for literally thousands of years, and only disappeared because they were legislated out of existence and the excess people either a) exterminated, b) imprisoned/executed, c) forced into cities when industrialization began to hit, or d) deported them to the colonies if possible, or otherwise "encouraged" to leave.


File: 1610939410998.png (680.8 KB, 725x960, Kx7GUXg7.png)

Thoughts on this?


Are the working class right wing?


No, not anymore than feudal peasants as a whole can be right-wing. Even if some of them suffer false consciousness and defend their local lord/czar, their position in society means they have nowhere to go but forwards.


I can't bring myself to care much about it. It's just typical vote fraud under a liberal democracy, what else is there to say? Although I do think it's pretty cool that they counted all the fake votes and made this chart.


>I have no idea what roll he played in the down fall of Yugoslavia, though.
me neither, and would like to know. So I'm asking this question now.

We'll see how that goes then.


He generally organized against Yugoslavia because he saw them as restricting his freedom of speech.


Section 230 protects ISPs and websites from civil liability for the stuff that's posted on them, or for removing illegal content. That is to say, Comcast can't be sued for libel or whatever because you wrote that George Bush is a serial cocksucker on your personal blog and someone accessed it over their network, because they aren't the publisher of that information, they just own the infrastructure it is transferred over.

This also prevents ISPs and websites from having to censor or approve all content that is uploaded on or through them. Without this protection, ISPs and websites are liable for everything they host and distribute. It's why moot didn't go to jail because some faggots made terrorist threads on 4chan.

Related to the effort to remove section 230 is a bill called SISEA.

The purpose of this bill is supposedly to put a stop to sexual exploitation via "revenge porn" or coerced porn or whatever. It also essentially seeks to install a new regime of intensified internet moderation and censorship. While the text of the bill seems to be oriented towards pornographic sites, in effect it would require the screening of all visual content uploaded to a website to check if it's a) pornographic and b) no one in it is on their "does not consent" list. It also imposes fines for websites that receive complaints that they're hosting porn against the wishes of the person in that image or whatever if they don't take it down within 2 hours of the complaint being received.

The purpose of both of these is to monitor what is being posted on the internet, by whom, when, and where.

As to why:

The internet has been absolutely integral in disrupting American imperialism over the past 20 years. It was an indispensable tool during the Arab Spring and other protests as a means of coordination and spreading information. It was essential in revealing the US's wrongdoing abroad, as well as the huge disparities in living standards between the US and parts of the EU. It played a major part in the meteoric rise of Bernie Sanders, and among people under 40 is the primary method of both communication and information sharing. It also allows for simultaneous, global communication for virtually nothing. Without the internet and these protections, the revelations brought by Edward Snowden and Wikileaks would not have been possible. The internet disrupted the old corporate domination of mass media and helped to democratize everything from journalism to science to politics. It also threatens the massive media empires in other ways, like facilitating piracy, or providing alternatives to corporate published media.

For these and other reasons, the internet as we have known it all our lives is a massive thorn in the side of the bourgeoisie. They don't like that their secrets keep getting posted on it. They don't like that their property is being shared over it FOR FREE. They don't like that it gives people alternatives to their propaganda. They don't like that the disruptive effect the internet can have on the business scene. From the point of view of the bourgeoisie, there is nothing about the internet that is good for them as things stand now.

It's no real secret that the US is angling to try and get its increasingly restive population under control, as well as start a war with Russia, Iran, and/or China in as near a future as possible. Depending on the metrics you look at, China has already eclipsed the US in several respects and has reached parity in several others. Since WW2, the US has relied on its overwhelming technological superiority and industrial capacity to fight its dominance as its ultima ratio. The linchpin in this since even before WW2 has been its massive fleet. It relies on its aircraft carriers to project its power around the world. It relies on its nuclear submarines to hold the nuclear dagger to the world's throat.

Now, not only is China reaching parity with the US technologically (and arguably surpassing them industrially), both it and Russia have developed a counter to the US's carriers in the form of hypersonic cruise missiles, to which the US currently has no countermeasure. The US fleet is expensive and aging and their recent moves at updating and replacing them have produced mixed results at best. It takes years and billions of dollars to build a new ACC, while cruise missiles can be mass produced relatively cheaply, and all it takes is one in the right spot to send that expensive ship to the bottom. In short, the window through which the US can be reasonably assured of victory (according to its calculations) is closing faster with every passing day.

While they might seem as unrelated as possible, the US's drive to war and these moves at censoring the internet are directly related. They've spent years building the infrastructure and invested many billions of dollars in monitoring the internet and trying to shape or influence discussion on it. The US doesn't want their citizens to be able to educate themselves with alternate news/propaganda sources, much less Russian, Chinese, or Iranian sources. It also doesn't want them to access information like Hillary Clinton's emails or the Snowden Files. It especially wants to put a stop to websites like /leftypol/ and chapo, or at the very least keep them under the strictest surveillance, especially after last summer's protests/riots.

If I had to guess, that would probably be what freaked the bourgeoisie out the most: seeing the poors out in the street fighting the police and setting up their own autonomous zones. The bourgeoisie want to nip that right in the fucking bud, and either frustrate any further activity or strictly monitor everyone involved in it.

tl;dr: to control the proletariat and facilitate their drive towards war to maintain their hegemony and the supremacy of the bourgeoisie


File: 1610982385551.jpg (248.34 KB, 1024x891, 2020-Presidential-Table_No….jpg)

A bunch of numbers with zero sources on them. Republicans made a blatant attempt to steal Michigan by the way, Biden just won in such a blowout that the fraud committed in Trump's favor didn't matter.


And Wisconsin*. Wisconsin is the really outrageous one.


What's the deal with Trotskyists? I get that they allied with reactionaries in the past, but I still don't understand why they are almost so universally reviled.


A distinction should be made, there are trotskyists in the western sense as in communist parties that uphold Trotsky as a important theorist for some reason. Those range from being full on glowies and schizos to just believing wrong things about history.
Then there's what official USSR historiography calls trotskyists, which are just people who organized around their goal of taking down Stalin, with no unified ideology (there were both rightists and ultralefts) not all of them bet on Trotsky but it's a shorthand.


Ah that makes sense


What are some countries with free, state-funded television channels?
Are they any good? How do they differ from their commercial competitors?


>attachment 1
>This text is © the authors.
stopped reading




You mean like Russia Today or Telesur?


a bit too restrictive, lumpen proles are "unproductive adult in working condition" : so neets, homeless, unlucky guy out of a job, police, most criminals, (not dealers, but thugs, pimps, burglars, grifters, thiefs, etc)
they usually have no direct interest in communist actions/revolutions as they're not workers able to strike and benefit from it, and big fish in the mafia are usually well integrated with porkie (and were often used as tools against organizing worker for various anti communist interests).

for abortion, great philosophical argument that doesnt deny right to live to the foetus

he has interesting analysis, and have great meme potential, isn't a complete retard or a liberal. But he is definitely a philosopher first, many will very often disagree on his pop culture and political analysis, and he suck at geopolitics (as do most). still interesting


just remember that space and dollars are faggot and our vanguard of jannies led us here for the better.


>Scranton Joe?


Trump repealed the part of the ACA which mandated people to get healthcare. I heard from some people that this was bad, because this makes insurance more expensive, but from others that it was good because the repeal freed up money from people for whom insurance was not worth it – and the numbers say that 8 million people quit getting insurance after the repeal. So, what's the correct position on this?


How do I deal with the statement that "US intervention is good" because of human rights violations, like the alleged ones in Syria from an anti-war standpoint? I assumed I would be prepared for this argument and yet have nothing on mind.


You can just tell people about the crimes committed by the United States in Iraq like dumping white phosphorus on civilian population and ask them if that makes up for a country being destabilized. It's hard to argue that Assad is a good leader objectively but I guarantee a stable country is much safer than one that is an active warzone. Especially one that isn't just confined to government vs rebels but instead is the site of an international proxy war in which many different countries from around the world fund paramilitary groups that represent their interests, and you can guarantee that these nations are ready to get their hands dirty in the name of profit and security. Plus, it's not like Iraq is any better off now than they were under Saddam. In many ways, the current regime is just as bad if not worse.


Guy was straight up arguing that Assad and Russia were committing genocide and I didn't have the resources to argue against him, but in general that's a good answer.


Clearly that guy can't tell the difference between a war and a genocide. But you should also ask him why the Christians ethnic minorities of Syria all back Assad. There are reports that the Free Syrian Army and YPG engage in ethnic cleansing of Assyrians.


Russia Today from what I've seen seems more like an overt state propaganda network, I'm thinking more like Australia's ABC and SBS which are more independent, with a focus on community and international programming. It feels more organic than the 'entertainment' commercial channels.


BBC probably counts (funded by television loicences and redistribution fees or something), I haven't seen it directly but they have decent education programs coming out of it.


Does anybody have a PDF/EPUB of Anti-California by Kenneth Lamott?


>The BBC isn't overt state propaganda


If it is ok to punch fascists; Given that Biden is a fascist and people who vote for fascists are fascists is it ok to punch Biden voters?


File: 1611352447257.jpg (83.43 KB, 800x600, 1441040337222.jpg)



Anyone noticed an uptick in just flat out reactionary/neo-nazi posting in other chan boards outside of /pol/ and /v/? /tg/ is getting unusable with constant threads about "returning to tradition" or some shit.


File: 1611374609294.png (284.99 KB, 680x465, ClipboardImage.png)

What is the meaning behind this meme?


Leftists should be more willing to explain things because otherwise it opens people to propaganda from the right.


it depicts how “leftists” on Twitter reply to anyone that disagrees with them vs /pol/ups on 4chan


Making fun of radlib types that think they shouldn't have to explain leftist ideology to normies because it's "emotional labor" and that you're bigoted if you don't take what they say at face value. Rightoids don't do anything like this as far as I know


A few years ago, I was pretty naive and someone had made a disapproving post about 'All Lives Matter'.
Me, not being American or really aware of the situation, thought this was a reasonable statement. People's lives matter regardless of their race. So I comment saying 'don't all lives matter?'
Cue a group of three twits saying 'you're a cunt', 'i wish people like this would die' and shit like that. No explanation to clear up a reasonable, common misunderstanding.
Shit like that recruits for the right.


think it's kind of ironic in showing how despite looking worse, rightoids are eager to tell others about their beliefs while libs are all about muh feefees


All lives matter is an absolute insult to the USano because it implies that the people overseas they kills lives matter

The people who thought up using the phrase to make the USano liberal condemn it accidently stumbled on a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow with that one


To contrast "It's ok to be white" another common sense phrase that sort thought up to provoke an overreaction and repression and therefore drive people right never got quite the same traction


>>55121 (me)
>>55123 (me)
Think about it English is an international lingua franca
Why should we pander to provincial USano concerns and brain worms in our use of it?


Who defines what "socialism" is? Some right-wingers claim that Nazism is socialism too but just not Marxist. There are a lot of definitions and Nazism can fit some of them, like this one from Merriam-Webster:
>any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods


Marx and Engels


Where do you all buy physical books from?

I'd like to read theory, but I'll go insane if I have to read more words off a digital screen.


I've found plenty of books at my local used book stores.

Alternatively, ask your local library to purchase specific texts. Generally speaking, libraries have funds available for purchasing books that usually don't get used up because, well, people generally don't know that, or use their local library.

Literally everyone wins from you doing this. Your library gets its budget justified by local engagement, other people have potential access to revolutionary material, and you get to read whatever you want F O R F R E E. Even if you absolutely have to have your own copy, you should still request shit through your local library, because then you get to check out alternate translations and so forth on their dime and not yours.


English Second Language here, what's this mean?
>To contrast "It's ok to be white" another common sense phrase
It is, in isolation, a common sense phrase but that one (like 'straight pride') has a more obvious exclusion in the way it's phrased. It's a 'we're repressed' kind of response rather than the egalitarian unification of 'everyone matters' which is far easier to naively agree with.

Philosophically, societies define words.
In some ill-informed communities, far-left means Bernie Sanders, and it's commonly used enough that it might as well be a slang definition within their group.
However, anyone saying that in an academic political discussion will probably get disregarded, like someone using the word fascist to describe anything they don't like that is authoritarian. Multiple definitions exist and they are fluid. That's one reason why the whole 'left-right' spectrum has devolved into shit and why ultra-tard rightNPCs like that guy on lain claim that the left keep redefining things to move the goalposts when the definion is consistent in dictionaries and wikipedia and theses and basicallyevery respected source.


>Alternatively, ask your local library to purchase specific texts.
Libraries are a socialist institution!


"USano" is a combination of "US" as in United States, and "gusano", as in the bourgie fucks that fled Cuba when Castro freed their slaves, and now support attacks against Cuba and other socialist nations.


It makes people mad because it takes the whole Black Lives Matter thing and says "ignore that".
I think you're letting ideology color your judgements, here.


It actually Esperanto for American
Most people being offended didn't care when Fergasson protesters were being assassinated under the Obama years and won't care in the slightest about black lives mattering under Biden

It's not about black lives, never was. Iraqi lives matter, Yemeni lives matter, Somali lives matter
Ethiopian lives matter since that's probably who the USanos will be killing next

Stop letting Amerikkka colonise your minds


Right, but that's not what they're thinking when they complain about "all lives matter". That's what the truth is, but that's not what's going through their heads.


File: 1611838035295-0.png (8.99 KB, 1024x512, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1611838035295-1.png (361.68 KB, 800x939, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1611838035296-2.png (251.18 KB, 1024x650, ClipboardImage.png)

Why did they kill it?


>Why did they kill it?
What do you mean, the USSR?
The Karelo-Finnish SSR first became an Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic in 1956 (Karelian ASSR) to then in 1991 become the Republic of Karelia (after the dissolution of the USSR), which still exists (within the Russian Federation) and the south became Leningrad Oblast, for a variety of complicated historical reasons. See (in chronological order):
The Finnish Civil War
The October Revolution
The Winter War
On 16 July 1956, the republic was incorporated into the Russian SFSR as the Karelian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic (ASSR).
In the waning days of the USSR, the Karelian ASSR became the Republic of Karelia, a subdivision of the Russian Federation, on 13 November 1991.


Hey guys, I remember reading some shit about fbi using progressive stacks and funding stupid woke shit during occupy wall street, but can't find it. Any comrade to link me up ?

Also, there is no article on leftypedia about OWS, so if you're knowledgable on the subject go for it.
(and the leftypol article doesnt mention the second split)


Is tv.leftypol.org/ just for streaming? Or can videos be uploaded there for people to view later on?


This is going to be a really ignorant question but i honestly don't know since i'm pretty new to leftism. Why is imperialism bad?


Videos can be uploaded from youtube and a few other sources.


I was thinking more of the kind of 'educational' videos that might become useful to people in the future.


does anybody have that silly greentext about a post revolution post socialism future

where anon is in a museum or something and the spirit of marx visits him

i know it's cringy but i kinda liked it and want to read it again because it was very uplifiting


1. Because it oppresses people outside of the imperial core
2. Because the exploitation it creates opens up news markets for capital which lets capitalism sustain itself (since there is new stuff to invest in).


bump for interest


File: 1612361616994.jpg (218.05 KB, 695x825, marx future looking backwa….jpg)



Nice thanks : )


yee thanks


Is there a defined ideology that explicitly aims to eliminate all of humanity, and indeed, all sapient life as a whole?
Are there people who adhere to this ideology? Does it have a name?
Is such a thing real, or is it purely relegated to hackey fiction plots?


Voluntary human extinctionists/anti-natalists


I don't mean like "oh we should just not reproduce anymore", I mean "wipe them all out".


Then no not really other than say cults like Aum Shinrikyu. Obviously anyone who tried to enact such an ideology would be exterminated by the rest of mankind.


What would Marx have said if you asked him to justify communism/a proletarian uprising? Would he simply have said "historical necessity", or something along the lines of "it's in the proles' material interest"?


File: 1612864364913-0.jpg (62.51 KB, 750x1000, 1612523156348.jpg)

File: 1612864364913-1.jpg (26.58 KB, 600x399, 1609474439662.jpg)

File: 1612864364913-2.jpg (30.18 KB, 720x397, 1608912051300.jpg)

How the fuck did I wind up involved in this nonsense? My entire family is parroting Cato Institute and New Cold War crap and somehow I cooked my brain A LOOOONG time ago and went from being somewhat of a nascent radlib as a kid to a radlib as a teen to dumb fencesitting /pol/ reactionary to reading Wage Labor and Capital on my lunch break

what the fuck man like how does this even happen to someone in Burgerstan I want to be like the other normies


Be thankful you didn't end up like those normies anon


It's just the way things are things are getting bad and unless capitalism is ended this will never end


Was Ayn Rand really just a psy op from the USSR to disseminate the harmful and hyper-individualistic philosophy of objectivism to weaken the U.S. in the long term?


File: 1612892060561.jpg (33.65 KB, 675x680, 9b31ea546cd8d7fffc11c984fc….jpg)

What is concrete labour and abstract labour?


File: 1612938130237.jpg (864.64 KB, 2015x2656, me.jpg)

Is there a word for multiple libraries of different formats and mediums? Not just books.
t. A literal armchair


A collection


File: 1612938609719-0.png (2.49 MB, 2738x1658, infograph occupy cointelpr….png)

File: 1612938609719-1.jpg (1.16 MB, 2744x2672, infograph cointelpro occup….jpg)

File: 1612938609719-2.jpg (1.06 MB, 2434x2110, infograph cointelpro occup….jpg)

File: 1612938609719-3.jpg (598.42 KB, 1568x2146, infograph social justice o….jpg)

File: 1612938609719-4.jpg (80.38 KB, 739x518, 4chan pol post occupy.jpg)



We don't have the capacity to craft such high functioning, high IQ retardation. She's a product of the US in many ways.
concrete labor is the actual labor that is done to make things. eg. the activities involved with making shoes or chairs.
abstract labor is just "labor" in the abstract. you can't equate concrete labor of making chairs with the concrete labor of making shoes. They are entirely different. In the realm of abstract labor, they are the same "quality", ie. "labor in the abstract".
Thus making this equation intelligible in a market:
2 chairs = 1 shoe
It's a library that contains different media.


Médiathèque in French, Mediateca in Spanish, Mediathek in German.


Why did the US pull its troops out of Iraq between 2011 and 2014? Isn't it interested in "forever wars"?


> Isn't it interested in "forever wars"?
Yes. the former does not discount the latter her.


File: 1613015846175.jpg (34.86 KB, 322x500, external-content.duckduckg….jpg)

Who financed Nazi Germany? /pol/ says it was a grass roots, but i don't put much faith in their answer. Did Vladimir Lenin die from poison? Was communism based on the Jesuit slave plantations in south America called Las Reducciones and Thomas More's book Utopia?



utopians like thomas more did had some influence on some socialist utopians but scientific socialists didn't care much about the man himself or his books


Books sales from Mein Kamph, wealthy capitalists like Henry Ford and Ruhr steel barons as well as good old fashioned tax evasion


Communism is based on Jacobinism, the English Enlightenment and German Idealism. saying anything else is a stretch.
>Who financed Nazi Germany?
the country or the party? the formers was funded by rapid imperialist expansion and appeasement.


The party.


Why would they withdraw the military for any period of time then?


Probably because of the insurgency


>are we retarded
Hermano, en vez de darte una paja diciendo estupideces de pol que tal si estudias un poco la historia material del continente. Lugares como ese son extremadamente comunes en lationamerica, tu pais no es el unico.
Y por si te da algo tras leer esto, los EEUU tienen arrabales asi de mierda y de forma extremadamente comun, lo unico es que nunca los vez. Ahora mismito estan creciendo de forma exponencial.


wealthy jews


Do countries like North Korea or Cuba use computerized planning? If not, why?


So in other words, the right wing understands dialectics?


>why is Mexico like this
chicanos will never be mexicans


prolly not because you need a lot of technology for that as in several supercomputers all running comunismplanning.exe


even if i move to mexico and dont come back 😭?


Not so. Cockshott demonstrated that modern computing power is so advanced that a small economy can be planned even with a laptop.


File: 1613191261538.jpeg (615.68 KB, 1500x1000, Yalta-large.jpeg)

>Libs will always side with the fascists against the communists!!!!
Who invented this meme?


The entire history of the Cold War is full of fascist-liberal alliances against the communists.


Iirc it was the express wish of many powerful members of the liberal powers in the lead up to WWII that Hitler would be useful tools in destroying socialism and the USSR. The problem was that Hitler had ambitions beyond their aims, as he threatened their empire (i.e. it got out of hand and became a short term "greater threat" than the USSR).
Of course, this analysis is overstated. There were elements in the FDR administration for instance that actively sought cooperation between the USSR and USA, to a certain extent. A sort of one world two systems kind of approach – managerial keynsianism and state socialism working together for world stability. These people were always pretty marginal though.


Why can't you show a single proof of Shining Path massacring civilians/killing children?
Why would there not be a single photo, while there are plenty for actual massacres / genocides since decades before the fucking 80s and 90s (when that tech already was increasingly abundant and portable)?


File: 1613227242975.gif (12.2 KB, 151x200, chairman-gonzalo-waiting-p….gif)



The entirety of modern history


>>78700 Chairman Gonzalez admitted and took responsibility for the massacre of Lucanamera in which women, children and civilians were all massacred.

"In the face of reactionary military actions… we responded with a devastating action: Lucanamarca. Neither they nor we have forgotten it, to be sure, because they got an answer that they didn’t imagine possible. More than 80 were annihilated, that is the truth. And we say openly that there were excesses, as was analyzed in 1983. But everything in life has two aspects. Our task was to deal a devastating blow in order to put them in check, to make them understand that it was not going to be so easy. On some occasions, like that one, it was the Central Leadership itself that planned the action and gave instructions. That’s how it was. In that case, the principal thing is that we dealt them a devastating blow, and we checked them and they understood that they were dealing with a different kind of people’s fighters, that we weren’t the same as those they had fought before. This is what they understood. The excesses are the negative aspect… If we were to give the masses a lot of restrictions, requirements and prohibitions, it would mean that deep down we didn’t want the waters to overflow. And what we needed was for the waters to overflow, to let the flood rage, because we know that when a river floods its banks it causes devastation, but then it returns to its riverbed…. [T]he main point was to make them understand that we were a hard nut to crack, and that we were ready for anything, anything."


It says nothing about targeting children. That they took revenge on people that ratted them out (the villagers in question) and led to their comrades being murdered by police is something I can understand during the years of revolutionary war, while the USSR was still in existence and everything (I know that Maoists weren't Sovietstans, just pointing out that the times, contextually, were still very different and overall tumultuous than the pacified post-neoliberal dominance era we're living through today).
TL;DR is there proof they killed children or not?


Global capitalism


Can you prove that??


Last year this guy I was talking to said that Fidel made Cuba into some sort of Sugar colony for the Soviet Union. Is this bullshit or not?


Are there any good sources on American involvement in supporting Yeltsin on the 1993 Russian crisis? I know they talked him into a lot of the measures that killed the Russian people but I'm struggling to find sources saying that they directly backed him during the crisis when I'm sure I've seen them before.


The results I am finding are either extremely whitewashed or barely relevant. I did search before asking.


>According to Ambassador Thomas Pickering, Yeltsin sent Foreign Minister Andrei Kozyrev to notify four key Western ambassadors about his intention to dissolve the Parliament and call for new elections (Document 4). In Clinton’s first phone call to Yeltsin immediately after the latter issued Decree 1400, dissolving Parliament and setting a date for early elections and a constitutional referendum, the U.S. president expressed his full support and accepted Yeltsin’s assurances that there would be no bloodshed and the reform would move faster now that there would be no obstacles. U.S. support for Yeltsin remained unwavering all through the confrontation and after the Russian President issued the order to storm the parliament (after initial violence on the part of the opposition).

>On the morning of October 4, Muscovites awakened to the awful sight of the burning Parliament building—the White House they had defended against the putsch in August 1991, where Yeltsin had stood on a tank and led the democratic forces. On October 5, the day after the bloodshed, Clinton called Yeltsin and congratulated him for his handling of the situation; he did not ask about the loss of life. Even stronger support was expressed by Secretary of State Warren Christopher, while visiting in mid-October, who practically lauded Yeltsin for his actions during the crisis. Documents show that the Clinton administration saw no alternatives to Yeltsin and was prepared to support him no matter what.

Found with
This search

Can you specify what sort of thing you're looking for and I might be able to find it


Why are some currencies "safe" and considered to be "reserve currencies"? North Korea for example operates some restaurants in southeast Asia in order to get dollars, but what's the difference between getting the same amount in one currency or another? 900 North Korean Won makes 1 dollar, so what's the difference between getting 900 NK Won versus 1 US dollar? Is it just because of inflation?


Did the Nazis actually ban interest rates in the German economy when they took power? I've heard Neo-Nazis make this claim tons of times but I can't find any info about it online


File: 1613505122966.jpeg (242.83 KB, 1200x1003, capitalists against commu….jpeg)

A while ago I looked through Wages of Destruction and a few other books (iirc), none of which spoke much about bank policy let alone said that the Nazis banned usury.
Someone on the Axishistory forum asked this same question and the evidence provided by the users, such as interest rates, indicates that they didn't:
As one of the users said:
>Several points of the 25 point programs were conveniently forgotten once Hitler seized power
This is, therefore, not remotely surprising given that, for example, people such as the Rockefellers helped to facilitate international trade during the war, and that the Nazi leadership reprivatized its banks.


Thank you for the answer. Also,
>Pilots were given instructions not to hit factories in Germany that were owned by U.S. firms.
That's fucking crazy


File: 1613577141363.png (453.78 KB, 722x470, 89368171b780f7f6ab708ced45….png)

Wondering about Afghanistan with last year's negotiations with the Taliban and the question of whether Biden will actually follow through with said promises.

Since the Taliban has been strengthening its numbers recently, if NATO and co. were to pull out do they have the power to take the entire country afterwards. If so, is Taliban rule a risk worth taking or should there be some for of support to the Kabul government.

It seems if the US continues to stay they strengthen opposition whilst, paradoxically, are also preventing a further escalation of the conflict.

What is leftypol's thoughts on the Afghan situation?


Not him: I would be skeptical of that claim as phrased. WW2 Aerial bombing was still at the level where only something like 20% of bombs landed within 1000ft of their target and it wasn't unheard of to bomb the wrong city entirely
(Not saying it it's entirely untrue, as there was similar fuckery at the start of WW2 - at one point during the early phases of the war the British rejected bombing German factories on the grounds that they were private property - but it seems more likely that US factories were never specifically targeted, since pilots would have had difficulty specifically avoiding them.)


a 20 year war so that arms factories could make a few bux? skkkrt

Theyre gonna keep doing drone strikes at the behest of the hapless liberal government in Kabul, the Taliban has reat control


Any scientific journals, researchers, and/or papers in academia that analyze the material conditions of the working class? If not, what variables studied in sociology best reveal the material conditions of the working class? Also, scientific papers that discusses the current definition of a working class person?


Are the TKK based?




Who is Navalny?


Do you mean the PKK


Anyone have good resources on extractive colonialism in the late 19th/early 20th century? I was doing a little reading about the Guggenheims - official accounts will off-handedly refer to them having made their fortune "in mining" before sucking them off for their philanthropy. Digging a little deeper, it turns out a lot of their mines were in Latin America and Africa, including a copper mine in Chile that Allende nationalised lol


One of the leaders of the pro western liberals in Russia


File: 1613629247201.png (233.18 KB, 966x966, derchuden.png)

Some Ethno-Nationalist scumbag that NATO countries are shilling to destabalize Russia. those fucking yankees with one hand complain about the far-right in there own country whilst in the other support them in Russia… It really is anxiety inducing.


I see, so that's why he seemed to have popped up out of nowhere.


What prevents energy companies from jacking the price of utilities up? It takes a ton of investment to get into the sector and they have virtually no competition; so why not charge high prices?


Why eugenics in a non racist way is bad?


That's related to class, in a way of hating the poor. Frankly, after giving some thought about it, yeah it would be counterproductive in the reputation of any government employ full eugenics (ableism if you ask me). What could be done is a more subtle approach, like offering social bonuses for vasectomies or simply supporting more the right to abortion and the importance of avoiding babies with clear mental deficiencies.
I say this because last month I went to some orphanage for mentally disabled boys and it was tragic (mamaged by the catholic church, hopefully they are not molested) and well the pain of seeing the human condition as that endured.


Should communists adopt a two party system similar to the current dictatorship of Capital to alleviate the “scariness” of the one-party “ dictatorship of the proletariat”?


Communists should adopt actual democracy, fuck elections and fuck parties.


How long does it take to be a communist? Reading and catching up with news is fun but it’s taking a long time lol


5 years, like everything else.


What would happen if America pulled its troops from the rest of the world and cut defense spending, reinvesting the money elsewhere? Would it be just the military sector being hurt or would this cause huge economic trouble?


The military would not even feel it outside of the Pentagon. It's the war profiteering contractors who would eat the loss, and they all have congressmen in the bag. Beyond that, not ensuring an uninterrupted and cheap supply of resources continues to flow out of the resource extraction nodes that the U.S. military keeps in line to the industrial centers around the world would have the effect of driving the value of commodities through the roof globally. The result of that would be that the value of the means of subsistence would explode, thus prompting countries to rapidly print money to ensure that there is enough currency in the system. It would be an economic death spiral until some other bourgeois states start sending their militaries to resource extraction nodes to force them back into compliance.


It depends on how it happens. If it shocks the system it could cause economic trouble. If it's done as a gradual reduction of global military spending, it would be positive for the economy.
It's not as simple as the military keeps resources cheap. The switch away from imperial domination would change technical development and change the demand for resources as well.


Why does American media always try to so hard to push the narrative of 'the clean Wehrmacht', just putting all crimes on SS? it is so tired and easily debunked yet they still do..


File: 1613985499879-0.jpeg (37.1 KB, 474x316, chase float.jpeg)

File: 1613985499879-1.jpeg (42.26 KB, 800x450, mcdonald pro-lgbtq.jpeg)

File: 1613985499879-2.jpeg (174.69 KB, 740x434, external-content.duckduck….jpeg)

File: 1613985499879-3.jpeg (174.69 KB, 740x434, external-content.duckduck….jpeg)

File: 1613985499879-4.jpg (23.63 KB, 474x193, external-content.duckduckg….jpg)

I'm new and still figuring out what the left (or lefts?) value and to what extent.
What do you and other leftists here think about each of the pics related?


A few hand-picked pictures aren't sufficient to judge anything tbh. Considering how most of the stuff you posted was searched for. Anyhow it's a very well known in the left that lifestylism isn't revolutionary. The critique of mainstream culture has been a constant point made by leftists of all sects. Adorno's works are a good beginner guide for that.


Why are americans so autistic about children seeing naked bodies or being naked themselves? They always sperg out about these issues.


The first two being excellent examples of how effective capitalism is with incorporating progressive aesthetics. Libs love their symbols after all.

The latter two being the opposite side of right wing reactionary ideology. Kind of interesting the ridiculousness of it.


>If so, is Taliban rule a risk worth taking or should there be some support to the Kabul government
Do you mean what side should leftypol support? They are both not good at all, on one side you have extreme right wing theocrats that originated from an anti-communist movement, and on the other side you have the US empire and it's local puppet government. While they are both shit, I think the Taliban winning would be the best scenario since the Taliban would not become a powerful imperialist state like the US and the US would become weakened from losing Afghanistan since they would lose geopolitical influence (because Afghanistan borders China and Iran and is also very close to Russia). Unfortunately it doesn't seem like there is a left wing alternative in Afghanistan that could challenge the Taliban or the US


Why the fuck did/do people like Reagan so much? I haven't looked into him that much, but I get the general impression that he is the one that is why parts of the US look like Africa but with wYpip0


Cuz the 70's were terrible for the U.S.A. and Jimmy Carter was a total faliure. Reagan (and Thatcher before) played on the simple strings of liberty and all that anglo crap. The state is responsible for things being shitty, so we must take responsibilities away from the state and give them back into your own hands, you shape your life, not some guvvment stooges.


It's very similar to why people who benefited a lot from Obama care and similar policies voted overwhelmingly for Trump, who campaigned on getting rid of said policies.


And basically the demoshits really had one solid president ever - FDR.


Can someone with a good grasp of the history of the communist movement weigh in here? I was glancing at the anarchism thread and this guy that claims to be an "orthodox" Marxist (something that I find unlikely considering how he describes his pov) says that centralism wasn't central (hah) to Orthodox Marxism, but rather to Classical Marxism (???) and then goes on making a lot of posturing that I've at least associated with a lot of 20th century Marxist "developments" such as takes from the Frankfurt School, the New Left and "libertarian" Marxism as self-described by posers like Varoufakis (making statements like "I'm a libertarian Marxist just like Marx was a libertarian Marxist!!1 ignoring that it is infantile councilists and autonomists that are described by that moniker because of how similar they are to the original "libertarians"; anarcho-communists (of which, needless to say, Marx wasn't one of).

I haven't got the reading required for this debate but I'm sure one of you must have. I don't want this pseud to slander Marxism with these aesthetic, ahistorical takes in the in front of the leftypol anarchists, that can only lead to muddying of waters.

Here's the most contextual point in the replychain, where he clarifies his vews:


File: 1614133846461.jpg (64.94 KB, 640x427, M1jCBmJl.jpg)

Why is it that automatio/machines aren't also capable of producing more value than they are worth in the same way that human labour is?


>Is politics ultimately a zero-sum game?


File: 1614287578956-0.jpeg (115.61 KB, 612x885, Anita communism 1.jpeg)

File: 1614287578956-1.jpeg (45.92 KB, 596x378, Anita communism 2.jpeg)

How can you guys defend feminists?


This is a trans inclusionary radical misogynist board


Imagine being triggered by Anita Sarkesian in 2021.


It's even more cringe having a union retweet her tbh


Radlib newfags from Reddit.


"politics" is not zero sum. Society is synergistic.
hahaha wtf


It's on par with the IWW catering to furries. Still, I prefer that kind of cringe to anti-feminist edgelords that are still fighting a culture war from 2014.


Retweeting Anita Sarkeesian is fighting a culture war from 2014 lol
Not the poster that posted the screenshot who probably responded to himself complaining about muh redditors to import his stupidpol reddit culture war


Why 5 years specifically when making plans? Why not an entire decade? I was thinking about "chaining" two 5 year plans together in a single decade and then at the end of the decade finish everything up and then start the cycle all over again in the new decade? Or would that be too complicated?


Long enough to plan it out, short enough to adjust focus for the long term.


>why would the USSR try to also do it?
Its an old proven method to undermine enemy nations as was proven in the opium trade of China.


Anita always struck me as a bourgeois feminist


I've been trying to study Marxism for a while but still am relatively new, and struggle to wrap my head around certain concepts. I don't plan to read Capital until I feel I have a grasp on the general mechanics of Marxist economics. The little that I do know about Marx has already transformed my understanding of the world and of economics, but I still have the following gap:

Marx asserts that wages must average out to a level that is sufficient to support the reproduction of the working class. Looking at a specific skill level or even one single job, this leads to the revolutionary conclusion that total wages are not determined by hours worked, but rather that the total subsistence income divided by hours equals hourly wages. It is also for this reason that Marx speaks not of an increase in hours but an "increase in the working day", and not of monetary exploitation but of "hours worked for oneself and hours worked for the capitalist". It is not that the capitalist underpays you but rather that you are only paid for the equivalent labor hours of *part* of your labor produce, and every second of work past this point is a second's worth of profit.

At first glance this concept would have some connection with the common practice of employing few workers for long hours and long working weeks rather than increasing the number of workers. Clearly this is what results in widespread unemployment. But why is this better for the capitalist than employing several workers for the same "hourly" wage - for example, dividing a 40-hour week at $7.25 into four 10-hour weeks at the same wage? The apparent conclusion from the above paragraph would be that doing so would increase the demand on wages - four workers making a quarter of the previous amount would hardly be subsistence - and either wages would go up or the working class would go down. But Marx himself describes this phenomenon in Wage Labor and Capital, and the workers I've worked with just as often ask the boss for more hours as they do for less. Not to mention that this would require foresight on the part of the capitalists, or collective reasoning, when in reality some individual capitalists would do just fine implementing it. Right?

I feel like a complete brainlet asking this question, but if so then let me just be an educated brainlet


>why is this better for the capitalist than employing several workers for the same "hourly" wage
Because every additional employee adds considerable cost for the business and not every occupation is scalable, especially not occupations that require highly specialized knowledge. Every time you hire someone new, you have to pay the FICA payroll tax, and both state and federal unemployment taxes. You have to provide insurance, you need to provide liability coverage. You might offer 401ks to new employees. After a certain employee threshold, you have to provide unpaid medical and family leave for each employee. You have to train the employee. You have to provide equipment to the employee, like a uniform or PPE. I might be missing some costs here, but you get the idea.


What the hell do you mean "you have to provide". Everything u listed is provided by the workers with their labour.


Just how oppressive were socialist states like the USSR? I get conflicting reports from people even on /leftypol/
Also, if "authoritarianism," for lack of a better word, is necessary to defend the revolution, why do socialist states not feign liberty and openness while secretly working to repress dissent, as Western states do? They seem to be needlessly shooting themselves in the foot


The capitalist has to pay the payroll taxes and provide all these employee benefits according to law. The money to do this comes from valorization of capital, but that is irrelevant to the point. The point, imbecile, is that it costs more money for a capitalist to hire 2 workers part-time than 1 worker full-time for a particular job. This is a Q&A thread, read the fucking questions before posting.


It sucks.
Why I can't post ponies?


File: 1614585900949.png (34.07 KB, 1149x104, ClipboardImage.png)

Why do we live in such a dystopic shithole of a society?
How do i make it stop?


Thanks, this is the based pragmatic answer I was looking for. But didn't most of this originate in the 20th century? If you had asked Marx about why this is, would he say something totally different? I realize that I'm overstaying my welcome a bit and that I should just wait until I sit down and read Capital.


Do people actually believe that the DPRK is the workers' paradise it claims to be, or is it just critical support against US imperialism?


Mostly critical support, some people do actually believe that it is a workers paradise though. Be careful not to confuse belief that the DPRK isn't as bad as western propaganda makes it out to be with belief that it is a workers paradise too.


None of these "costs" the capitalist anything as the "money" to pay all these "costs" will come from the fact that the worker will work to earn said money which then the capitalist will give for things he has to according to the law.

>The point, imbecile, is that it costs more money for a capitalist to hire 2 workers part-time than 1 worker full-time for a particular job

Wrong again. It depends on the situation it is not always true.
I also read the answrs and when they misleading I must call them out.


File: 1614627618739.jpg (31.54 KB, 640x405, fox mcloud news.jpg)

>The point, imbecile, is that it costs more money for a capitalist to hire 2 workers part-time than 1 worker full-time for a particular job.

Yet everywhere in retail we see the former not the latter. Part time employees: don't need their healthcare paid for (in the US and similar countries), and they are flexible. In normal circumstances, part timers can be squeezed and forced into working whenever is convenient for the business, if things are especially busy you can put both part timers on practically a full time schedule, yet if things are slow you can cut their hours down to a minimum in a way you can't do with a fulltime salaried employee. Obviously the ultimate form of contract (for the bourg) is the zero-hours one or even better, the 'gig economy', where you don't have to give anyone any work when they're not needed, and in the latter case, they have to pay all their own costs too.


File: 1614740347189.jpg (38.53 KB, 480x360, PaulZSimmons-RIP.jpg)

Why do radicals online all have Patreon nowadays? It is so pathetic, I cannot get my head around it anons….
Back in my day if you needed money you would go out and take it, you would not beg off of absolute strangers to be able to live, When did these kids become so soft and pathetic? it really is sad.


File: 1614744807463.jpg (1.15 MB, 1242x1589, 6700fedc8c62f3e7b41949b94b….jpg)

by radicals you mean e girls on twitter who have their pronouns in their bio?


What's the name of that soviet body building group?




thanks mate


>Back in my day if you needed money you would go out and take it

WTF do you mean by that, or by 'back in your day'. People should go rob stores and get arrested or something?


Smh back in my day all security could be dealt with with a sock on your head but now these damn spoiled kids are all "muh cellphones, muh CCTV, muh police GPS"


File: 1614817552979.png (126.92 KB, 512x425, ClipboardImage.png)

Why are acting unions like SAG-AFTRA and performance/filmaking unions in general so strong? Why haven't they been smashed like most other burger unions and why do they continue to be so resilient? Is it just that the industry they're in is itself so nonessential to the violence of the stately machinery that their destruction's not been imperative?


I was hoping to get an answer from an anarchist, I am not very familiar with anarchist theory and I am currently engaging with an "anarchist".
Do you guys believe that idpol takes away from class issues?
Do you guys believe that voting for Biden was better than Trump?
I know these seem like stereotypes, please forgive my ignorance.


Does legalizing drugs effectively defund the CIA?


I'm not an anarchist, but do you really think any group as large as 'anarchist' (and [i]especially[/i] them) will have a single popular point of view on those ideas?


File: 1614982837237.jpg (16.02 KB, 300x300, Vigo.JPG.jpg)

Does anyone have the post that discussed how neoliberals are soulless elites only hungry for power with the example of some Russian / Ukrainian liberal woman with a Twitter background comparing themselves to Vigo the Carpathian?


Cause actors have funs and yoy cant just send the pinkertons against them


It's unclear how involved the CIA is with drugs right now. So my answer is "unclear". They do use drug networks to do shady shit, so in some countries, it would cut that line of influence.


oh my bad, I was informed that anarcho communists/syndicalists actually all did have a common framework. How mutual aid works, why skipping the transitionary period is necessary, how to do revolutionary praxis etc


Nevermind I found it >>102715


Are there any leftist books that specifically focus on the Bourgeoisie?


Why did the USSR commit genocide against the Ingrian Finns, who beforehand were numbering around 150,000 and afterwards were only 19,000?


they are the state's propagandists at this point


Was Machiavelli (past 1512) a NEET?


I'm reading The German Ideology, and Marx frequently brings up population growth as an important material conditions. Usually on leftypol when people talk about material conditions they're talking about the efficiency and quantity of productive forces, which are almost always increasing, but population growth is dramatically slowing down in advanced capitalist countries. What effect will this have? Feudalism, according to Marx, was caused largely by the decline of urban areas as well as the decrease in population. We're not seeing a decline in urban areas but we are seeing a decrease in population. What will this mean for the conditions of the future? What effects will this have?


oh, same anon here. Another question about the German Ideology. Why does Marx call Stirner "Sancho"? I get he calls him a saint because he sees the holy everywhere, but where does Sancho come from? What does it mean?


a reference to Sancho Panza from Don Quixote perhaps?
Though, considering Marx hated Stirner, I don't why that would be?
I'm not that well acquainted with the book since I only half-understood it in Burger Spanish class, but Stirner being Sancho seems like it would be more positive than negative.
Unless there's some other cultural reference to another Sancho that I just don't understand at all either there.


he became a playwright after the medici won iirc


Was that shitpost from bunkerchan comparing Rev. Catalonia and USSR death tolls archived? If so, have a link?


File: 1615462381998.png (588.61 KB, 412x612, ClipboardImage.png)

Hey, looking for any book about life and culture under polish communists, just what everyday life was like back then for the regular person. Can anyone recomend such a book?
Polish or English are both fine, does not need to be digital versions but a bonus if is.


sancho pansa from don Quixote

no, material conditions are the real existing circumstances in which the world and its people are - it's from the mode of production to living conditions to climate etc.

aging first started in Japan and you can see where the rest of the "global west" is heading; but before anything like this goes full way the climate catastrophe will force billions from the global "south" to flee and it will be like a mass migration (similar to what europe witnessed fomr 4th to 9th century, but on a global scale)


Are equal wages a bad idea? It would discourage people from taking on tough but necessary jobs, wouldn't it? Should there be, therefore, some wage differentials between professions?


socialist countries had wage differentials, hierarchies, bosses/managers, etc. north korea for example likes to boast in their domestic news how they reward scientists, especially nuclear, more than other professions and give them fancier residences in pyongyang's "scientist street" https://www.youngpioneertours.com/mirae-future-scientist-street/


Is it true that Russian nationalism was taboo in the USSR until Operation Barbarossa when the Soviet government used it to rally the population?


Piggybacking on this question: Was Stalin a Russian chauvinist in his last years?


did stalin have sex with a 13 year old?


There's no evidence to even suggest that afaik.


why does Belarus have such a low poverty percentage compared to it's relatively low GDP per capita?


except for offspring


she was 14


Can someone explain to me the Venezuela situation in a nutshell, and why the right uses it as 'proof' that socialism doesn't work. Also a link to a more in depth answer would be much appreciated.


Set fire to your local McDonald's or Burger King. But not Popeye's they make good food.


Venezuela is embargoed, so can't participate in international trade. Since Venezuela isn't 100 % self sustaining, they still need imports for stuff they don't make, but since the embargo makes this impossible, they lack these things.
Their state companies are also sanctioned and unable to do business so there is a connection with the private sector which is too alive, but completely killing it would only worsen the situation.


Because state run capitalism provides for citizens.


How did a clown like Trotsky manage to create and lead the red army? What were his secrets and methodology?


File: 1615842886404.png (4.66 MB, 2800x1864, gerantocracy.png)

are there any decent books that tackle the issue of gerantocracy? I don't mean "tackle" in the sense of shitting on old people in general


What's some good theory I can read on the formation of the bureaucratic layer in the soviet union, the how and why it formed, its consequences and how to avoid it in the future?


Was reading this journal. Not completely finished but it goes through a somewhat material history of rotoscoping and abstracts some ideology from it. To find some meaning of things such as commodity fetishism I had to go through some other journals and opinion pieces and pining that the child is capable of making the same decisions as people and that the fetishization of commodities is drilled into children by the simple fact that there is no way of communicating the labor and other things done to fully produce the toy itself. The isolation of labor yadda yadda. I’ll read Capital in its entirety soon

But it just got me thinking of the uncanny valley effect. It’s interesting to think the reason why people really are uncomfortable with CGI that “display” the uncanny valley effect is that it rips them from the “ideology” of commodity fetishism itself. It makes them aware that human labor was put into making the thing with the uncanny valley effect. Of course their view of the labor is usually negative, but it’s an interesting way of “scaring” people into “class consciousness”, as when uncanny valley is discussed, it’s seems the people immediately demean and ridicule the effort put into it.

But I’m a theorylet who’s still learning. I could be saying pure bullshit. Especially with my casual switching of is and oughts. But I digress.

Are there any other topics that usually lead to discussion of the labor production of a commodity that (You) notice or observe?

Here is the journal in question, although you need a specific school address to access it for free: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1746847718799416


Just finished reading the journal, and their conclusion from uncanny was the same as mine. Funny.

But even more importantly, Linklater’s rotoscoping draws attention to its own production:

[The rotoscope] brings a heightened illusion of realism to an animated scene, but it simultaneously also makes the viewer even more aware that the scene is animated by drawing attention to the ability of the animated image (and rotoscoped animation in particular) to draw out and accentuate some of the fissures and contradictions of material reality. (Fore, 2007: 122)

leading to a challenge to the ideology of the viewer:

[The rotosope’s] defiant move not only forces the viewer to question her understanding of the ‘real’ space of the studio, but also revise her understanding of the physics and phenomenology of the animated body. (Klein, 2000: 51)


How can I find leftist organization to join or organize myself? Is there any guide?


I've heard recently but cannot confirm yet that this is a very good read related to it:


Well he was not a clown he was the most capable man of his time and even Lenin reckognized this and welcomed him back in the Bolshevik party, even though Trotsky was generally an unlikable asshole as a person.


Are you like handicaped or somethig? What guide? Just look around your area what exists and then nationally. If there is no local org. of a national org in your area, contact the HQ and suggest they create one.


There's some information here: https://leftypedia.org/wiki/Organizing


How much would history change and the aftermath look like of the Soviet-Afghan war if USSR had won?


who the fuck is zizek and why do i keep running into his books
i know that he's the sniff man but what else


He got well known for examining ideology via Lacanian/Marxist lenses and provided a critique of Althusser "Ideological State Apparatuses". Besides that he did few very good films, sniffed a lot, wrote few more books.
But I believe his legacy is "sublime object of ideology"


MLs: Is there a need for a centralized vanguard in a country where a majority of the working class is at least somewhat educated? Why or why not?


can i get the calculation debate pdf?


he likes eating out garbage cans


That Deng thread has me wondering: With the plan to build communism by 2050, how long would it actually build towards communism


File: 1616230538871.jpg (312.19 KB, 2048x2048, 106136586_3410017945685538….jpg)

Anyone heard of these guys? Opinions? Music seems alright, just wondering if they're Nazbol or somesuch thing


I mean you could declare yourself a communist and it's as easy as that, really. But familiarizing yourself with the foundational works of Marxist theory shouldn't take too long. Although reading stuff that applies that theory to real-world situations is also recommended. Either way it's pretty hard to turn into a lib or reactionary if
you understand the world in Marxist terms
most of the myths in the West surrounding the Germans in WW2 come from the generals we rehabilitated in order to build the West German state, many of whom were hardly less innocent than their SS counterparts.
the way I see it most of these "radicals" are no different than the lifestylists, hippies, punks, etc that just wanted to rebel against a vaguely defined "system". even if they put a hammer and sickle in their bio I guarantee you most have no idea what they are talking about.


Any good resources on the relationship between the Catholic Church and Nazi germany? Particularly in the lead up to 1933


Well a look at the contemporary global "north" should be enough to see that yes, it is badly needed.


File: 1616457087435.jpg (70.68 KB, 700x524, Local.jpg)

Why do American unions have names like Local 170 or Local 57?
Are these subdivisions of larger national unions? What does the number represent?


My stereotype for American uninons is that they have weird fremason names


File: 1616457989924.pdf (2.03 MB, 212x300, Karlheinz Deschner - God a….pdf)

God and the Fascists: The Vatican Alliance with Mussolini, Franco, Hitler, and Pavelic


File: 1616477418387.jpg (177.91 KB, 638x992, the-occult-roots-of-nazism….jpg)

Weren't the Nazi's Occultists? Does your book answer this?


Some of them were occultists (especially Himmler) while others were not.


ok I'm willing to use my stimmy now.
I'm not going to invest much. I'd rather just practice with $100. My goal is to make $115.
How do I begin?


Read up on technical analysis and make good stop loss levels just in case.


Chagnon's ethnography on the Yanomami people of Brazil and Venezuela mentions there being liberal fears that the Yanomami would revolt and create a communist state. Does anyone have further information on this?


Why did the Soviet Union start importing food in 1963?


File: 1616735231261.jpg (21.79 KB, 330x412, 76934112431320048a10953b54….jpg)

What are your guys thoughts on this book.


We've discussed it before. The general feeling I got was that it had problematic shit, but it wasn't entirely bad. The intent is good, seeing as nobody else on the left is really writing about it.


Failure of the virgin lands campaign and drought in 1963, which also caused livestock numbers to drop drastically, nearly halved. Soviet policy of ramping up attacks on private plots in 1958 encouraging them to sell livestock to collective farms also lowered yield.


Why would selling livestock to collective farms lower yields? Are collective farms less efficient or something?


How would Marx in his prime react to + what would his opinion be on like a 20'th century Anti-Rationalist like Evola or Spengler or Francis parker yockey or something?
Could he beat them in a debate? Or would they probably just do what their ideological children do and scream and yell at each other?


Can someone fill me in the hyperborea/trollwaffen stuff?


does anyone still have the "defend the catgirls" webm? I've lost it and I can't seem to find it on youtube anymore


File: 1616894247737.mp4 (5.65 MB, 640x360, 028b93dea804fbcafadf590458….mp4)

found it, it was in my old catgirl folder


File: 1616894311390.webm (6.68 MB, 640x360, 78afbc8b91709a7a7cc7e422c….webm)



Why was the soviet union so shit at mass producing consumer goods? I was watching this 50-something ukranian on youtube retelling how back in the 80's he had to wait for months to buy an SLR camera and this wasn't an isolated case.


oddly they ended up being even worse at producing consumer goods after they switched to capitalism but had better heavy industries


Could any state today reasonably benefit from building a cybersyn/cockshott economic planning network?


I have no idea, I guess the country would have to be big enough to be largely self-sufficient, having enough domestic production to survive embargo and encirclement.

China could absolutely start incorporating computerized planning and make a transition. But will they ever? I am doubtful.


Also, if R&S or another actually revolutionary, non-electoral, non-shithead ML party ended up destroying the US in 50 years and building Socialism there, that would be a great place to do economic planning (although not sure how that would work alongside decolonization) and the anti-communist boomer retirees would see good manufacturing jobs come back.

kindof funny to imagine anti-communist people's reactions when the jobs that got offshored because of capitalism came back under lower stage communism


>China could absolutely start incorporating computerized planning and make a transition. But will they ever? I am doubtful.
They have the computing muscle to do it on the technical side of things, but their economy isn't in crisis, it's chugging along nicely. The opportunity for change exists where systems begin to crumble. They are not willing to make it fail on purpose to manufacture an ideological realignment. When their system gets worse they will relaunch experimentation, and it's very likely that socialistic computerized planning comes out of that.


What should be done with the people detained in Guantanamo Bay? Obviously the place itself (the jail) needs to be closed and the entire territory returned to Cuba but what about the people? I would assume try to deradicalize those who still identify with jihadist wahhabism, maybe convince them with islamic socialism but what if they choose not to? Execute them?


File: 1617500342127.jpeg (99.65 KB, 960x1120, EyDYeJ-WEAIK5YI.jpeg)

What does "socialism" even mean to americans?


>If they have a dominant communist party or any leftwing party they're socialist
>But also if they're just countries opposed to the US
>But also nordic and western european liberal democracies
Am*ricans will never change will they?


File: 1617500614129.png (513.81 KB, 888x593, 1468269528130.png)

something among those lines


Low security, ethical prisons without any forms of torture where they can go to school and have a decent paying job etc. i guess.


sweden no


Not US, but probably:
>state owned services instead of private (beyond status quo, so not schools, military, emergency services, roads, etc.) like free health care and free education
>non-fascist totalitarianism
>Russian and Asian US enemies
>increased distribution of wealth


In a potential scenario of "from the river to the sea" for Palestine, what would be the best outcome for the country? To remain its own sovereign state or for Palestine and Jordan to unify?


Where can I find accurate statistical information on state-owned enterprises per country? Like the percentages of state property and private property, people here often use the percentages of how many people are employed in the public sector of a country from Wikipedia but it isn't really that accurate, since on many cases countries with a big public sectory can still have more of its workforce employed in the private sector and viceversa.


You guys know how /pol/ has an archive of Hitler speeches and the German army's marches and battles; do you guys have one for Stalin and the Soviet Army?


For Palestine to annex Jordan and guillotine the Hashemites


china imprisioning muslims is true or cia propaganda?


Cia propaganda


File: 1617886420513-0.jpg (143.37 KB, 750x831, 20210408_074420.jpg)

File: 1617886420513-1.jpg (52 KB, 750x309, 20210408_074421.jpg)

Why was Marx such a lib?


Is there a comedically long list or wiki article about U.S. lies?


There's a lot of information on Leftypedia, for example this page: https://leftypedia.org/wiki/List_of_atrocities_committed_by_the_United_States
For specific lies about particular subjects just go to the page on it.


Any nice works on MLM that aren't written in the annoying larpy way in which MLMs tend to write? (The Revolutionary Application Of Enlightening Revolutionary Practice To The Strong Foundations Of The Scientific Material Analysis Of The Proletarian Struggle type shit). Just a dry ol' boring theory book?


Marx died before the infamous backstabbing of Rosa, so he could believe Socdems were legits.


Why did the Soviets end up 22 billion dollars in debt by its collapse to the Paris group?


Anybody have any sources on the majority of people in Vietnam wanting to vote in Uncle Ho?


is it safe to discuss how to materially benefit the working class? what are strategies right now in these current conditions?


File: 1618293563872-0.pdf (665.36 KB, 195x300, continuityandrupture_(1).pdf)

File: 1618293563872-1.pdf (932.81 KB, 184x300, S01-MLM-Basic-Course-Revis….pdf)

That's classic maoist wording, but see if this helps


How does the LTV explain YouTubers that make a living out of ad revenue?


They are creating a service people want to consume. They are using tools to create videos and tools (the platform itself) to post the videos.

Ytube is like any other type of media that makes money by selling add space.


Why do some "leftists" fetishize organized crime when they have a history of being mobilized as a attack dogs by bourgeoise government to destroy communist organizing?


Can I get a quick rundown of Juche and what exactly it is, as well as how it differs from normal ML ideology?




Could have to do with the ocassional hostility these groups have against the state apparatus (such as killing cops) but ofc it doesn't justify supporting them, for the reason you say and also because organized crime works in the same way as any other bourgeois entity works, except the violence is much more explicity, direct, and less subtle.

This is why shoving hobos, pimp-owned prostitutes, etc, with mafia bosses into one big social class as "lumpen" is very misleading, since they all have different material interests. This is why I believe the term lumpenbourgeoisie works well for organized crime.


What is the truth behind the holodomor? I remember watching video and shit in class, describing it as a result of Stalin’s personal hate of the Ukrainians, with the NKVD killing people who would pick spare bits of brain from farmed grain. Why did the Soviet Union export so much grain from Ukraine when Ukraine clearly needed if?


didn't happen but it should have
serious answer kulaks burning fields and killing livestock


>Why did the Soviet Union export so much grain from Ukraine when Ukraine clearly needed if?
Soviet grain exports went down 60% the year of the famine.


But I really don’t think that explains 7 million or so people dying, surely they had many farms that kept on going, not only in Ukraine but in the rest of the USSR?


There was a crop disease also and add people leaving the farms for cities since the country was industrializing. All of this together and the kulak sabotage you have a famine.


That number isn't even right. Also the famine affected all the grain producing areas of the USSR.


If too many people were leaving for the cities why didn't the state just close off those jobs, if the balance is unright?


this is more of an observation that doesn't deserve it's own thread
Cuba has the 103rd lowest GDP per capita, but the 70th highest human development index (HDI) and the 46th highest life expectancy


See anon! You don't need high wages to be happy!


Cheers mate. Will report back soon


any articles or studies on the increasing financialization of Capital? Read this old article and would like to read more



Is the consensus of the historic community that the Holodomor wasn't a engineered genocide? Proofs? I need to throw a book at someone.


File: 1618631572371.jpg (44.38 KB, 687x500, 4hu7z6.jpg)

What's some good stuff to read on Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge? Most stuff on them seems to be by bourgeois historians and calls them "orthodox ML". Were they a nationalist deviation of ML that went full nationalist, a reactionary peasant's movement that was closer to anarchism, were they never socialist at all and simply nationalist opportunists that adopted a superficial ML line for international support? All I have right now is this: https://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/pol/khmerrouge.html




File: 1618633317710-0.png (27.6 KB, 123x244, 07.png)

File: 1618633317710-1.png (38.7 KB, 164x238, 23.png)

File: 1618633317710-2.png (26.78 KB, 133x216, 31.png)

File: 1618633317710-3.png (34.67 KB, 128x245, 32.png)

File: 1618633317710-4.png (33.9 KB, 152x273, 40.png)

can a political ideology catgirl expert tell me who these five are


File: 1618635077444.jpg (69.25 KB, 900x700, 0ba092c174972e1e6d08081853….jpg)

Fourth is Makhno


File: 1618641336466.jpg (116.74 KB, 1279x720, 118280596_812538456218014_….jpg)

Big thank you, anon.


because the state waas too slow to react


The truth behind holodomor is that the government decided to push collectivization of farming which stirred up rebellion among parts of the peasant population. There were violent uprisings and also in protest to the collectivization peasants slaughtered millions of heads of cattle. At the same time bad weather+crop disease stepped in and things went to shit.

Unique IPs: 187

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ overboard / cytube] [ leftypol / b / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music ] [ meta ] [ GET / ref]