[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / baphomet / choroy / dbv / eros / f / int / miku / vore ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

A collective of people engaged in pretty much what the name suggests
Winner of the 77nd Attention-Hungry Games
/x/ - Paranormal Phenomena and The RCP Authority

April 2019 - 8chan Transparency Report
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Options
dicesidesmodifier

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


Tags: leftism (CLICK HERE FOR MORE LEFTIST 8CHAN BOARDS), politics, activism, news

File: 14ca3b3582294bb⋯.jpg (23.27 KB, 220x306, 110:153, 220px-Daniel-DeLeon-1902.jpg)

 No.2859361

>inb4 third worldist take over the thread and tell us not to do anything

Okay amerimuts, why haven't you joined the IWW yet? If it's because of cost you're good, but what excuse do the rest of you have?

Why haven't you joined a political party yet? There are plenty to join.

>SLP

>PSL

>SEP

>SA

>SPUSA

If you're REALLY desperate you can join the Greens. The CPUSA is an FBI plant though, don't join it.

Why don't you talk to co-workers and friends?Socialism/communism/anarchism are all too strong of words to use, but you can still slowly build the ideas in their head if you know what you're talking about.

 No.2859364

can you recommend any party/org for reverse Australia?


 No.2859365

>>2859364

That's for you to look up, sorry.


 No.2859367

https://twitter.com/IWGBunion

Reminder that the IWW gave birth to perhaps the most based union in Britain atm.


 No.2859372

obligatory

>america

>socialism


 No.2859388

Imagine being a Brit and stanning DeLeon even though he said the IWW began to represent bummery and Jacobin Anarchy, then decided to proceeded to split the org


 No.2859390

Connolly wasn't a DeLeonist btw


 No.2859396

"… What we have done in Russia is accept the De Leon interpretation of Marxism, that is what the Bolsheviki adopted in 1917."

~ Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, 1922.


 No.2859397

File: 500c52623d790be⋯.jpg (73.04 KB, 640x1138, 320:569, ham.jpg)

>>2859361

>socialism in a first world country

this is what first worldist actually believe


 No.2859399

>>2859397

>Socialism can only happen in places without fully developed capitalism

Imagine misunderstanding Marx this fucking hard


 No.2859400

>>2859399

>trots

>reading

lole


 No.2859402

>>2859361

>alphabet not wasting their thievery on /pol/…

Shame on you. Why not try recruiting formers with shekeldom similar to the street beat bottomfags in LE? You're basically there…here..so why not?


 No.2859407

>>2859400

Third Worldism is a Maoist-derived mode of though.


 No.2859409

>>2859397

>Trot defending his bourgeois state from revolution

I'm becoming more and more convinced that this guy glows in the dark.


 No.2859412

because every party here fucking sucks ass


 No.2859432

>all these old sects

PSL seems okay but I was in SPUSA for a couple years and to call it a joke would be giving them way too much credit, it's a fucking cesspit. The new standout orgs are Marxist Center and For-The-People. Both are totally uninvolved in electoral politics, both focus on base building with serve-the-people programs, both forego petty 20th century factionalism for a wide net that basically any revolutionary socialist can fit under. Marxist Center had 2,000 people after 2 months of existing, which is about as much as SPUSA's national membership despite having existed since the 70s (or 1910s if you believe their line about being the legitemate successor to SPA). The IWW and New Afrikan Black Panther Party are also great, just smaller and with less infrastructure than Marxist Center or For-The-People as far as I can tell. Either way, if you're a burger you have good options:

>IWW

>NABPP

>Marxist Center

>For-The-People

Personally I recommend Marxist Center but all are great and I'm going to join a couple others when I get the chance.


 No.2859434

File: 6123fdf236e53b5⋯.jpg (144.53 KB, 600x419, 600:419, bigbill1.jpg)

>>2859412

>What we have done in Russia is accept the De Leon interpretation of Marxism, that is what the Bolsheviki adopted in 1917."

>~ Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, 1922.

Lemme quote wikipedia's page on labor federation competition

Via Wikipedia page on labor competiton

>The WIIU created an industrial union structure that was similar to that of the IWW.[144] Unlike the IWW, which from 1908 onwards constitutionally restricted itself from political alliances, the WIIU advocated political actions, and maintained a close association with the SLP, although (as of 1922) it declined to openly affirm this association.

>Robert Hoxie, author of Trade Unionism in the United States, referred to the Detroit IWW as socialistic, and the Chicago IWW as quasi anarchistic.[147] Hoxie, who was writing in the 1913-14 time-frame (his book was a joint effort published in 1921), wrote that socialistic unions (some of which were AFL unions) "look forward to a state of society which, except for common ownership and control of industry and strong centralized government in the hands of the working class, does not differ essentially from our own."[148] Although they were "revolutionary," they would attain their goals by peaceful means, both political and industrial. The quasi anarchistic unionists, on the other hand, envision an industrial society in which the unions would act as the government. Hoxie believed that quasi anarchistic unions were abhorrent of political action.[148] Other authors have a different interpretation. Quoting passages from Bread and Roses Too, Verity Burgmann has written,

succdems, not socialists

>>2859407

Was Khrushchev right to call Mao a Trot?


 No.2859493

To be honest I'm somewhat terrified that joining the IWW would affect my future job prospects. Given I want to move into a more stable household, outside of that, I try to talk about socialism with my friends when I get the chance.


 No.2859494

>>2859493

Yeah, I see where your coming from. Luckily it is growing quickly, maybe when it gets big enough you'll be safe under the logic of

"you can't fire ALL of us"


 No.2859516

>>2859494

Any stats on the growth of IWW or just obvious that it's growing?


 No.2859534

>>2859361

>IWW

Nice history, but today they're too small and decentralized. I'd join if I knew my local branch was good.

>SLP

Pretty sure they don't exist anymore.

>PSL

Pseudo-Trots. Every cringey Left Twitter account is a member too.

>SEP

Good website (especially for Trots) except for all the sexual assault apologia.

>SA

More Trots, with all the rapeyness of the SEP but without the anti-imperialism.

>SPUSA

If I wanted to be a succdem I'd join the Democrat Cops of America, at least they've gotten some people elected.

>Greens

Same as SPUSA.

>>2859432

>Marxist Center

I don't know too much about them, but are they really as big as you say?

>FTP

They seem to have nice politics but they also seem tiny.

>NABPP

Only exist in prisons as far as I can tell, which is fine but I have no interest in ever going there.


 No.2859562

>>2859534

>I don't know too much about them, but are they really as big as you say?

They just formed in February and already have 2k members spread out across the country. Basically it's a central organization made to organize a dozen or so seperate but similar serve-the-people city specific socialist orgs. Our Philly branch has organized Tenants Union that is now a legitemate force in the city, as well as English Second Language classes for immigrant workers and their kids, both of which are being imitated across the country, I believe the bigger branches are in Kentucky, Kansas, and Colorado Springs. FTP is a bit smaller as far as I can tell but is doing similar stuff, with a bit more of a Maoist element to it afaik but basically similar and nonsectarian, mostly in St. Louis, Atlantic City and I believe Alabama. NABPP has started doing work in Atlantic City but you're right that they're almost exclusively a prison org for now.

None of these orgs are especially big, but having shopped around for about five years now and seeing the whole range of insular impotence, Trotskyist microparty redundancy, resigned socdems, cultish Maoists, etc etc, these new ones are much, much better. They have a lot of momentum and are focusing on actual base-building and the construction of independent proletarian infrastructure, which is just fucking common sense for a socialist organization to do but it took major political shake-ups, new blood, and socialism coming back into public view again. I dont mean to disparage the comrades that have been doing good work for decades, god bless them I dont know how they did it, but they did it in spite of the sad state of late 20th century American commie fashion clubs and cults LARPing as revolutionary politics.


 No.2859563

>>2859562

Also the rate of growth of these new orgs and the involvement of their members is very impressive compared to SPUSA/ISO/SA/PSL. They may have similarly small membership but they've gathered it in a much smaller amount of time whereas these other "parties" have been around for like half a century and struggle to retain a couple hundred members.

Basically I'm just saying they might not be much to look at now but I think these are the groups worth investing time and energy in because compared to the others they have much more momentum and vitality.


 No.2859568

File: 3100adc6f4f7ff3⋯.jpg (71.21 KB, 768x1024, 3:4, Marxist-Center-e1547250025….jpg)

>>2859534

>>2859562

>>2859563

https://regenerationmag.org/a-new-socialist-org-is-born-a-report-on-the-marxist-center-conference-2/

>Friday November 30th, 2018, I flew to Denver to attend the second annual Marxist Center conference. Up to this point, Marxist Center had been a loose network of local revolutionary socialists collectives united around a commitment to dual power and base building strategies. The network had congregated last year in Philadelphia to collectively discuss strategy and praxis. The previous conference was mostly for networking and information sharing, and did not represent a decision making body for the network.

>Unlike the previous conference, this second Marxist Center conference was focused on decision making and working towards formal unity between the collectives within the network. In the year leading up to the conference, multiple proposals were prepared and shared online. These proposals included Points of Unity drafted by a comrade from the Communist Labor Party, a proposal for a Marxist Center website and affiliation requirements drafted by a comrade from Philly Socialists, and a proposal for Revolutionary Left Radio to officially affiliate and cross-promote with the Marxist Center. The goal for the conference was to create a framework for the establishment of a nation-wide Marxist Center organization with more formal unity than the network had up to that point.

>Finally all voting was concluded, and somehow, at the end of hours on hours of debate and editing, we had established a new nationwide revolutionary socialist organization. What is more, this organization was not born out of a split but out of the unification of multiple collectives. This is a very rare occurrence, and at the very least should be seen as a massive organizational accomplishment. I think that at this point many delegates were exhausted, and the transition to workshops was a welcome relief.

>While I will not go into details on the workshops for security reasons, I will say that they covered a broad variety of topics such as: cultivating a healthy organizational culture, labor organizing, cooperative organizing, tenants organizing, cyber security, and fundraising. These workshops were very practical in nature, and I can personally say that I learned a lot from them. The skills that were shared will definitely go to help our organizing at UCLC, and I am glad that we were able to send a delegate to learn from the successes and failures of other comrades across the country.


 No.2859569

File: 6f9be0ab861ba87⋯.jpeg (67.37 KB, 960x540, 16:9, MC1.jpeg)

>>2859568

https://regenerationmag.org/base-building-activist-networking-or-organizing-the-unorganized/

>Base-Building: Activist Networking or Organizing the Unorganized?

>The dominant left-wing political forms of our present moment are either amorphous “movements” without formal structures, or nongovernmental organizations (also known as nonprofits or NGOs). Radicals should reject both of these options and form explicitly political organizations (anarchist, Marxist, socialist, communist, whatever).

>Instead of “subsuming” or “liquidating” our work into the amorphous “movement”, we should found political centers which engage in community and workplace organizing, while simultaneously participating in standard leftist activities such as protests and political education.

>The task of radicals, at present must be digging in deep to the class, going “to the masses,” building long-term relationships with layers of oppressed and working class people, and organizing in our neighborhoods and workplaces. This is the punishing, demoralizing grind work that activists prefer to avoid, but it constitutes the only way forward.

>One major strategic error of the Left in the past several decades has been using a method of analysis which we might refer to as “issue-ism.” The idea here is that among struggles against imperialist foreign policy, against police brutality, in support of LBGTQ rights or workers rights, etc. we can choose to embrace one while rejecting another. Deeply-rooted social contradictions are treated as though they were consumer choices, which might be mixed and matched based on our personal preferences, as one might put different items from a grocery store into a grocery cart.

>Most activists who have engaged in single-issue work come to understand the limitations of this sort of politics. The majority of activists either repudiate active political struggle entirely, or break toward reformism. Among more experienced political actors, there is another path which we also regard as an error: that is to imagine that combining some or all of the issues into a giant progressive coalition will lead to liberation.

>Many look to a “movement of movements” strategy, holding out hope that uniting all progressive struggles together will somehow add up to more than the sum of its parts. However, despite its long-standing and generally untheorized popularity on the left, this strategy has produced little in the way of material gains for the working class.

>The “movement of movements” strategy has historically been prone to rightist and leftist deviations. The rightist error (and the most common outcome) of a “Rainbow Coalition” is overtly or covertly corralling the social movements into the quagmire of the Democratic Party. The leftist deviation can be called “activist networking.”

>Activist networking is what might be called lifestyle activism, in the sense of individuals who form their identity around being an activist and derive the majority of their social life from activism. These are the type of people who do not engage with, are not comfortable around and are not friends with non-activists or non-theory types, and whose weekly and monthly schedules are a busybody itinerary of meetings, discussion groups, protests, and conferences.

>These individuals are not particularly concerned with effectiveness, because for then it is more of a hobby, an identity, or a “safe space” for like-minded people to discuss common interests without having to engage with working class people with their warts and all.


 No.2859572

>>2859397

This. It's not going to happen.


 No.2859654

So why was this thread anchored? Salty Trot/America-hating mods, or just autistic screeching about discussing actual organizing instead of impotent activism or internet shitposting?


 No.2859662

>>2859654

No idea, maybe they thought it should go in American politics general? Either way fucking stupid


 No.2859676

this thread's allowed


 No.2859720

>>2859396

Source? Did he really say that?


 No.2859733

>>2859361

Why, OP? I've asked myself this question many times before, and every time, I've gotten one answer in response; cultural warfare. Not cultural warfare between cultures, but cultural warfare in our own culture. We are barely encouraged to learn other languages (among other measures to limit our exposure to other systems than capitalism), we are raised in an extreme grind culture that considers anyone left of center "weak" or some bullshit like that, we are told over and over that libs are "radical leftists" by our cucked two-party politicians, we are told over and over bullshit about how "teh ruskies and teh chinkz r gonna eat ur first born chaild!!1 nyurrr they hate freedom also isis wantz 2 cut muh towerz down", we are fed serving after serving of bullshit on how capitalism is the best system ever, we are told that communism killed more than 95 million people since its inception even though capitalism has killed more than 100 million just in the last five years (1.6 billion since its inception in Great Britain), etc… We aren't simply stupid, we're being groomed and brainwashed from childhood onward to believe that we are living in the best place in the world, and if we can't afford the cost of life with three fucking jobs, it's all our fault.


 No.2859739

>>2859720

>George Seldes quotes Lenin saying on the fifth anniversary of the revolution, "… What we have done in Russia is accept the De Leon interpretation of Marxism, that is what the Bolsheviki adopted in 1917."[15]

Considering the bloke was actually there and interviewed Lenin…


 No.2859761

File: c5517988c85d65c⋯.gif (17.32 KB, 600x600, 1:1, normie_chart_tiers.gif)

File: d17ad4e8723c157⋯.gif (2.82 KB, 150x150, 1:1, Lame normie.gif)

"When fascism comes to America, it'll be a cross wrapped in the flag. "

For Christ's sake, left(y)pol/sters! Stop nagging America into socialism! It's never gonna happen. Most Americans are eternally spooked into the "get rich or die trying"/"rags to riches" mantra. Even if they learned the difference between (neo)liberalism and socialism, most would reject it because they all want to be the god-boss of their business.


 No.2859776

File: f1664db7e6dd36c⋯.png (36.24 KB, 617x1306, 617:1306, niche.png)

File: bafc0f924537eb5⋯.png (55.39 KB, 507x401, 507:401, personalitydisordertest.png)

File: 9423bdbc43f84c1⋯.png (59.59 KB, 358x387, 358:387, depressedtest.png)

File: dfac1d95ded3862⋯.png (214.29 KB, 800x1200, 2:3, 9axes.png)

>>2859761

This quiz kinda sucks when it comes to actually labelling doomers. I'm probably better at socializing than most normies are, and more idealistic than they are, but my depression is overwhelming and the mask comes off when i'm not around anyone.


 No.2859788

>inb4 third worldist take over the thread and tell us not to do anything

Why do people think Maoist-Third Worldists say first worlders shouldn't do anything? M-TW is about re-prioritizing, not "doing nothing".


 No.2859793

>>2859788

Third worldist don't advocate "doing nothing" in the first world but doing nothing is certainly preferable to promoting imperialist social democracy (i.e. social democracy in the first world.)


 No.2859807

>>2859793

Who is advocating social democracy?


 No.2859821

http://rashidmod.com/?p=1125

Third Worldists need to read Rashid. Your analysis is pathetic.


 No.2859824

>>2859821

Literally who?


 No.2859827

File: 06d660c39f20090⋯.jpg (294.99 KB, 700x914, 350:457, occupy.jpg)

>>2859824

One of the most committe and consistent revolutionaries in the US right now. He has been in prison since he was 18 on drug charges and has been organizing behind bars since. He was moved from prison to prison because he kept organizing and leading strikes. He was placed in a cell block with only the Aryan Brotherhood and he started organizing them too. He's been in solitary for like a decade now. He's a major figure in the IWOC, the IWW's prison branch, and is the Minister of Defense of the New Afrikan Black Panther Party. Everyone should be reading him.


 No.2859830

>>2859824

Founder of a prison org based on the black Panthers and one of the IWW's most valuable members. He's been trying to unionize prisoners for years, he's convinced hardened gangsters and even neo-Nazis to see the light, and that's why the guards been torturing him and censoring his work then transferring him off to another prison for more of the same cruel and unusual bullshit.


 No.2859838

>>2859733

>>2859761

>>2859793

There seems to be three different people who trend towards anti-capitalistism in the global left.

The first, understandably, is the third world which has felt the worst of American Imperialism.

The second, are rather hypocritical Europeans who adopt an anti-capitalist attitude in part out of jealousy of America supplanting Europe's old place in the sun. Thus they'll make long lists detailing America's "crimes" and pretend like they weren't just as guilty of them in the past.

The third, and perhaps strangest, are Americans themselves who feel socially isolated/alienated from wider American culture, and so respond with a nihilistic lashing out against their own countrymen. It's the type of people who listened to Green Day's "American Idiot" unironically and are what Orwell would call "Trans-nationalists"

Of the latter two, you see an annoying pattern of accusations:

>Americans are Stupid

>Americans are greedy/immoral

>Americans are brainwashed

>Americans are "bootlickers"

All of these things supposedly making the socialist project in America impossible. To which I counter that if their entire argument is based off the worst interpretation of stereotypes, it's no wonder the left finds itself in such dire straits today.

There's no great cultural impetus that makes Socialism impossible in the United States. Such an idea is inherently stupid, and I suspect based off some convoluted relationship that the propagators of this idea had with their parents–maybe they were evangelical protestants, maybe they read too much Ayn Rand, so on. What this does is merely reinforce leftism as a thing to adopt as a counter-culture rather than as a political foundation.


 No.2859883

>>2859516

This is just anecdotal, but the Burgerville Union in Portland was largely organized with the support/advice of the local IWW chapter. Though it obviously helps that Portland has historically been a fairly strong labor town.


 No.2859909

>>2859534

>decentralized.

THE IWW SHAT ON THE AFL FOR DECCENTRALIZATION, AAAHHHHHHHHHH

Read Robert Hoxie


 No.2859934

>>2859838

Socialism has been been so marginalized in American culture that the denial of the native proletariat as a revolutionary subject is second nature to most self-described "leftists." The position that an absolute majority of the US population is hopelessly, permanently "reactionary" is taken as a given, and therefore socialism is only to be accomplished by the native lumpenproletariat, or some foreign nation like China, or by capital imploding itself without any human subject at all. The mass death of most American workers and bourgeois along the way is also taken as given, of course.


 No.2859941

>>2859934

>Socialism has been been so marginalized in American culture

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2UF8yw89yE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEf_kbAHT40

>that the denial of the native proletariat as a revolutionary subject is second nature to most self-described "leftists." The position that an absolute majority of the US population is hopelessly, permanently "reactionary" is taken as a given, and therefore socialism is only to be accomplished by the native lumpenproletariat, or some foreign nation like China

>I hate people who think that the U.S is magically immune to anger from crashes, now lemme do the same thing

Hmmmmm


 No.2859950

File: 3c799e03c7e3444⋯.jpg (109.16 KB, 619x1000, 619:1000, 3c799e03c7e3444deb8f845b72….jpg)

>>2859934

Is this even a materialist analysis? Sounds more fascistic than anything, that culture–not material conditions–drives people to action.

Socialism exists marginalized because the two party state has made it near-impossible for socialists to function as an electoral force, and regardless of what you may think even the Bolsheviks attended elections, people voting for you, even if you can accomplish nothing in office, shows they have faith in you and your ability to change things.

Instead Socialism finds itself marginalized from electoral power, and rather than trying to build up non-electoral power, through union membership, through mutual aid programs, so and so forth, students latched onto it and made it a counterculture thing. Expecting it to make it big when everyone in the movement seems like they're attempting to one up one another by being more of a stern faced "revolutionary" zealot, and by sneering at the entire United States, its people, its history, and its culture as hopelessly reactionary.

All of this is in spite of the fact that the most successful "communist" revolutions took place in countries where it was assumed that the autocrat in charge of things was appointed by the divine, where the masses were illiterate and uninformed, where they were hyper religious, and far more reactionary than the U.S. ever was.

And yet people stupidly think the U.S. is unsalvagable! The fact is if the socialist movement here is unsalvageable, it's only the fault of idiots among the movement itself. Even Lenin confessed to a psuedo-patriotism, in stating that the Bolsheviks loved their country, this is in spite of many of those Bolsheviks being victims of pogroms and the worst kinds of oppression by the Tsar.

Yet take a country like America, compare it to Russia's history, and realize that it's stupid to think that somehow the United States is "more reactionary" than Russia, and those who argue it is are just being useless idiots.

I confess, that if half the Bolsheviks were as useless as third worldists are, sneering at peasants for their "backwardsness", confessing that they despised the Russian people, culture, and history, then the Revolution would've been an immense failure.


 No.2859981

>>2859838

Very good post, shame that goofy wordfilter spoiled it or I would screencap.


 No.2859995

>>2859838

>>2859950

Are you burgers? Because man I'll never be convinced of any sort of revolutionary potential in burgerville.


 No.2860037

>>2859995

Are you?


 No.2860046

>>2859950

Good post, mate. Not american and I really don't like how the US backed a military coup in my country but the only way for the US to become a decent country is through marxism.


 No.2860050

Revolution is impossible in the imperial core. Also America leftists are for whatever reason really attached to the democratic party which means that even if leftism becomes more popular it still won't amount to anything as any revolutionary energy will be channeled into electoralism instead of being used to build or strengthen an independent party/movement.


 No.2860055

File: 337db83f05ac517⋯.png (54.1 KB, 500x658, 250:329, tumblr_phxtioowdY1xfwsbao2….png)

>Revolution is impossible in the imperial core.

Not when the contradictions build

>Also America leftists are for whatever reason really attached to the democratic party which means that even if leftism becomes more popular it still won't amount to anything as any revolutionary energy will be channeled into electoralism

Bernie and the Democrat Cops of America are going to fucking die, I'm calling it


 No.2860063

>>2859995

I find the “muh Fox News watchin’ Walmart shoppin’ gun lovin’ Hicks” stereotype is absurd, I have lived in this country all my life, my family’s history extends all the way back to the founding of this country. The “stupid red scared American” trope is probably one of the dumbest things I’ve encountered. It’s pure Hollywood.

Our country was gripped by the OWS protests a few years back, we have a labor history fraught with actual militant violence against laborers—planes dropping bombs, etc—and even Trump’s election is testament to the squeeze people are feeling by capitalism.

More than any other western country, the American worker is worked harder and treated worse, and you somehow think there’s no revolutionary potential? How stupid must a supposed “Marxist” be to say that in spite of the history of communist movements in the third world, in Russia and China of all places—two nations with some of the longest standing traditions of being autocratic and reactionary—that there is something in the American character that is just too “backwards” to accept communism. That somehow an anti Semitic illiterate peasant state could embrace communism, but the US can’t.

The typical excuse is that the American worker is just so privileged that he supports imperialism because he has it so “good” under the system, but the fact is that American workers have seen their pay stagnate and have progressively less free time. He is growing progressively more angered at his treatment, and THIS is where his revolutionary potential lies.


 No.2860067

>>2860063

I am glad to learn more about actual American's take on this matter but as long as your country's military advantage remains, you will not run out of country to invade and implant democracy (tm) and your country will be able to squeeze your own people bit less to tame them. Russia and China is slowly starting to gain edge on some departments but that's even more pessimistic as we are actually hoping to be opportunists in the middle of new imperial conflicts.

like seriously plz sind halp. how the fuck is dialectic supposed to work in nuclear missile era


 No.2860077

>>2860063

>The “stupid red scared American” trope is probably one of the dumbest things I’ve encountered. It’s pure Hollywood

have you actually talked to americans


 No.2860079

>>2860077

Have you talked to Americans irl?


 No.2860081


 No.2860092

>>2859838

>counter-culture rather than as a political foundation

True. Cultural change must precede political change.


 No.2860094

>>2860092

>True. Cultural change must precede political change.

Literally the opposite of what he said.


 No.2860095

File: ea2185e40bfae6d⋯.png (257.6 KB, 1200x1176, 50:49, BaseSuperstructure.png)


 No.2860208

File: 9e6b060cfd9fa82⋯.jpg (164.97 KB, 1200x1000, 6:5, 1550519383057.jpg)

>>2860079

I am an American.

>>2860067

Our country doesn't squeeze it's people less. If anything, it just uses its imperial state as a bulwark for the corporate class. Our infrastructure is falling apart, and hell, part of the reason Trump was elected is that things are legitimately terrible for the working class in some places.

A couple years ago, I went camping by this town in the far south of Oregon, almost on the border with Northern California. I had a buddy that owned property up there, driving through the town the signs of poverty were obvious, most people seemed to be living in these shacks, cobbled together from whatever scrapwood the people could find. I was informed that the town wasn't exactly safe after dark, as the total lack of any emergency service infrastructure meant that the locals had to stay armed to protect themselves as no police would be coming to help them–along with the implication that one of his neighbors potentially murdered a local punk that was harassing an elderly widow.

Here, everything seemed so ramshackle. You could find people living in abhorrent shanty towns that seemed right out of a textbook on the great depression.

These are people living in such poor conditions that they even have to develop their own rugged kind of law where murders are quietly practiced now and again in order to "keep the peace". If there were any people that could benefit from Socialism in America, it would be them.

And so why don't they choose Socialism? Well I would argue this is because as myself and others have mentioned, Socialism has become a counter-cultural thing. People use it to signal their opposition to the predominant culture, rather than feel out actually sensible political goals. Politics as a whole has been subsumed by ones stance on cultural issues, this being no surprise as it is in the interest of the rich to keep it that way.

The one building this community could come together to maintain was a small little Lutheran parish. My friends and I engaged in local community activities, namely firing a Kalashnikov in a public landfill, there we encountered a Native American wearing a "Love It or Leave It" shirt who asked us if he could give our AK a try and wanted to know if we smoked weed.

There was irony and contradictions inherent in the culture of course. The local black family said they hoped no more "California niggers" moved up north, even the most conservative people we encountered seemed to smoke Mary Jane, the people were angry of the government's poor management of the local environment while also disgusted by "hippie environmentalists".

But that's what culture is, it's a little mess of contradictions, and we take the most recurring patterns of thought at face value and say it's "our" culture. It's also why /pol/ and /leftypol/ have such problems breaking into the mainstream.

In spite of /pol/'s supposed nationalism, the racism it practices and "ideals" it holds to are so contradictory, or taken to such an extreme, that it can safely be said that even if one were to take their most mainstream ideas, they would never be able to find a society at any point in the last century that could approach the level of fervor and ruthless ideological purity that they inflict on themselves. Even the racists of the old confederacy would balk at /pol/'s strange, weird, violent fantasies.

Yet this is a double edged sword. It seems much of the left has similarly fallen into its own counter-culture, we all know the habit of "leftist" parties being glorified microsects, but more than that you'll find the worst sort of militant atheists and social progressives among left movements today, that it couldn't ever hope to approach a legitimate understanding of mainstream culture.

I remember once, someone on here said the left could stand to be more patriotic in the U.S., as patriotism is a pretty big thing here, in response one of the replies mentioned leftist parties wearing cowboy hats to "display their patriotism".

Like /pol/, these leftists look at the aesthetic, not the idea. Worse, they so totally reject the aesthetic, that they become annoying little killjoys, or even seen as hostile to the very way of life of the people they supposedly want to help.

You'll never convince the people of that little, poor town, to tear down their church, smash the altar, and build some community art house. You can convince them that socialism will help their homes, and part of building trust is showing your part of the culture.

No, this doesn't mean adopting an aesthetic as /pol/ tries to. This means actively being involved in the culture. Go shooting with the locals, even if you don't believe in God, maybe go to a Church potluck or volunteer. Enjoy 4th of July for the fireworks, instead of screeching that "Washington was a slaveowner and America was built on lies"


 No.2860229

>>2860208

10/10 post, especially about the countercultural Left


 No.2860308

>>2860208

bravo, anon


 No.2860523

>>2860208

>And so why don't they choose socialism? well I would argue this is because as myself and others have mentioned, Socialism has become a counter-cultural thing.

Which is what enables reactionaries to heroically strike down straw man like 'cultural Marxism' .

>Politics as a whole has been subsumed by ones stance on cultural issues, this being no surprise as it is in the interest of the rich to keep it that way.

Then why are you keep trying to play their game?

Maybe I'm asking wrong question as I do not understand what you mean by culture and how it differs from other social relations as shaped by capitalism. Either I'm being obtuse to such concept or you are fetishizing it.

Whatever is the case, true question remains: what prevents American left to confront their economical problem in economic approach? That is, if con job like Donald Trump could work, why couldn't you push far left populist with strong economic reform programs? I'm asking for actual batshit insane politician who would propose to abolish landlordism, provide free high education, free healthcare, unionization, nationalization of key infrastructure, infrastructure reform and any other items that your people SHOULD crave.

Do you really think you can Trojan horse such promises under relatably revamped socialists with American aesthetics? Do you really think you can overshadow existential meme of your country 'American dream is this concept even relevant in 2k19? '? Penetrate thick skulls of people who worship entrepreneurship?


 No.2860572

>>2860208

>In spite of /pol/'s supposed nationalism, the racism it practices and "ideals" it holds to are so contradictory, or taken to such an extreme, that it can safely be said that even if one were to take their most mainstream ideas, they would never be able to find a society at any point in the last century that could approach the level of fervor and ruthless ideological purity that they inflict on themselves. Even the racists of the old confederacy would balk at /pol/'s strange, weird, violent fantasies.

Do you actually believe this? American slaveowners were insanely brutal.


 No.2860579

File: 3ef688d7d82fe5c⋯.jpg (112.07 KB, 741x552, 247:184, virginian.jpg)

>>2860572

They only were missing confederate anime tbh


 No.2860588

Americans will never accept marxist-leninism so the best way forward is libertarian socialism because freedumbs.


 No.2860599

>iww

planning on it

>slp

Long dead even though i wish it wasnt there needs to be more leftcom orgs

>psl

Im not ML

>SEP

dont know about them but the only trots i find ok so far are IMT

>SA

Know them, dont like them, prefer IMT

>SPUSA

Boomer Democrat Cops of America, basically dead

Anyways im involved in Democrat Cops of America and IMT shit, planning on getting involved with the IWW too. Im pretty open about socialism and communism to my friends who srent and i have friends who are leftists of all types.


 No.2860605


 No.2860606

>>2860599

Also adding on to this that i still think the IMT are flawd with meme dated trot praxis

Also while i do not generally like traditional ML parties, the one org that I really like their praxis and miggt have potential (even if they are ML) os marxist center, although idk if they have any branches on the east coast


 No.2860618

File: e0e79a38bfe4302⋯.jpg (41.38 KB, 680x493, 40:29, 254.jpg)

>>2860523

>Which is what enables reactionaries to heroically strike down straw man like 'cultural Marxism' .

Exactly.

You have to deal with your "brand identity", even if it's untrue, and even if you don't like it. To give a personal example, I work in retail, a customer once told me that she went to a wedding in the California wine country, and to save costs (as well as run a little social experiment) the host got these expensive wine bottles, like $15 stuff, and he filled them all with a bargain $3 wine. No one at the wedding knew the wine was stuff they could buy at any low-end grocery store, they all appraised it, sniffed it, swirled it around in their glass, sipped it and tried to detect the "flavor notes."

If you tried serving these people wine in the original bottle, they'd complain that it's low-end, blase, or even that it tastes terrible. If you revealed the ruse after the fact, those same people would probably insist they always "knew" it was bad but humored the host anyways.

The moral of this story, is that that fact sadly gives way to image in our modern capitalist society, once you learn to play the game you can win, however.

>Then why are you keep trying to play their game?

I'd say, funny enough, I'm not "playing the game". Truth be told, I'm pretty conservative on most social issues. I'm a Catholic. I tend to prefer the company of conservatives to liberals and even some socialists. All in all, I would say I don't "play the game" in the slightest. I am not part of the "counter-culture" but rather "the culture".

>Maybe I'm asking wrong question as I do not understand what you mean by culture and how it differs from other social relations as shaped by capitalism. Either I'm being obtuse to such concept or you are fetishizing it.

Well there's a myriad different cultures in the U.S., but the most predominant cultural trope is American Patriotism. Loving the country, respecting the founding fathers, celebrating 4th of July, this is all part of the mainstream culture of the U.S., if the left earns a reputation for sperging out at that patriotism, then it creates an image of itself as an "outsider" to the culture it wants to take root in, as something "alien" and "threatening" to it–regardless of the reasons for that opposition in the first place.

So my premise is fairly simple: engage with the culture. Yeah some of the founders did own some slaves, the natives did get the short end of the stick, and we do have a sad history of racial violence and slavery, yet none of these things are going to stop me from celebrating independence day with my friends, or enjoying Thanksgiving at face value, or even singing the national anthem at Baseball games. Truth be told I love my country, and I want it to be better.

>Whatever is the case, true question remains: what prevents American left to confront their economical problem in economic approach? That is, if con job like Donald Trump could work, why couldn't you push far left populist with strong economic reform programs? I'm asking for actual batshit insane politician who would propose to abolish landlordism, provide free high education, free healthcare, unionization, nationalization of key infrastructure, infrastructure reform and any other items that your people SHOULD crave.

Let me put it like this, there's a saying here: "Only Nixon could go to China"; meaning back in the height of the Cold War, when it looked like there'd be an armed conflict between the USSR and the PRC, Nixon went on a diplomatic mission to China and essentially brought them closer to us on the international stage. Hell it might've even prevented open warfare between the two. The saying comes from the idea that if a democratic president went to China, he'd be accused of communist sympathies and his poll numbers would slip.

1/?


 No.2860636

File: 9274c024ac74f06⋯.jpg (274.61 KB, 1029x1000, 1029:1000, 1537048541732.jpg)

>>2860618

I think what I'm about to say is important enough that it deserves its own post.

In America, we have a strange relationship with "the foreign". To be perfectly frank, I'm a WASP. On my father's side of the family, we arrived as indentured servants from England just a year after we declared independence, and on my mother's family were some of the first anglo-scot settlers in the U.S. I'm also Catholic, as my great grandmother immigrated from her homeland in Czechia and brought her Catholicism with her, enough that my grandmother insisted when she married her protestant husband that their children be raised Catholic, and my mother insisted upon marrying my (protestant turned agnostic) father that I be raised Catholic too. I look like a WASP, talk like one, but my religion is "foreign" enough here that people make this uninformed distinction that they're "Christian, not Catholic". Our country will celebrate the foreign heritage of her people when holidays like Chinese New Year or St. Patrick's Day or even Oktoberfest come around, but this is set against a history which at times has harshly persecuted the foreign. We've been captivated by religious great awakenings brought by predominantly German protestants, yet when it comes to the nature of our Republic, the foreign is cast in a suspicious light. We're isolationists, but love to travel. We love foreign cuisine and outfits and movies, and while we make poor tourists we're excellent hosts… on top of all this however, lingers the idea of some things being "un-american": while we celebrate Oktoberfest, it was quite common for us to outright lynch German-Americans during the World Wars as an example. This notion of "un-americaness" is the most powerful obstacle that the capitalist class can level at communists, and this tired trope has been repeated time and again for almost every ethnicity under the sun. The implication being that an idea is foreign, and that it seeks to place foreign power over Americans and destroy the republic.

The question those of us worried about cultural stigmatism have to ask ourselves, is how do we fight this accusation? To which I say that a change in rhetoric (and ONLY in rhetoric) can weaponize this tool of the capitalist class against itself.

Most Americans are, in fact, suspicious of corporate conglomerates all the while admiring the "entrepreneur", similarly they're suspicious of the federal government. The easiest and most useful thing to do, would be to accuse the Capitalists of being anti-capitalist. Simply put, they're out of touch, they wall themselves off from their countrymen, they start wars that claim American lives, all the while their own children go to college and rule over the maimed and crippled veterans of our military.

Accuse congress of being run by aristocratic dynasties, and most powerfully of all, exclaim from the heavens that these people are selling the country out (which they are).

When tobacco companies were dealing with the revelation that smoking is bad for you, they eventually moved away from claiming its healthy, or trying to deny these facts, to just not addressing them at all. They would simply say that their tobacco is "toasted", people would imagine that somehow means its healthier for them, or that it's "safe", and for a little while they dissuaded people from worrying about what cigarettes were doing to their health.

Similarly, most Americans wont care about the color or demographics of a Marxist party, if you keep pushing this idea that Wall Street is unamerican.


 No.2860652

File: 677de97a68bb685⋯.jpg (17.85 KB, 191x255, 191:255, 5a87209ba062a30746b1df1cad….jpg)

>So my premise is fairly simple: engage with the culture. Yeah some of the founders did own some slaves, the natives did get the short end of the stick, and we do have a sad history of racial violence and slavery, yet none of these things are going to stop me from celebrating independence day with my friends, or enjoying Thanksgiving at face value, or even singing the national anthem at Baseball games. Truth be told I love my country, and I want it to be better.

I agree with everything but the "respect muh flag" idea. It doesn't fit into the whole "people have to right to overthrow an unjust government" thing that people claim to represent, especially since it elevates the government into a thing of worship/adore that shouldn't be threatened

Also the hammer and sickle and tools on the West Virginia IWW's logo are dank and get you on TV because of the audacityit takes to do that


 No.2860667

>American left's praxis should be calling out bourgeoisie as un-American, thereby unfuck general consensus formed in cold war rhetoric

My brain tells me your plan is pure ideology but my dick is confused


 No.2860672

File: a59a9c21ff16854⋯.jpg (81.24 KB, 960x720, 4:3, slide_5.jpg)


 No.2860676

>>2860667

This is rule #1 of winning the battle of words dude. Steal your opponent's language from them and they'll have no weapons to fight you with. I have lost count of how many times I've referred to wage-labor as "un-American."


 No.2860684

>>2860672

The Black Panthers 10 point program was phrased like this as well I believe


 No.2860702

File: eed9c5dbb4bd6b4⋯.png (101.01 KB, 750x375, 2:1, flag.png)

File: 1ad56396c394629⋯.png (79.22 KB, 1024x539, 1024:539, wjgsraiuo92z.png)

File: 0972110f4a7bf34⋯.png (49.51 KB, 1620x900, 9:5, Communist USA.png)

>>2860652

Well here's the thing about the flag: it's an abstract symbol, it means different things to different people. The problem with destroying a symbol, is that it's like trying to perform surgery with a butcher's cleaver, eventually you're going to cut into something you shouldn't.

So when you think we shouldn't respect the flag because it represents the American government, or because it calls to images the history of capitalism and imperialism in this country, it wont be hard for someone somewhere to exclaim that you're disrespecting the memory of their grandson who died to an IED in Iraq, or that you're disrespecting the idea of free speech and the pursuit of happiness.

I think one of the most important marketing lessons the left needs to learn, is appreciating diversion over conflict. Remember what I said about cigarette companies just not addressing health claims? Well rather than "disrespecting" the flag, I think something far more devious and clever would be the creation of a peoples' flag.

In your home, or at ball games, or at party meetings, use a flag that is unattached to the American state, but still clearly American in character. If you have to pledge allegiance to anything, make it allegiance to that flag. If people attack you for it, well then they can't attack you for pledging allegiance to a foreign nation, or to not respecting the flag, but only for using a different flag. Let your response be that you're "pledging allegiance to the country, not the government", and they'll sputter out because the terrible truth about many of these "love it or leave it" types is that while they say they love the country, usually they end up hating the government, and they probably wont embarrass themselves by actually trying to defend the government.

I generally don't like the hammer and sickle, if only because its association with the soviet union (as well as the sickle's representation of rural peasantry, something alien to the American mindset) makes it look to "foreign" or like you wish to live in some American puppet state. I think a far better symbol for the American left would be the Statue of Liberty.

>>2860667

Well, I'm not a political philosopher, I'm just a working class guy with a marketing degree. Yeah maybe it is ideology, but I think we can let slide the occasional theoretical sin in favor of winning more people over to the cause.

>>2860672

This is a great example right here. Hell I know a guy whose dad is a vietnam vet, they're pretty right wing, but his dad honestly respects Ho Chi Minh and had nothing but good things to say about him.

>>2860676

Ding ding ding!

Even the American Dream can be used against capitalism. Trump proclaimed, to the cheers of patriots, that the American Dream is "dead", just to state how bad things have gotten. Similarly, leftists should argue that "Corporations killed the American Dream", that the sheer work load placed on Americans is murdering the dream, that we've seen our freedoms, rights, and prosperity erode to a military-industrial complex that is killing the American Dream. This is powerful rhetoric.

>>2860684

I think it used language from the Declaration of Independence, yes. It was smart of them to do, and probably won them some extra sympathy.


 No.2860726

File: 61919aa49417282⋯.jpg (4.03 MB, 2403x1622, 2403:1622, d522955de4a9160045b5d3fe7b….JPG)

>>2860702

>Well here's the thing about the flag: it's an abstract symbol, it means different things to different people. The problem with destroying a symbol, is that it's like trying to perform surgery with a butcher's cleaver, eventually you're going to cut into something you shouldn't.

So when you think we shouldn't respect the flag because it represents the American government, or because it calls to images the history of capitalism and imperialism in this country, it wont be hard for someone somewhere to exclaim that you're disrespecting the memory of their grandson who died to an IED in Iraq, or that you're disrespecting the idea of free speech and the pursuit of happiness.

Iran's fucking Ayatollah got good press by just stating "death to America" meant "down with imperialism", so it's showing what it stands for and burning it for some press

>that you're disrespecting the memory of their grandson who died to an IED in Iraq, or that you're disrespecting the idea of free speech and the pursuit of happiness.

It's also not hard to say that the flag stands for America silencing the IWW in the 1900's and sending their grandson Jimmy into a war that we're stuck in by design of Mr. oil Barron

>Well rather than "disrespecting" the flag, I think something far more devious and clever would be the creation of a peoples' flag.

It doesn't even have to be a flag, it could be a song like the battle cry of freedom. hell, songs like the red flag came from wobblies shouting over the salvation army band doing some Christian songs.

>I generally don't like the hammer and sickle, if only because its association with the soviet union (as well as the sickle's representation of rural peasantry, something alien to the American mindset)

The Hammer and Sickle is infamous (tenant Farmers that exist aplenty are basically U.S peasants) and that's a good thing because of the attention it brings when accompanied by familiar Americana


 No.2861285

>>2860702

Fucking hell, these are some badass flag designs, especially the middle and the right one.


 No.2861474

>>2860726

See infamy as a marketing technique is one of the oldest tricks in the book, and while it may have been great decades ago when businesses were competing to get their name out, we live at a point in history where there are plenty of non “shocking” ways to get people to notice you. I also fear that the more you advertise with edge, the more you’ll get edgy people in socialist movements, which runs the risk of backfiring.

I think that these days, irony and taboo breaking have played their course. People have had their fill of it, and the Jordan Peterson’s of the world notice this and capitalize on it with this kind of conservative reaction, a supposed return to “normalcy” a revitalization of certain culturally accepted “truths” and traditions in an effort to escape from insufferable liberals and the cultural effects of globalization. It’s a similar attitude as people who convert to new religions in an effort to experience some kind of spiritual fulfillment.

Point being, advertising ourselves with “edge” only gives us the image of being an immature “fad”, we need maturity and sincerity to win the masses over.


 No.2861479

File: becdd30d2c46e18⋯.png (31.8 KB, 540x301, 540:301, Untitled.png)

>>2861474

>Point being, advertising ourselves with “edge” only gives us the image of being an immature “fad”, we need maturity and sincerity to win the masses over.

You can still be a totally radical brotendo while still being serious, the IWW (sorry for bringing this up again) was reeed at by the Democrat Cops of America prototype "Socialist party" and everybody else for representing "anarchy and jacobinism", but they kept gaining memebers


 No.2861622

Might be moving into Chicago soon and all this IWW talk is interesting. Anyone have any thoughts or experiences with them or the area in general? I am definitely more partial to union action than parties.


 No.2861843

File: 5c5a421652865b9⋯.jpeg (38.8 KB, 308x320, 77:80, BDD37993-8162-4140-9389-2….jpeg)

I kinda feel that just like Europe has "Eurocommunism", the US needs, "Americommunism" or whatever else you might want to call it. A school of Marxist thought that is geared towards the particular conditions and situation of the USA, as opposed to just blindly following the lead of our European comrades, as some often do. The American state and business realm have done so many awful things that leftist here are afraid to speak up for the American workers, as if internationalism applies to everyone but us.


 No.2861874

>>2861843

t. doesn't know what Eurocommunism is


 No.2861901

File: 01daed088770c5a⋯.jpg (15.13 KB, 335x315, 67:63, 1531346840029.jpg)

>>2861843

Eurocommunism is for SuccDems who want to LARP as Communists.


 No.2861961

>>2861843

I feel like this is a pretty important point, maybe worthy of another thread. If our goal is to construct a left movement and truly American kind of socialism, where do we begin? This thread has good ideas, but they won’t go anywhere if we do nothing with them.


 No.2861994

Tbh I think socialism in Amrerica HAS to mean restorative justice for all the Native American nations and for minorities in general, land restoration, right of return, and protection of resources from exploitation.


 No.2862000

>>2861994

Autism. Socialism in America has to mean abolition of private property.


 No.2862011

>>2861994

America needs a cultural revolution once it has a socialist movement. So many things from the past need to be destroyed. Especially the artifacts cherished by the cult of the founders (the US Constitution, all statues of the founders, the liberty bell, etc.)


 No.2862019

>>2859776

what is this quiz?


 No.2862023

>>2861874

I know that it's broadly a revisionist strain that at its worst falls into SocDem, but its originators claimed it was a theory of praxis more suitable to Western Europe than other schools. True or not, it's that sense I was trying to analogize with. I've also heard the term used to refer to any pro-EU communists, and that's perhaps closer to the definition I'm forming here.


 No.2862025

>>2861994

>>2862011

Nuclear hot takes


 No.2862027

>>2862000

You can abolish property and enfranchise native peoples, it's called restorative justice for a reason


 No.2862029

>>2862025

Why is it a hot take? Nobody here would unironically defend Israeli or Ulster Scott settlerism, so why defend American settlerism? They're the same thing in character


 No.2862030

>>2862011

We're revolutionaries, not barbarians. We shouldn't destroy historical artifacts just because they were of a time we're not fond of. It was the Western powers who tried to comb over the Nazi camps, while the Soviets made sure to preserve all the evidence of their evil.


 No.2862032

>>2862027

>restorative justice

I don't think you know what this means.


 No.2862033

>>2862029

Nigga, that's the present, not 300 years ago


 No.2862034

>>2862030

I hope you're not suggesting we keep things like Mt. Rushmore or statues of Washington or god forbid, fucking Confederate statues


 No.2862039

>>2862033

Nigga native Americans are still being victimized by colonization to this day, just look at what happened at Standing Rock, despite what yo think, Native Americans still exist.


 No.2862043

File: e422d14261ed16b⋯.jpeg (49.27 KB, 1200x675, 16:9, 4D8B1437-32F0-41E2-8BAE-5….jpeg)

>>2862029

That's another thing: just how long do a people have to be living in an area before they are no longer "settlers"? Apparently since 1600 isn't far back enough, so what it? 1500? 1400? Should we give back Belgium, Luxembourg, and the left bank of the Rhine to the French? Should we return all the land we know the Bantus stole from the Khosians? Where does this irredentism end?


 No.2862046

File: a46432c0763823a⋯.jpg (40.72 KB, 400x488, 50:61, tumblr_pmi485vseM1y6qrvuo1….jpg)

>>2862039

>Being genocided by Unionist militias in living memory and that continued order=some shit 300 years ago

Return Nepal to the Newar people


 No.2862048

>>2862043

You're assuming natives are going to kick all the white people out of America, it's not true, right of return would actually benefit the white working class the most as socialism is established for everyone and historic wrongs are corrected. Settler colonialism predates and is the foundation for capitalism, if you truly want socialism without the possibility of bourgeois restoration, then right of return and the enfranchisement of native Americans is the best defense you could ask for.


 No.2862051

>>2862046

My man it wasn't just "some shit", Native Americans were butchered and their land was stolen so capitalism as we know it could develop. You're being a chauvinist.


 No.2862055

File: ecd210dc7420e02⋯.jpg (773.53 KB, 1072x712, 134:89, headdress.jpg)

>>2862051

what happened happened and they'd be treated fairly in communism anyways


 No.2862059

>>2862048

>then right of return and the enfranchisement of native Americans is the best defense you could ask for.

Legally speaking that's already been done. Native Americans have the right to vote in all elections, and there's no laws preventing them from moving into wherever the hell they want. Clearly that doesn't solve the problem though.


 No.2862079

File: f007049b1f0ed4a⋯.jpg (158.39 KB, 1024x683, 1024:683, george washington342.jpg)

>>2862030

Destroying the constitution and various monuments to the founders isn't about erasing history but about eliminating the foundations of the cult of America and American exceptionalism. To American reactionaries these aren't just artifacts but holy relics. They must be eliminated if we want american reaction to fade away.


 No.2862084

File: 5634735043ec507⋯.jpg (1.03 MB, 1367x1707, 1367:1707, shut the fuck up liberal k….jpg)

>>2862082

lol triggered liberal detected


 No.2862086

>>2862082

Went for a run, cooked some food, took a shower and this nigger is STILL pouring his assmad in every thread.


 No.2862120

>>2862103

>/leftypol/ crumbles when I GOMAD?

Wut? Do you think I go for a run and eat food because a /pol/yp goes schizo? Lul, we get your kind here daily.


 No.2862148

>>2862079

A lot of historical artifacts were once the holy relics of some faith or another. Still they should be properly preserved in museums so that future generations can understand the society that came before their own.


 No.2862149

>>2862148

Just take some pictures of them lmao. Stop being so dramatic about your bourgeois relics getting rekt.


 No.2862151

>>2862149

The Vatican and shit looks amazing though


 No.2862156

This thread was going so well before the ChristCom showed up with his cultural revolution nonsense.

The fact is you don’t need to smash statues or destroy cultural relics to achieve Socialism, and besides the majority of America is White and Christian. You can’t ever hope to win them over with unfair expectations, and the fact is you need them.

And don’t give me this “See this is why Settlers is right” screed so many of you types go into. There’s nothing keeping anyone from respectfully retiring the constitution to a museum under socialism. Nor will destroying a statue of Washington accomplish anything tangible besides insulting and angering a ton of people.


 No.2862173

>>2862048

>if you truly want socialism without the possibility of bourgeois restoration, then right of return and the enfranchisement of native Americans is the best defense you could ask for.

I mean this isn't like Palestinians who are legally prevented from returning to their homes, any Cherokee guy in Oklahoma can move to where his ancestors lived before the Trail of Tears. The problem is that even if they all moved back they'd still be poor as shit and have no land, and white people would still abuse them with little legal recourse. What America needs is land reform like in Cuba and cultural protection and guaranteed political representation like in the USSR.

>>2862156

Nah, every reactionary figure in American history should be denounced as such, coddling spooked proletarians like that will keep them reactionary too. The best bet is to hold up progressive individuals, organizations, movements, etc. from our history as models. Talk about the gains of Reconstruction (and its betrayal at the hands of the ruling class), the radical unionism of the IWW, racial/national liberation movements of the 60s like the BPP and AIM, and so on. Show the working class that there's always been something worth fighting for here and people willing to fight for it.


 No.2862242

>>2862048

>>2862079

>>2862173

These idpol types are why socialism is going nowhere in America. The entire left is infected by postcolonial brainworms.


 No.2862291

File: 509f8d9507852d3⋯.jpg (122.18 KB, 576x910, 288:455, Uncle George.jpg)

>>2862173

I'm going to be very candid here and hope that we can have a mature discussion.

I'm white. My family has been a part of this country for as long as we've been a country, and on my mother's side we were Americans a good few years before independence too. To be perfectly frank, my family's history is woven in the history of this country, and I know a great many other people who love this country as much as I do, even if their family hasn't been here for as long as mine has.

Now, there's nothing more depressing and off-putting to me, than hearing the total sadistic glee which some culture warriors (even of the non-idpol variety) talk about "smashing" the supposedly bourgeois culture of pre-revolution America. Then the talk turns into repatriation of native land and the usual gleeful talk of destroying monuments. All this stinks of a kind of "trans-nationalism", a desire to change the past because of personal reasons more than anything. I'm not so obsessed with the past sins of my country, and I can guarantee that many if not most Americans share this sentiment, that I believe we need a total break from the past complete with crowds whipped into a frenzy smashing statues of beloved national figures.

Now, for the betterment of the cause of Socialism in America, we will inevitably have to talk about race because race makes such a large part of our country's history. I suppose we're unique in that the people we displaced this country from still live and exist as separate entities with multi-million dollar Hollywood blockbusters romanticizing and publicizing their fall, whilst the same cannot be said for–say–the Gauls, Brythonic Celts, proto-Europeans, and basically every other group which has existed because the history of the world is filled with the history of displacement and war over limited resources. It can also be said that our country was a republic founded by men, rather than a complicated transformation and consolidation of various feudal monarchies into what roughly outlined the modern European nation-state of today. The situation in America is thus complex, and I don't believe European solutions work for American problems.

In regards to Washington, I'm well aware of the things he did that would probably be considered criminal today, such as the displacement of natives. Similarly our country conquered its way to the west coast. This happened. It's done. Now we have the complex situation of dealing with people who descended from settlers who arrives maybe 100 or 200 years ago living on land right next to people whose forefathers may have lived there 400 years ago. To complicate matters further, in many cases the beloved founders of our country are responsible for several of these modern groups forebears losing their land. So while we rightly celebrate them for winning our independence, founding our country, and making us "strong", the people we defeated exist beside us today.

Perhaps the most cynical analysis would say that our fault was not completely culturally destroying the people in lands we conquered (after all, who other than larpers contests the Turks claim to Istanbul and Anatolia today?) but the fact is these people still exist and we're essentially celebrating our gain at their loss.

To destroy our statues though, and sneer at/denounce the founding figures of our country though, would be utterly infuriating and intolerable to many white Americans who see this as just as much their country as anyone else's. I personally don't with to associate with people who have such a vitriolic hatred for the founders of our country.

So respectfully, these people are a part of our history. We admire them for the virtuous qualities they displayed. We admire them for making us powerful and leading us excellently in the early years of our republic. There's nothing wrong with that, and our admiration for these men doesn't come at the cost of any peoples' dignity, nor do we wish to sacrifice our own dignity for theirs.

If Socialism is going to be American, it has to address race. I see no better way other than continuing to respect the heroes in every race's respective communities, warts and all, and agree to respect every race's dignity while working in a combined, integrated effort to stand today in solidarity with workers of all creeds and colors.


 No.2862298

American issues are not solved by European Solutions. Race must be addressed by leftists in the Western World. This is a must. However, working class whites do feel isolated by these discussions of race. I am from the working class, and every single white person I talk to feels isolated when discussing issues of race. In my opinion, in order to make communism/far left wing views more popular, we must appeal to the working class white person. The Western World is mostly white. We must start focusing on two fronts in my opinion: 1. on the fact that the Western World sends the children of the proletariat to die off in foreign lands, and 2. that CEOs and owners of corporations (usually white) send off American jobs to foreign lands in order to pay less and that this is the fault of the (usually white)CEOs, NOT the fault of foreign workers.

We must start focusing more attention on the white citizens of the Western World, and I personally believe that the only way we could even have the majority of white people talking about left wing politics is via arguments against the economics of capitalism and imperialism, and then we can talk about social issues like race.


 No.2862304

Fact of the matter is, is that the average white person DOES feel isolated and somewhat on shaky ground when discussing race. We must first win over white people via economic arguments and arguments against imperialism, and only then can we discuss issues about race in the West. I am a minority (Indian), and I formed this view from talking to white people, many who voted for Trump. Feel free to criticize this viewpoint.


 No.2862329

File: 0b228328fce0233⋯.png (193.21 KB, 665x1000, 133:200, 2aac3bd7c791ba12573dbb1fb8….png)

>>2862298

>>2862304

I'm glad to see some positive feedback to this, and I have a confession to make.

A few years ago I fell straight into /pol/ shittery. I mean, I didn't really have much of an actual, visceral hatred against minorities–in fact funny enough I was surrounded by a lot of them at work and we got along perfectly fine, my Muslim customers loved me–but when race issues did come up in online discussions I'd be the first to start spouting fire and brimstone stuff and drop terrible racial epithets.

My transformation into that kind of /pol/lack, well a lot of it was just being isolated in the real world, but part of it was a lashing out at what I saw as an unfair and stilted discussion about race that dominated almost every political conversation I had, and soon even gave the appearance of worming its way into entertainment that I used as an escape from my problems.

It felt isolating, yeah, but most of all it felt (and still feels) just plain unfair. I was born White, I was born in America, and I was born a man. I didn't have many friends growing up, and I tried to be as nice as I could while minding my own business, then I'd go on to these online discussions and I'd hear "Well there's not enough of this group here, and there's not enough representation of that", and soon enough this call for diversity seemed to transform into this insufferable, passive aggressive contempt. I started noticing this in the real world too, hearing conversations about how "Ugh, there's just SOOOO many White People here" and while I was attending college, it felt like there was just this huge emphasis on race: "Deconstructing Whiteness" this and "Abolishing Whiteness" that, and it came across in my classes like there were two standards in place: one for minorities, one for whites and especially white men.

Like as an example, a professor of mine in this art history class I had to take for general ed, she talked about the conversion of pagan tribes in Africa and South America in this tone like, "Catholic priests would go to pagan tribes and destroy these beautiful idols they worshipped because it was against their religion, and they robbed the world of a piece of history by doing that", and then when it came time to talk about the cultural practices of those same tribes, she'd speak in this flowery, psuedo-spiritual jumbo. The caste system of the polynesians was justified because "They believed in mana and if you were born of a lower caste, with less mana, it was believed you'd be putting your life at risk by touching chiefs and priests because their mana was so powerful" or even "Aztec human sacrifice was this very ritualistic, beautiful affair. It was believed the gods sacrificed themselves everyday to keep the world running, so in turn the people were sacrificed to the gods to repay and fuel them and preserve the world."

It's incredibly frustrating to hear this open contempt when people talk about a group you happen to be a part of. When you try to voice your concerns, you're met with this really infantile mockery: "Aww, did I hurt da poor widdle white boy's fragile feelings? Q.Q"

Eventually, I started treating any conversation of race with open disgust and contempt. I believed you couldn't have any kind of equitability, if you were part of the majority you were just expected to give and give and give and you get nothing in return. When I heard other people say "we need to have an honest discussion about race" or "white people, you need to address race" I began to think what they were really saying is "let us lecture you about how you're terrible and we hate you and why don't you give us some of your stuff to make up for how terrible a person you are?"

Then the idea of being doxxed, losing your job, and harassed by the scumbag side of twitter just made me keep quiet. So you got all this anger growing inside you, no way to vent it in small doses, no way to even really clamp down on what seems to be making you angry, or if you do you get all these people calling you a terrible person or a racist or misogynist or what have you, and then these far right types come along and they say "Nah you're right to be angry, aren't these people just crazy? Listen, this didn't come out of the blue, don't you find it suspicious that all this anger seems to be directed at white people? Let me tell you who I think is behind it!" And you start falling for their pied piper routine.


 No.2862333

>>2862329

Exactly. I understand the mindset very well because even though I'm not white, I literally was a fucking /pol/ack. It is true that in the modern day, there is a lot of discussion about things like "white privilege" and such, and these conversations can be VERY isolating to the average white person. If you're a poor white person, you think to yourself "what kind of privilege do I have? I'm poor!" And that is why I do believe that, while the discussion of race is extremely important to discuss, it is not the ideaa way for white people to become interested in far left politics. Economic discussions, in my eyes, are much more likely to help white people become more interested in left wing views.


 No.2862338

File: 77907db3851e89f⋯.png (328.41 KB, 2298x2300, 1149:1150, Sri-Yukteswar.png)

>>2862329

W E W L A D

E

W

L

A

D

I love your picture because someone finally drew Alyoonuh as a tranny cat that take's porky dick if you flash her a few $$$. /leftypol/ BO's mental image is that communist cat kek.

Enough joking around though. Once Civil War 2.0 erupts in America it will be a bloodbath where only the color of your skin and/or ethnic group matters. How do you feel about that? We're nothing but worthless pawns that will tear each other apart like animals in a society with false equivalence and equality once the time is right.

>>2862333

>333

>Illuminati trips checked

We will all be sacrificed in the bloodbath. Only some people will retain the sanity needed to keep their ethnics well hidden…yes indeed.


 No.2862485

>>2860702

The first flag pleases my autism, I’ve always hated our flags asymmetry.


 No.2862488

>>2862291

A free bourgeoisie should be armed and diciplined and be able to buy a private militia is what Washington meant.


 No.2862492

>>2862338

>only the color of your skin and/or ethnic group matters

How will you even know who is who when all of you are just mystery meat mongrels

Will the 1/64th Irishman ally with the 1/128 German against the unholy 1/4 McDonalds grease man?


 No.2862512

>>2862338

> Alyoonuh as a tranny cat that take's porky dick if you flash her a few $$$.

I mean minus the tranny part that's literally all of us under capitalism. We're all whores for porky.


 No.2862526

>>2862242

Please explain to me how exactly I'm supporting idpol. Is it because I mentioned anti-racist organizations like the Black Panthers?

>>2862291

We come from similar backgrounds; on my father's side I'm descended from British colonists, and I even had a distant relative on the Mayflower. As for loving our country, you seem to be conflating two different things. There are many things I love about America: our artistic traditions, the radical history I mentioned in my first post, the beautiful land. But if I'm an American, why should i love the Founding Fathers? If African Americans are my countrymen, why should I love the people who enslaved them? Why should I love the aristocrats whose reactionary ideas continue to poison the minds of my people? Why should I love the politicians whose policies of genocidal land theft set the stage for the destruction of our ecology? Yes, I'm an American, and I do feel an attachment to my country. But I have nothing but contempt for the vampires whose statues you now defend.

>>2862298

>>2862304

I don't see why we have to separate economic issues from racial issues to win over white proletarians. The organizations which had the most success in organizing white workers before the Second World War were the IWW and the CPUSA, both of which emphasized anti-racism. And in the post-WWII era, the height of class consciousness among white workers occurred in the 60s, alongside the radical anti-racist movements. In fact, I believe that emphasizing the importance of racial justice is not only a moral good, it's the *only* way to get white workers on our side. Without combatting white supremacy, we'll never get white workers to separate themselves ideologically from the white bourgeoisie.


 No.2862548

>>2862526

I don't see why we have to separate economic issues from racial issues to win over white proletarians. The organizations which had the most success in organizing white workers before the Second World War were the IWW and the CPUSA, both of which emphasized anti-racism. And in the post-WWII era, the height of class consciousness among white workers occurred in the 60s, alongside the radical anti-racist movements. In fact, I believe that emphasizing the importance of racial justice is not only a moral good, it's the *only* way to get white workers on our side. Without combatting white supremacy, we'll never get white workers to separate themselves ideologically from the white bourgeoisie.

I agree with this except perhaps the lat few sentences, of which I'm unsure. USSR were also based on race issues to the degree they were relevant.

I came to the radical left through anti-idpol, and am still sympathetic to the sentiment behind it. But I also feel less and less convince by the anti-idpol types who say we must not "divert" attention from class issues. I personally believe radical anti-racism has to be a visible part of the program in order to clue the proles of different races together. The crucial thing is how we propagate this to the white workers. "White privilege" is a less than useless talking point here. I think we wouldn't have to bitch about idpol so much if more of us white comrades were actually doing the work of organizing and educating the workers in ways that are accessible to them.


 No.2862549

>>2862548 (me)

Forgot to greentext the first paragraph. also, I'm not a Burger but thought to chime in because this is an increasingly relevant discussion in the West in general.


 No.2862670

>>2862488

The 2nd Amendment, as it exists, has always allowed the American people to exercise some degree of independence from their government. It's a good thing, and if the founders intended for it to only apply to private armies paid for by the bourgeoisie, they would've said so.

>>2862526

Well, why should anyone love any of their national heroes? Alfred the Great defended Britain from Viking invasion, but that was to some extent just to secure his own rule. Islamic caliphs conquered their way across the modern Muslim world, but many also lived humbly and tried to alleviate their followers' poverty as best they could.

The founding fathers did in fact own slaves, and yes they did lead campaigns against natives. These are poor actions taken because the world isn't perfect, and I find that any of us judging historical figures for their sins is a bit hypocritical on our part because we've never been burdened with the sword of damocles over our necks. We can sit back, safe and comfortable, with perfect hindsight, and condemn people for one or another failures of their administration, not having to deal with the stress of trying to lead millions of people in a hostile and dangerous environment as an entirely new and untested country.

All in all, consider how many liberal revolutions end with a slide back into dictatorship. Consider how many constitutions even modern western nations have gone through. Consider what the founders could have done but didn't. That they steered the American state as they did upon its founding, I think, makes them some of the greatest administrators in human history.

To say that we should only build statues of morally "clean" individuals, especially ones whose heroics are centuries into our past, is an unrealistic and wholly inhuman standard. Worse than that, I think it's a storybook narrative that creates an incomplete view of the human subject: we accept racism is bad, we find out that a "good" person was once racist, now we argue that "good" person has now become a "bad" person and the bad they've done wholly undoes the good.

Another example: I love H.P. Lovecraft's mythos. I've read so much of his works, and I also feel a special sympathy for the man because our backgrounds were so similar in many ways. Yet when it comes to analyzing him and his works, the taint of his racism and reactionary politics seems to undo all of his talent as a writer, and his achievement in essentially pioneering a new field of horror. Such that now people spend all their time judging works that are based on Lovecraft's originals by whether they "address" his racism.

Lovecraft the boy, meanwhile, was isolated from most other people for most of his life, kept locked up in his house by his abusive mother whose sanity was degrading in front of him, he struggled with poverty almost his entire life, and in spite of that all he still created a body of works impressive even by today's standards.

It may be that I'm Catholic, but how can us humble little people sit back and scrutinize the finest details of people infinitely more ambitious than us, and stand in total moral condemnation of them for sins that fate thankfully never tested us with. Who knows how we would have acted, for better or worse, when dealing with all the issues Lovecraft or whomever dealt with.

>>2862548

The problem is that it's so easy to paint racial issues as just racial issues and divorce them from class issues. Beyond that, even in discussing racial justice at its time, the IWW as far as I know, never approached the topic of denouncing and shaming the founding fathers. They had the benefit of focusing radically on the present society, rather than discussing what statues had to be smashed.


 No.2862683

>>2862526

>The organizations which had the most success in organizing white workers before the Second World War were the IWW and the CPUSA, both of which emphasized anti-racism.

Anti-rascism isn’t kicking white people out of middle america and giving the land to natives because postcolonial brainworms.

>>2862526

>And in the post-WWII era, the height of class consciousness among white workers occurred in the 60s, alongside the radical anti-racist movements.

No it wasn’t. In the 60s the only whites who were involved in leftism were collage students. I’d say today is probably the highest (and only) time in the postwar era where working class (non collage educated) whites are interested in leftism.


 No.2862708

File: 7d50ff87b39f97c⋯.jpeg (2.75 MB, 4032x3024, 4:3, 7EB26C6D-0187-4E38-8490-6….jpeg)

>>2861961

Getting back to this point, I think we should start by looking at all the American revolutionaries and radicals we already have. Thomas Paine, Fredrick Douglass, John Brown, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Emma Goldman, W.E.B. DuBoise, Eugene V. Debs, Huey P. Newton, and so forth. Look at what radical tradition we have to start with.

Then consider the particular features of American civilization (or do this first, either order works). It's a physically large country which despite heading towards a post-industrial stage, still has immense natural resources, including enough farmland, fossil fuels, and minerals to be totally self-sufficient for an extended period of time with only a relatively minor drop in the standard of living. It is a hub of communications, science, culture, and transportation. A US passport will get you almost anywhere, and a wallet full of US currency will get you farther still.

That keystone status means that ushering in proletarian socialism in this country may be a tall order, but doing so would leave the path wide open for world revolution. It's a situation fundamentally different from any nation that has had a socialist revolution so far. The IMF just said in the papers this morning that 75% of world economies are now in a downturn, compared to just 30% one year ago, and they attribute that largely to Trump's actions in international trade. Seizing the United States would leave throw the capitalist system everywhere else straight into crisis mode.

Another thing is, the United States is so physically large and diverse that a monolithic national struggle is likely impractical until much later in the game. The continental US is about the size of continental Europe; Texas alone is about the size or France. The strongly federal structure means that gaining power in one state or even just a single city would provide us considerable room to demonstrate our ideology in practice, as well as create bases of operation from which wider campaigns may be carried out unmolested.

Also, unlike most European states, the US has never really been mono-ethnic. The panmixia of ancestries is rather uncommon. Only other examples that come to mind are South Africa, Brazil, and Indonesia. This has always made the racial question far more salient than in Western Europe, which did not really start becoming diverse in that way until after WWII. We also still have a long chain of unresolved issues with the Native Americans, who are themselves a diverse assortment of cultures and lifestyles.

So I think there is good reason to believe that America needs its own school of socialism. Those who cry "American exceptionalism" often in the exact same conversation then claim that America is exceptionally bad in some way. Clearly then we can all agree that America is unique in some non-trivial way, and I think that demands a theory and practice suited for it.


 No.2862955

>>2862670

>It may be that I'm Catholic, but how can us humble little people sit back and scrutinize the finest details of people infinitely more ambitious than us, and stand in total moral condemnation of them for sins that fate thankfully never tested us with. Who knows how we would have acted, for better or worse, when dealing with all the issues Lovecraft or whomever dealt with.

This is insane lmao, by that logic I can't judge Hitler because I don't know how I personally would have acted in Germany in the 30s. Please stop respecting genocidaires.

>>2862708

>Also, unlike most European states, the US has never really been mono-ethnic. The panmixia of ancestries is rather uncommon. Only other examples that come to mind are South Africa, Brazil, and Indonesia.

And basically every other country in the Americas, and India, and China, and pretty much all of Subsaharan Africa.

>So I think there is good reason to believe that America needs its own school of socialism.

Marxism has worked for a wide variety of countries all over the world, so let's stick with that.


 No.2862977

>>2862955

>China

which is 92% Han.

>>2862955

>Marxism has worked for a wide variety of countries all over the world, so let's stick with that.

No one is advocating breaking with Marxism. All that guy is saying is that the Material Conditions in America right now are different than those of twentieth century Europe, and as such new theory to analyze this must be developed.


 No.2865905

>>2860063

Fellow Americlap here.

Our country has a lot of problems. Americans (for the most part) don't know any better because of decades of red scare propaganda and lies which have been repeated ad nauseum for so many years that even genuine leftists have bought into them and they themselves capitulate whenever they're brought up. They pull the 'no true socialism' fallacy and as a result, have this idealized fantasy that only their untried utopian version of the system is the only one that works, and guess what? Right wingers are right to call them on their bullshit.

But if you actually make a stand, defend the history of revolution, and challenge them on their bullshit, you will find that all of the tired old arguments fall apart and don't hold up to any scrutiny:

>Communism has killed 100 million people

No it hasn't, the people who came out and wrote the black book of communism even came out and admitted that they deliberately inflated the death tolls.

>Russia was an authoritarian dictatorship no better than the fascists / nazis.

Russia fought to saved the world from the nazis while France and Britain sat on their asses hoping the Germans would win.

>Life under socialism sucked.

Life under socialism drastically improved at a pace far more rapid than that under capitalism.

>Socialism doesn't work

Socialism turned Russia; a backwards 3rd world feudalistic country into a world superpower rivaling the US in might and even surpassing the US technologically (they beat us to space).

>Something something human nature

Anthropologists and evo biologists generally agree that what has allowed us to come so far as a species is our ability to cooperate, not fight one another.

>Something something innovation

See point about the Russians beating the US to space.

See how easy that was? More leftists need to be willing to take a stand and do this because debunking bourgeoi lies is the first step to rallying people to our cause.


 No.2865911

>>2862670

>The 2nd Amendment, as it exists, has always allowed the American people to exercise some degree of independence from their government. It's a good thing, and if the founders intended for it to only apply to private armies paid for by the bourgeoisie, they would've said so.

The Second Amendment was put into place because porky and co. didn't want to fork up the pay for an actual army and instead rely on a semi-feudal conception of a militia. Of course that completely backfired in 1812 and they never got around to amending it until now.


 No.2865917

To be honest ive had the idea of attempting to reintroduce american socialist figures as new american national entities such as debs, big bill, and fred hampton and show them in a light of actual american national heroes that the anti commoner porky tries to smother and that internationalist spcialist value is a value thats more american than porky wants us to believe

On an unrelated note ive always had issues with the concept of a one party state and like the idea of co-opting the american system of multiple parties thst are working for the same goal at the end of the day while cointelproing and sabotaging other liberal and reactionary parties like they did to ours


 No.2865919

>>2865917

And just for the sake of clarification, of course that goal being communism


 No.2865926

>>2865917

>On an unrelated note ive always had issues with the concept of a one party state

That's the liberal in you speaking. I despise political parties but having one is a thousand times better than having many.

>and like the idea of co-opting the american system of multiple parties thst are working for the same goal at the end of the day while cointelproing and sabotaging other liberal and reactionary parties like they did to ours

Lol you clearly are the most historically illiterate fuck on the planet. Are you serious totally unaware of the history of rival socialist parties and unions tearing each other apart battling for dominance of the movement? It's why none of there efforts ever got anywhere outside of Russia.

Advocating a multi-party state ought to be grounds for being kicked out of any socialist organization. You're literally just saying that dividing working people and forcing them to compete with each other is somehow a good think. One Big Union, cocksucker.


 No.2865936

>>2865926

Im aware of having a one party state failed to prevent revisionism. Capitalist powers manage to have multiole parties, yet prove to work together at the end of the day.


 No.2865939

>>2865936

>Capitalist powers manage to have multiole parties, yet prove to work together at the end of the day.

Because they are driven by a common class interest. The revisionism in the Soviet Union was done partly because the conservatives refused to innovate and push closer to socialism, instead preferring to hold the party line where Stalin left it, and partly because politician class members like Yeltsin realized that there was far more to be made in spoils if you went capitalist rather than socialist. So those who advocated for communism would not fight for it with the material conditions at home, and the rest of the party was a bunch of opportunists and career climbing fucks.


 No.2865941

>>2865926

Within each scenario, marxist leninist countries that were not overthrown through military intervention collapsed under the weight of revisionist elements within their higher up members and everyone being forced to tow with that revisionist party line. Each of those socialist groups infighting involved groups who had entirely different ideals on what the state should be. I think something could be learned of having political parties with compareable levels of difference between the democrat and republican being allowed. They dont tear apart their regime to kill eachother despite their ideologicsl differences.


 No.2865945

>>2865939

Regardless of how or why, it's clearly a hazard that exists whenever one party apparatus has a monopoly on deciding what socialism is. Having multiple, legitimately independent parties allows for a "loyal opposition" to prevent conceit and self-serving behaviors from sinking in, because the workers can swap out officials without the peril of another armed revolution.


 No.2865947

>>2865939

>The revisionism in the Soviet Union was done partly because the conservatives refused to innovate and push closer to socialism, instead preferring to hold the party line where Stalin left it

Yes and when all is said and done, when the top vanguard officials who were cutting edge theorists croak, and only their dogma is what was allowed, what is there to prevent this from happening again?

>and partly because politician class members like Yeltsin realized that there was far more to be made in spoils

See previous comment. If this level of corruption seeps into the upper levels not much can be done to stop them.

>So those who advocated for communism would not fight for it with the material conditions at home, and the rest of the party was a bunch of opportunists and career climbing fucks.

My point being for this is that in a centralized, single party, when revisionism or corruption reaches its highest levels history has shown it causes it to fall apart like russia or drop the goals of communism like China. With another intellectual base being able to challenge this core one this allows some more breathing room in spotting this bullshit. Rather than everyone thinking they must still take that one path the posthumous theorist set as the party line.


 No.2865948

>>2865945

Yeah you get what im trying to say


 No.2865949

>>2865945

>>2865947

The thing is that this is not limited to just a single-party model, it is endemic to having a political class that is not representative to the will of the proletariat and pushing for the ultimate goal of achieving communism. It would happen to any system regardless of safeguards if those conditions are in place. Splitting the one party into several does not solve that fundamental issue.


 No.2865958

>>2865949

The answer to this question is just proletarian democracy. So long as the state itself is run by the people and accountable to the people, it will not become revisionist. As Lenin put it:

>The Commune, therefore, appears to have replaced the smashed state machine “only” by fuller democracy: abolition of the standing army; all officials to be elected and subject to recall. But as a matter of fact this “only” signifies a gigantic replacement of certain institutions by other institutions of a fundamentally different type. This is exactly a case of "quantity being transformed into quality": democracy, introduced as fully and consistently as is at all conceivable, is transformed from bourgeois into proletarian democracy; from the state (= a special force for the suppression of a particular class) into something which is no longer the state proper.

>It is still necessary to suppress the bourgeoisie and crush their resistance. This was particularly necessary for

the Commune; and one of the reasons for its defeat was that it did not do this with sufficient determination.

>The organ of suppression, however, is here the majority of the population, and not a minority, as was always the case under slavery, serfdom, and wage slavery. And since the majority of people itself suppresses its oppressors, a 'special force" for suppression is no longer necessary! In this sense, the state begins to wither away. Instead of the special institutions of a privileged minority (privileged officialdom, the chiefs of the standing army), the majority itself can directly fulfil all these functions, and the more the functions of state power are performed by the people as a whole, the less need there is for the existence of this power.


 No.2865968

>>2865958

Multi-party dumbass here. I do agree with Lenin's critique here of anarchists and the Paris commune. However, a single party line leaves vulnerability to corruption and revisionism among higher up party officials, as the Soviet Union and China has shown. Thus there needs to be some form of coexisting intellectual base that is different enough to be able to challenge revisionism and call out corruption when present yet not too different as to be willing to completely tear apart the the entire system.


 No.2865976

>>2865936

>Capitalist powers manage to have multiole parties, yet prove to work together at the end of the day

They cooperate on a few core issues like union-busting and military expansionism. That is it, don't overstate it.

>>2865941

>I think something could be learned of having political parties with compareable levels of difference between the democrat and republican being allowed. They dont tear apart their regime to kill eachother despite their ideologicsl differences.

I'm not going to respect your intelligence here, because I consider your braindead arguments an insult to mine. The GOP and dems have fucking torn this country into a million pieces dividing the population by race, national origin, sex, romantic orientation, state, region etc. etc. They have used every possible tactic they can do divide people to serve their own ends, and it has been spectacularly successful in ruining the labor movement.

So I'll call your suggestion that we should emulate them out for what it is: a sad, sad joke. Because I don't believe you have a single rational argument to support your claims, you just have a leftover emotional attachment to multi-party competition that you don't want to let go. Trying to get people to cooperate with multiple parties is as absurd as saying firms will cooperate in a market economy. You cannot just set up a system that encourages competition then simply sweet-talk them into playing nice with each other. Fuck off, dipshit.


 No.2865978

The ban on factions in the USSR was introduced at a time of violent civil war. Why does anyone think this is applicable today? We're not fighting a fucking war here. Meanwhile, sectarian fragmentation and marginalization is a massive problem in the contemporary left. An ecosystem of tiny micro-sects who all hate each other because of minor disagreements is useless compared to a potential broad-base socialist party where differences of opinion are tolerated and channeled productively through an internal democratic process.

If your commie org can't handle disagreement without cracking up or resorting to internal repression, it doesn't deserve political power.


 No.2865985

>>2865976

>I'm not going to respect yourintelligence here, because I consider your braindead arguments an insult to mine.

>you just have a leftover emotional attachment

>Fuck off, dipshit.

Someone's projecting. Im not the one insulting the other person and considering the argument "an indult to mine."

>you just have a leftover emotional attachment to multi-party competition that you don't want to let go.

I have referenced multiple times the results of the fall of the Soviet Union and China as what motivated my stance. If you looked at what wobblyposter stated, he also posted a similar statement as to why one party systems show some weakness. I may not be an anarchist, but i do think they make good points sometimes.

>They cooperate on a few core issues like union-busting and military expansionism. That is it, don't overstate it.

>The GOP and dems have fucking torn this country into a million pieces dividing the population by race, national origin, sex, romantic orientation, state, region etc. etc. They have used every possible tactic they can do divide people to serve their own ends, and it has been spectacularly successful in ruining the labor movement.

One statement implies a large level of disunity while the other implies a large amount of cooperation on multiple levels through multiple different forms. They also cooperate in the upholding of capitalism within the united states. What is their level of cooperation really?


 No.2865992

>>2865978

I also completely agree with this as well. While we do not control the monopoly of power within the borders of the United states i see it as a necessity to work as a single organization. However, we must evaluate where those ideas of handling difference in opinions came from and if they are useful in the current material conditions and what their effects were within the long term.


 No.2866176

>>2865926

The GDR was multi-pary.

>>2865917

Post-revolution all political parties should be disbanded. Or turned into nothing more than think tanks.


 No.2866415

>>2865985

>I have referenced multiple times the results of the fall of the Soviet Union and China as what motivated my stance. If you looked at what wobblyposter stated, he also posted a similar statement as to why one party systems show some weakness. I may not be an anarchist, but i do think they make good points sometimes.

I don't need to be educated on why single-party states are unneeded, as I've already made it quite clear more than once that I despise them. Unfortunately, your criticisms of them are wholly liberal and uncommunistic. And thus utterly useless.

You can blame your own lack of imagination for this, and your inability to think outside of the mainstream liberal worldview. When you hear "one-party state" you seem to think of a Stalinist-style party and nothing else. Which is quite odd, as you seem to believe parties can be organized in a more universal manner based on popular rule of all it's members. So why does this suddenly change when one party becomes successful enough to rule on it's own? Does a working-class party suddenly collapse into a gerontocracy when it reaches a certain arbitrary number of members or votes?

I hate to be the one to tell you this, but every political party desires a one-party state. They have to, because the system of electoral competition forces them to do so to survive. This is equally true for parties of working people, the intelligentsia, bourgeois, and middle-class parties.

>One statement implies a large level of disunity while the other implies a large amount of cooperation on multiple levels through multiple different forms. They also cooperate in the upholding of capitalism within the united states. What is their level of cooperation really?

Not sure why you even bothered to type this trash when the text you quoted answers your question. The parties cooperate when it is necessary for them to survive, and fight otherwise. It's not something you have to study political science for years to understand.


 No.2866421

>>2859432

>uninvolved in electoral politics

You figure this is a good thing in a country where political consciousness is centered entirely around electoral politics?


 No.2866422

File: 62558bc4cba0744⋯.jpeg (16.71 KB, 212x236, 53:59, F63E7316-81E1-44EB-A58D-D….jpeg)

>>2862338

>this whole post


 No.2866429

>>2866415

Im gonna be completely honest here, and believe what you want but tbh i nornally believe parties should be abolished, work and school just got me into a drained headspace where i begam equivocating allowing factions and critique of party line with multi party. Again stressing i believe once the socialist state is set up parties should be banned. I can say that my energy for imagination has been drained as of late however;

>your inability to think outside of the mainstream liberal worldview

This requires a shit ton of logical assumptions on various issues outside the scope of the debate. All i will say is this.

Regardless of this, the banning of factions that was laid down by Lenin at the time of civil war as previously stated by another poster in the enforcement of party line.

>So why does this suddenly change when one party becomes successful enough to rule on it's own?

Because a party becoming successful enough to rule on its own is established in a single moment of time. It does not account for how the party handles newer challenges after this moment. What happens some time down the line when the party has been infiltrated by those only seeking power? What if that person gets in a high position? Will the psrty be popular then?


 No.2866430

>>2866429 (me)

Fuck im tired and i meant to say thst the banning of factionalism, the hierarchical nature of the party structure lead to the seizure of power of stalin and later on people even more corrupt in that bit after the assumptions part




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / baphomet / choroy / dbv / eros / f / int / miku / vore ]