/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"I ain’t driving twenty minutes to riot"

Mode: Thread

Max message length: 8192


Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3


(used to delete files and postings)


Remember to follow the rules

/leftypol/ is a non-sectarian board for leftist discussion. Join our matrix! https://matrix.to/#/+leftychat:matrix.org

(41.05 KB 1024x576 bbc.jpg)
Brainworms Anonymous Anonymous 07/31/2020 (Fri) 16:56:25 No. 735071 [Reply] [Last]
a thread for all of us that have gone off the trolley due to or in regards to ideology l used to be a fairweather socialist out of a normal desire for a world where my human rights are guaranteed (food, housing, healthcare, education) but as l delved into it l've ended up sympathising with movements that offer even the slightest semblances of the former, l geniunely no longer mind authoritarianism of any kind (think nk), l would work 12h on a field (think funny cambodian school dropout land) if l know l have free housing even if it's fucking shit or free food even even if it's fucking shit (think uneducated romanian yokel land) etc. At this point l don't even know why l don't just go fully supporting the current capitalist neoliberal hell, it's not like l'm starving or homeless rn so maybe l could idealise any of my current sufferings This has gone so far that whenever l am irritated by something l think that how will l cope when barracks communism comes around and l no longer complain or find an easier way to do things, l'm currently fitting these tiles in my yard and instead of carrying them with a wheelbarrow that l had in my shed like a civilised human l just stacked them and carried them with my hands across the yard because it's the harder way, fair enough it's not a hard task but l find myself often doing mundane shit the harder way because l feel the easier way will make me a weak faggot, could drive to work (there's not even that much traffic) but instead l walk 4 km (again not like it's a hard thing) because in barracks communism l wouldn't have a car or comfort, l've even started seriously exercising because of this, been doing 500 pushups a day because l can't be weak Am l the only nutter like this?
1 post omitted.
>>735071 Peak alienation. You want to feel useful and a productive member of society. Or you're a fascist that pretends to be socialist. >>735083 What the fuck is wrong with you.
>>735071 That's a good thing. Get used to struggle. I personally started excercising (pushups,curls and running) simply to counter the le weak commie meme that is popular on the right. Got quite a bit of muscle in just half a year. Everyone needs to do shit like that. Especially with the hard times ahead of us.
>>735102 I am glad you personal improvement but do not ever think you will counter such memes. Right wing culture war stuff is entierly feelz>reelz. you could be pol's idea of peak mannliess, some lifting chad and you would still be a weak soyboy incel with no chin to people who have a vested interest in believing it.
>>735083 thanks la >>735102 good for you keep it up brother
>>735071 Unfortunately you aren't the only nutter like this, the left is packed to the fucking gills with psychos like you. It's extremely clear to me that not a single one of you have ever read Marx or taken him seriously - you don't seem to understand that communism is the logical endpoint of the progressive exclusion of human labor from the production process that characterises capitalist development. Marx's ideas seem to have been transmitted to you in a completely garbled form through a two-century long game of telephone played by fringe political cults and their glowie counterparts. >>735102 Sad. I exercise because it makes me fuck better.

Give us anti "an" cap memes to trigger ancaps Anonymous 07/31/2020 (Fri) 09:58:31 No. 734744 [Reply] [Last]
Arm the /leftypol/ with biggest arsenal of anti ancap memes please
19 posts and 9 images omitted.
(1.76 MB 202x206 1594243946515.gif)
>>734808 Jesus Christ.
>>734808 What the fuck, this is a proof they are scum on earth.
>>734808 Someone please reverse the roles in this pic.
(270.62 KB 500x606 1557418355678.png)

Is there an archive for /leftypol/? Anonymous 07/31/2020 (Fri) 18:13:39 No. 735236 [Reply] [Last]
I want to look at an old thread that I didn't save
(92.19 KB 680x386 bladerunnerspeech.jpg)
No. Your best bet for threads that aren't too old is using Bing/Yandex/Google to search for the URL and use their cache viewing function if the page hasn't been purged yet. If it's too old to still be there, it's a total crapshoot as to whether or not someone else manually saved it on archive.is And finally there's Wayback at archive.org, which for whatever reason only sporadically crawls BunkerChan. Though it actually did crawl h8chan a ton, so there's good odds an ancient h8chan /leftypol/ (or /leftpol/, /marx/, /anarcho/, etc.) thread has been archived. Finally, if you want to search dead threads, the only things still indexed by search engines are archive.is, and some "scraper" sites like Hola Forums that sort'a mirrored h8chan threads. Really though, I've been meaning to do whatever you're supposed to do to make Wayback crawl Bunkerchan properly.
>>735416 Thank you for the tip Found 1 of the threads I wanted to read with google and switching it to the "cached" option
(389.16 KB 1471x1020 Archive_-_V2.0.png)
>>735499 If you want to save it for posterity in a verifiable way, you can use archive.is on the Google cache.

(217.63 KB 656x631 SPOILER_623px-Path_Gob_Rat.png)
Anonymous 07/31/2020 (Fri) 19:36:49 No. 735414 [Reply] [Last]
Change my mind: Mls should be excluded from leftist spaces because they are not socialist
27 posts and 3 images omitted.
>>735448 i agreeing
>>735621 very funny jannies
>>735445 And.... Who controlled the state?
>>735575 Dotp is a State and I‘m an mlm
>>735434 >Supports state capitalism and thinks it is socialist in any way state capitalism is socialist in the sense that its an inevitable phase in the development of capitalism, predicted by Marx and Engels as a landmark on the road to the capitalist collapse into communism

RUSSIA Anonymous 07/29/2020 (Wed) 12:20:49 No. 729272 [Reply] [Last]
why did leftists abandon Russia in favor to defend china or remaining socialist state? Ive saw this discussion from a /pol/ tread.
46 posts and 3 images omitted.
(2.92 KB 160x160 Bullpoop.png)
>>734938 >There's nothing wrong with the theory of ultra-imperialism, Wow this is so wrong, how do I even ?! The theory of super-imperialism predicted there would be no WW2, because all the capitalists would unite in a global class war against the proletariat. Lenin was essentially correct in his predictions which gave the bolcheviks the correct theoretical understanding that allowed them to form the Soviet Union from the ashes of the inter-imperial WW1 war. So historically Lenin's theory was corroborated and Kautsky's was refuted. After the WW2 period you only had some global unity among capitalists in the cold war because they felt ideologically challenged by the Soviets as well as militarily blocked from engaging in imperialism. Once the Soviet union collapse this unity began to break down again. There was no socialist super-power in Kautsky's theory, and he also predicted that unity among capitalists would end wars, and the US is currently involved in something like 70 wars or "conflict theatres" at the moment. I call BS
>>734996 And yet WWIII never happened, and there's been no war between major capitalist powers for over 70 years. Only Cold War proxy fighting and asymmetrical wars like the USA vs. Iraq. When the world finally does return to multipolarity and the USA/EU/China/India start launching sorties against each other, then you can pronounce Lenin correct again.
>>735112 >there's been no war between major capitalist powers for over 70 years That doesn’t mean they aren’t still in opposition to to each other. The renewed rivalry between Russia and the US, as well as the brewing Cold War between China and the US, is evidence of the flaws in Kautsky’s thinking. The lack of direct confrontation likely has a lot more to do with MAD than anything else.
>>734730 >imperialism, export of capital Imperialism is simply when one state takes control of another by force.
>>734873 >>734880 If we take the material base as primary cause of imperialism, we have to analyze that Lenin's take on it has become more relevant as monopoly capitalism has intensified everywhere; particularly with the advent of the Cold War where capital was surprisingly unified against the socialist bloc. I am not sure that I would accept your claim that colonialism is simply the form of imperialism, considering colonialism existed since the 15th century, you can quote Lenin at me, I don't remember where he says this, if he did, I'd disagree. You seem to agree with Lenin's analysis in which specific social relations facilitate imperialism, but your point is that there can be "exceptions" and that Russia, for some reason, is such an "exception". >The nature of commodity markets is such that control over the maximum proportion of global supplies is imperative, even if the sector/company in question has no need of further supplies, they still have to control them to prevent competitors gaining access. Russia supplies fossil fuels under value, because it seeks to undermine the American grip on Europe with its fracking gas. It also supplies fossil fuels under value to most countries around it. They only demanded Ukraine to pay their tap because the US literally conducted a color revolution there and installed a horrifying Russophobic government. >So did the British and Dutch East India companies operate at a level of capital that promoted “cooperation and mutually beneficial trade”? That was the accumulation of capitalism itself, Russia doesn't need to subdue the entirety of Africa or something to further their own accumulation. There are many countries that are more developed in Russia with which Russia seeks mutual cooperation with. I see no evidence of Russia being a "special case" where imperialism exists without the economic conditions that enable it under capitalism. This leads me to believe that the primary metric to judge the character of Russia is an analysis undertaken by the article you ridiculed earlier.

(47.84 KB 584x174 wtf am i reading.png)
Monopoly & Concentration of Capital Anonymous 07/31/2020 (Fri) 14:32:49 No. 734900 [Reply] [Last]
Lately, I've been seeing this argument on social media, mostly from anti-monopolists & reformist-capitalist soc-dems, that neoliberalism is what socialism actually looks like when put into practice. Their reasoning remains... unclear to me, but from what I can gather, they conflate the two on the basis that they're both statist systems of government that favor concentrating power in the hands of government-backed monopolies that gradually eliminate economic competition and liberal democratic political norms. They write-off anarchists as romantic dunces and insist that the ownership of the means of production in a given industry, if nationalized, will gradually default into the hands of self-interested bureaucrats and capitalists. They accept Marx's claim that increased concentration of capital is inevitable, but the only panacea for this in their view is to constantly break up monopolies, stimulate small business competition, and invest in startups / entrepreneurs. The claim that interests me the most though is that Marxists who advocate for trust-busting and the dissolution of private monopolies are incoherent, since the ultimate goal of socialism is to enforce public ownership of those monopolies. To quote Eugene Debs: >As a socialist, therefore I hail the trust. I view its development with supreme satisfaction... The socialists want the trusts. When they are ripe, the people will be ready, and there will be a change of ownership and operation. I confess to being too much of a theorylet to argue this point one way or another, but it did get me wondering, what is the general consensus here on monopolies? Most of the time I see leftists deriding the expansion of monopoly power, but is that really incommensurate with Marxism? What do you think, /leftypol/, should the trusts be busted or should we let them ripen? Also, if anyone can recommend me some good books / articles on the topic, I'd really appreciate it.
15 posts and 2 images omitted.
>>735110 >IIRC, Matt Stoller specifically went on Matt Tracy's podcast and referred to American imperialism as "not that bad," then proceeded to wax lyrical on how U.S. Keynesians engineered the enduring prosperity and peace of post-WWII Europe (as opposed to, you know, taking all the past violence, crumbling it up, and sprinkling it like confetti across the developing world). Oh wow. Yeah, I think I remember that. I'm aware of him because I follow this stuff a little bit, but he just came across to me as like an idiot so I haven't paid much attention to him. But yeah this is like a desire for an FDR-style "left" imperialism, and his problem is that the gains of imperialism are not being redistributed among the American population like they used to be, and that is the result of bad actors like the monopolists who are just... bad, or it could be that the gains are just running out. This does challenge capital's prerogatives, yes, which is why they are opposed more than Trumpian nationalism is, which is more easily accommodated, but I think they're pretty much destined to lose. I also wouldn't say this is "fascist" like the old "social-fascist" insult used by communists in the early 1930s, but there is some points of commonality between Michael Tracey and some of these neo-fascist types like Richard Spencer who retweets his takes constantly. Two sides of the same coin. Of course you end up sounding like someone with a 🌊 in their Twitter bio saying "what does Michael Tracey, Matt Stoller, Richard Spencer, Bernie Sanders and Vladimir Putin have in common!?!?"
>>734900 >Their reasoning remains... unclear to me, but from what I can gather, they conflate the two on the basis that they're both statist systems of government that favor concentrating power in the hands of government-backed monopolies that gradually eliminate economic competition and liberal democratic political norms. First I agree that is one of the most retarded comments I’ve seen. Second if this is coming from socdems it makes sense since they are literally so retarded they can’t see any form of socialism beyond their own ideology. Namely that socialism is statism which concentrates power in monopolies under capitalism. The thing is we statism under socialism wouldn’t have the same effects, that’s the whole point of why we’re not reformist retards like socdems and why ‘half socialism with capitalism’ is a retarded combination.
>>735186 The state wasn't always mediating between bourgeois interests. In the 19th century, the state represented the interests of the bourgeoisie in general, such as providing a police, disciplining the masses, suppression of revolts, etc. - only later in the imperialist stage the state was forced to balance out competing monopoly interests, but my point is rather that the state back then was much more dislodged from capital as it is today, in neoliberalism. This is why I don't agree that just because the state transforms a public asset into another legal form, a public company of which it holds majority shares, doesn't mean the state retreats, it just merges with capital. This is why social democracy is impossible today, back when FDR and the British Labour Party after WWII were elected, the state still wasn't the same as capital. In state monopoly capitalism, this distinction is harder and harder draw (there will always be a distinction but it's much harder to find). I mean, today, it's easier to imagine a literal war with China than to imagine the American government nationalizing a single power plant. >Monopolies are still market forces, just in an advanced stage. True, I should have used the term "free competition". >>735138 >This is an excellent assessment. But then, what specifically differentiates neoliberal and socialist centralization? Does it hinge entirely on who owns the monopolies and the means of production? Yes, but you could also imagine corporations with huge employee ownership participating in this, the necessary rupture is simply a proletarian revolution that disentangles monopoly capital by turning it into public property that is rationally planned, e.g. where value indicators are mere book-keeping metrics, and where production is not organized according to value realization on the market.
>>735228 Yeah, Stoller's an interesting character. His analysis on how monopolies function is stellar, but any time he ventures outside that very narrow wheelhouse he ends up looking like an enormous jackass. I agree that people like him and Tracy aren't fash, though. They're just so brain poisoned with western chauvinism they genuinely can't conceive of U.S. hegemony as anything other than a beneficent force for democracy and freedom. I also agree that they're destined for irrelevancy, if for no other reason than the coming crises we face are so severe that anything resembling even-handed, managerial incrementalism will be laughed off like someone showing up to fight a wildfire with a squirt gun.
>>735247 >Yes, but you could also imagine corporations with huge employee ownership participating in this, the necessary rupture is simply a proletarian revolution that disentangles monopoly capital by turning it into public property that is rationally planned, e.g. where value indicators are mere book-keeping metrics, and where production is not organized according to value realization on the market. I see. Do you think there's any reason to expect such a revolution anywhere in the near(ish) future? Thank you so much for your detailed responses, by the way. This is fascinating stuff for me.

Idpol moderation? Anonymous 07/31/2020 (Fri) 18:37:54 No. 735269 [Reply] [Last]
I'm just worried we can't talk about the obvious racism and struggles of other people Some people face hardships that are not just in the realm of class, right? So why should we not talk about that? Vol Notice: Also discuss here: >>>/gulag/6006
Edited last time by antious666 on 07/31/2020 (Fri) 18:47:22.
15 posts omitted.
can the mods please un-bumplock this thread so i didnt waste an hour making this effortpost
>>735318 haha this
>>735568 Those authors still have a lot of pitfalls in their analysis of American racism being over-dramatic, proclaiming it to somehow be unique when it is not unique to the ethnic/religious/national/racial divisions that exist all over the world
>>735568 Also the Irish never "became" White, this is a myth, Italians and Irish people were always considered White, White was ALWAYS a synonym for European, the Irish and Italians were discriminated against for having a distinct cultural heritage from anglo-american society, they checked "White" on the U.S. census always. Secondly any reference to old America to America in the present day is facetious, America is fundamentally different from yesterday and you can't just use the past relations to somehow say that those translate into modern America, when it is clear that race relations are fundamnetally different from where they used to be, first of all white people used to be a category that was legally enshrined and protected (relative to non-white) and anyone who didn't fit the parameters of "Caucasian descent" was discriminated against, now however Asian Americans, a non-white group, are the most successful group in America by every metric, not just by income but also in incarceration rates and in getting killed by the police. Nigerian-Americans are also the most highly educated and one of the most succesful groups in America, despite having black-skin, why has this happened? Because during the 1960s the *Bourgeois democratic revolution was fully completed*, are there lingering racial disparities? Sure, but you can actually explain almost all of that solely through income inequality, including the racial wealth gap: "Aliprantis and his colleagues draw forth this critical point via predictions of what the current wealth gap would be like if income inequality had been eliminated in the 1960s....They then adjusted the model to assume that income equality had been attained in 1962 and to make similar projections from that base. They found that, if median black and white incomes had been equalized in 1962, by 2007 median black family wealth would have been 90 percent of median white family wealth, nearly wiping out the racial wealth gap." Therefore any contradictions between whites and blacks and hispanics (and with the completion of the bourgeois democratic revolution the level of contradiction is actually *extremely* limited, truth is most Americans even if they harbor some prejudices value the idea, yes even the evil whitey, even most evil whiteys value the ideals of racial egalitarianism and a peaceful society, and if you can frame the fight for black liberation in terms of say, working class interests WHICH WOULD ALSO COINCIDE EXACTLY WITH THEIR'S, then you would not have a problem at all.
>>735574 copy them to the sakai thread

(2.33 MB 320x175 2d7.gif)
Anonymous 07/30/2020 (Thu) 22:01:24 No. 733727 [Reply] [Last]
I will look like Alex jones of leftists but, lets say a revolotion has happened how we going to beat the secret agencies/deep state
64 posts and 3 images omitted.
>>734710 We will see how this rolls out In future when revolution occurs.
>>734409 Really for the majority of them all that would be necessary is to coerce an early retirement. >>734664 most glowies are salary workers. Most of the infiltrators we have to worry about are payed wrecker opportunists within the workers movement.
It's literally just a way to externalize one governments failures to be the fault of some oppositional faction. When Biden gets in we'll see similar shit about Republicans throwing hissy fits and sabotaging the process
>>733803 what is the language you speak?
>>734858 Turkish

(232.59 KB 634x767 Roger Waters.png)
Anonymous 07/29/2020 (Wed) 21:18:23 No. 731025 [Reply] [Last]
What is the absolute best thing an American can do for the revolution right now? I feel so simultaneously overwhelmed and dispirited. It seems like it's impossible for one person to make any kind of a difference.
86 posts and 7 images omitted.
>>735172 >organising >reading Ok lifestylist.
>>735160 Np. But mostly try to keep everyone safe and have a plan. Learn your rights and have everyone learn them as well. If you are in Burgerland start by watching this video: https://youtu.be/d-7o9xYp7eE.
>>735210 And read the article attached to the video as well.
Be like the gays, come out of the socialist closet and stop worrying about glowies all the time. In fact it may be beneficial to simulate gayness by being disingenuous and creating some form of psychological essentialist socialist argument so glowies can’t snatch you up. Say there’s a gene for leftism and you can’t help but side with extreme leftism and it’s not in your control to believe in communism. That way they can’t prove intent and look like animals jailing people for something out of their control. The downside is the rightoids can try the same shit, so fabricate some research where only leftism is genetic and nothing else is
>>735210 You fucked up the link. https://youtu.be/d-7o9xYp7eE Don't put a period at the end.

(761.82 KB 818x528 12331231312.png)
U.S.A fueling new Cold War due to presidential election Anonymous 07/31/2020 (Fri) 06:47:53 No. 734476 [Reply] [Last]
China on Thursday accused the United States of stoking a new Cold War because certain politicians were searching for a scapegoat to bolster support ahead of the U.S. presidential election in November. U.S. President Donald Trump identifies China as the West’s main rival and has accused President Xi Jinping of taking advantage over trade and not telling the truth over the novel coronavirus outbreak, which Trump calls the “China plague”. Asked if he saw a new Cold War, China’s ambassador to London, Liu Xiaoming, said the United States had started a trade war with China and that there would be no winner from such an approach. “It is not China that has become assertive. It’s the other side of the Pacific Ocean who want to start new Cold War on China, so we have to make response to that,” Liu told reporters. “We have no interest in any Cold War, we have no interest in any war. “We have all seen what is happening in the United States, they tried to scapegoat China, they want to blame China for their problems,” he said. “We all know this is an election year.”
12 posts and 1 image omitted.
>>734493 I wonder why. Maybe Dengoids are, what's the word? Right?
(1.32 MB 4582x3054 GettyImages-1176406656.jpg)
>>734805 >This isn't complaining about unfair trade deals, this is complaining the existence of tariffs in the first place. It's pure liberal ideology. When I think of liberal ideology I think of complaining about lack of "freedom" or "human rights." I think the western system is approaching the "end of the line" as governments and CEOs try to find a way out of the crisis that began in 2008 in a world marked by slow growth and more or less a capital investment strike. Corporations have stopped investing in real production but taken to hoarding cash, although zero to negative (!) interest rates means it costs more to save, but given the lack of profitable investment opportunities, corporations have instead boosted their stock prices via buying back their own shares (and they'll take out debt to pay for it) giving a greater rate of return. This reinforces the effects of the Federal Reserve's monetary policies, which are also aimed at pumping cash into markets to support asset prices, in the hope that confidence will return and investors will start investing in production and growth. It hasn't happened. China meanwhile has relied on export-led growth to avoid contraction, and the U.S. has relied on cheap Chinese goods and China's willingness to fund U.S. deficits, allowing the bubble to keep growing. If a prolonged recession were to really take hold (not a V-shaped bounce), then policymakers fear the U.S. turning into Japan in the 1990s. Japan could keep its head above water though because the rest of the world was still growing so Japan could keep going with exports, albeit barely breaking event. But today, there are not external sources of growth to maintain export-oriented growth strategies. The U.S. has been talking about "reshoring." See Trump visiting a Louis Vuitton handbag factory opening in Texas last year with Bernard Arnault, the richest man in Europe who owns a big chunk of the world's luxury clothing market. However, the absence of global growth turns export-oriented growth strategies into a zero-sum game. Each competing nation struggles to export unemployment and asset destruction onto its neighbors. The high level of global economic integration means that a return to economic warfare between the major powers will be even more damaging and destructive. That's also the 1930s depression turned into a Great Depression with the crisis being exacerbated by plunging international trade.
>>734975 Re-shoring can't happen, it would just be a repeat of the profitability crisis of the 1970s.
>>734936 >Also notice the different messaging for different audiences. China are evil communists for one audience, but that doesn't work with the liberals as much so they have to be fascists. Which isn't a big of a problem for the ideological apparatus: People have been shoved down the totalitarianism theorem (a vulgarization of Hannah Arendt, she wasn't an anti-communist, although she was a liberal and a racist) for decades, with the false "democracy vs totalitarianism" dichotomy they can get consensus amongst normies that fascism = communism because they're both "totalitarian". It's also my personal conspiracy theory that this hyper-woke liberal stuff that's been furthered was also created to be able to attack communists from the left culturally.
>>734945 It doesn’t take a genius to see that the US and PRC are headed for confrontation. Dengoids noticing it doesn’t make them right about anything else.


no cookies?