/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>443155
You speak as if there has been any decline in carbon emissions. It hasn't. And with the methane being pumped in the atmosphere from thawing permafrost and the clathrates undersea, tipping points have already been reached, and that a problem liberalism cannot and will not cope with in any meaningful way.

>>443182
spot the nazbol

>>443182
lmao did you discover peter wilburg or something?

>>443203
Emissions have fallen within nations, though globally they were still rising at a pretty typical rate before COVID stalled them. The core is capable of dropping emissions, it’s the periphery that needs cheap fossil fuels for further development. But I think if the core can band together and increasingly shift the global market (through national and international regulations) towards artificially excluding fossil fuels while bolstering renewables and other carbon neutral tech, then there is a trade dynamic where they start extracting more from the periphery by forcing them to acclimate to new global standards of consumption, which they hold the keys to. China has tried to front run the west on that strategy because it’s a massive unified market that is significantly planned by the state, so they can have a big and focused industrial strategy. So China uses Belt and Road and it’s burgeoning high value tech and manufacturing industries to produce more eco-market oriented commodities. Meanwhile, political turmoil between nations in the west (because they are separate nations run by liberal democracies after all) means that the capitalists who are more focused on building a global market around eco-tech and the transition off of fossil fuels are being forced into conflict with the capitalists who either feel trapped in fossil fuel investments or otherwise are so myopic that they just want to keep investing in that area for the mid-term to make out like bandits before the collapse of the industry. But China’s increasing competitiveness in eco-tech is causing more urgency in the various state actors, which could trigger a Cold War esque industrial race to corner the global carbon neutral market.

There are absolutely capitalists who have a long view towards molding markets, they know the shape of the market is managed by the state. But just knowing that is half the battle, because the state’s policy is still largely downstream of capital interests, so it usually takes some overwhelming force to push the state to break for one set of capital interests over another (in the most recent classic and large example, the dispute between the slavers and the industrialists in America). So western capital interests are struggling because there is less unity there, but China is a massive unified market that has a longer view, and so it may push the west to unify more quickly for economic and political self-preservation. If it does it in time, then the larger part of the world market may suddenly set stricter standards (again, you could analogize it to the end of slavery in the major markets) that result in strong arming the smaller players to abide or be excluded from trade. The trick for the west or China is to already have the industry in place to excel at that game, so that when the rules are changed everybody who is still reliant on fossil fuels is forced to buy from the guys setting the rules of the market, creating opportunity for unequal trade and increasing global extraction that will make the big gambit all worth it.

>>443312
So if that works out (which I severely doubt it will) and hypeman's space "revolution" truly takes off and opens up the solar system like so anons in this thread are speculating, then Marx will finally be proven wrong, because then, capitalism will be able to go on forever.

>>442912
>colonized people have the most revolutionary potential
certainly, the focus shouldn't be on immigrant colonizers instead of the native populations of these nations. Capital already panders to these demographics, capital is the reason they are there in the first place.

>>443312
So basically the way capitalism gets its shit together on climate change is when the communist party in China decides to do something like roll out nuclear reactors full throttle and bulldoze local capital interests that disagree out of the way. And that will create eco-market competition for the rest of the world.

At least for the energy sector component this will be a planned economy, in all but name.
How is this capitalism saving it self ?
You're vision of how capitalism can save it self, has capitalism as an appendage, that just about manages to adapt to changes made outside of the system by people who neither are capitalists nor care about capitalism for any reason other than it's utility for creating means of production.

>>443337
I think capitalism could still fall, but it wouldn’t be through climate change. Maybe indirectly through climate change. I’m not very sold on the whole Xi is going to press the communist button in 10 years or whatever thing, but China’s political culture is definitely more socialistic. I could still see some seismic shifts coming about in that direction, though hard to say. I think America is undergoing some surprising shifts right now, but could be extinguished. The job market is all fucked up and so far the state seems to be waffling on when it is going to crush labor’s enhanced bargaining position. I’d imagine it is waffling because we just came out of the pandemic and the state actors see a lot of political danger in just blatantly plummeting the working class into precarity. They have their hand hovering over the button (almost letting the eviction moratorium go by), but they’re afraid to press it. I don’t have any prediction of what that is going to lead too, just that there is a bit of somewhat hidden power conflict occurring. The working class stumbled into a good position right now but doesn’t even realize it because it is so depoliticized and disorganized. It doesn’t even really have to do anything, it’s just sitting there making demands across a bunch of disorganized job seekers and the capitalists are complaining, but the state is refraining from intervening because it is afraid.

There's nothing special or unique about western imperialism other than that it was more successful than other forms throughout the world. Take a look at how the Japanese (technically Yamato) forcefully assimilated and conquered the Ainu or Emishi peoples native to Japan. Or the Arab conquests and its extensive involvement in the Trans-Saharan slave trade Or the Aztec empire and its extensive list of subjugated tributaries. None of this is really any different from western imperialism.

>>439067
Trying to "convert" people politically over the internet is pointless, the only way to "convert" people is a combination of funny memes, shocking images, not being condescending/being nice (paradoxical but it works) and making fun of your enemies.

Most of the human race doesn't care about figures, statistics or theory, if it ain't spelled out and in front of them it might as well not exist.

>>443377
True, rhetorically the communists might not be totally out flanked because it would be China that set off the shift. And I do think that is the likeliest way something like that would happen. While it is POSSIBLE the west does it on its own, it is more unlikely. And China is already pretty clearly making moves towards carbon neutral industry to try to improve its trade position and increasingly move away from being a cheap labor market. So the seeds are there, it just depends how quickly it develops and whether the west responds with an industrial race or desperate proxy wars (maybe both? But it would muddle things if the west tries to just slow China down rather than compete with them).

>>442942
it's not embarrassing to appeal to the majority of a nation, it is the main hallmark of graduating from controlled opposition to actual opposition.

Socialist's have been pandering to minority groups for decades in failed attempts bringing socialism to westernized nations, only when some suggests pandering to the majority do the deradicalization police come in with their essay's.

>>443436
>Thinking the Proletariat is a minority group
>Thinking that appeals to le demographic majority appeal to the interests of said group
How do I know you’re a suburbanoid?

>>443459
read the thread the poster >>441356 advocates to " ally with socially-progressive movements" because they will eventually be the majority. And lists the times that socialists and minority idpol groups overlapped.

>>443436
it is one thing to appeal to the majority of a nation, it is another to pander to them.
for every socialist party or organization which has been "pandering to minority groups" there's another which has been embarrassing itself by thinking it can pull ahead with cheap pandering. i submit to you the CPGB-ML's forays into the culture wars, or George Galloway's entire WPB shtick. At best it gets them nowhere, at worst it advances bad causes.

The hallmark of graduating to controlled to actual opposition is to wield some power, and if you wind up assembling a coalition of spooks then you're going to find yourself being directed by events rather than directing them.

Josip Broz Tito did nothing wrong, he was the greatest statesman of the 20th century, he did what was best for his nation, and all the tradlarpers crying about him being an opportunist revisionist are just assmad that he cucked Stalin out making Yugoslavia a puppet state of the Soviet Union.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LM0ezXxDvyY

>>445232
Redpill me on Tito. What exactly did he keep Stalin from doing?

Labor Vouchers are objectively superior to money for the economic medium of a socialist society.

People who don't care about democracy are not leftists.

>>445330
now post your foto, chinlet

>>443947
you people only post your prewritten warnings when the white majority is mentioned for western countries. The majority that actually has the ability to create economic change. When >>441356 says we should ally with "progressive" majorities there is no dissenting prewritten paragraphs. When >>442912 mentions settlers they put white before settler so you don't remember that natives applies to the majority native European peoples in Europe. And in America, is used against the majority who founded the nation.

Minority groups have completed hijacked socialist causes for decades with absolutely no realistic plans for how these minority groups would actually be able to institute socialism over the majority of the population. Where were you and your ilk then, or last years USA race riots?

>it is one thing to appeal to the majority of a nation, it is another to pander to them
then it is time to appeal to them isn't it

>>446096
>Appeal
NTA, but you're both retarded. All your "appealing" will result in is a race to the bottom against established political ideologies that have been playing the game of opportunism longer then you, and you will lose. "Appeal" isn't what determines revolution, and your job as communist is to inform and organize, not perpetually attempt to shift yourself in every possible direction to "appeal".

>>446096
>Where were you and your ilk then, or last years USA race riots?
At the Windows on the world Restaurant, Floor 107, sipping a cappuccino.

>>446104
so that's the normal communist thing to do. Don't try to appeal to the majority of your local peoples population (unless they are a minority unable to cause economic change). If you look throughout history the stance of revolutionary leaders was never to suit the majority causes, that includes stalin, che, mao ect. Utterly ridiculous

I would understand if you were talking about capitalist imposed culture, but at a minimum culture against that is a friend to be taken advantage of.

>>446107
clearly you should have given them one of your speech's on how "Marxism" shouldn't pandering to Africans or BLM.

>>446118
Floor 107 no longer gives a particularly good view.

>>446118
>so that's the normal communist thing to do. Don't try to appeal to the majority of your local peoples population (unless they are a minority unable to cause economic change). If you look throughout history the stance of revolutionary leaders was never to suit the majority causes, that includes stalin, che, mao ect. Utterly ridiculous
None of these "appealed". If yours is a program merely attempting appeal, you will lose. Literally no revolutionary movement has ever won and survived by merely grifting on "appeal". Organize and inform people, teach them what socialism stand for and what it actually guarantees. But don't "appeal". All you'll end up doing is construing socilsim for what its not out of a desire to sell it to people who still think in the confines of capitalist relations, because you haven't actually changed how they think about the system itself and their relation to it.
>I would understand if you were talking about capitalist imposed culture, but at a minimum culture against that is a friend to be taken advantage of.
We live in a capitalist culture. Don't try and cultivate some kind of capitalist "counter-culture", because the very concept itself is something subsumed into the capitalist market. Organize and inform, teach and make known your principles, and "culture" will arise from there. If you actually have an actual analysis that relates to some kind of event affecting peoples lives that is itself beneficial towards understanding it, give it. But don't fabricate one on the fly to try and "appeal" to them and "sell" them you socialism. That has always been a failure, and eventually you're going to warp your politcal views in order to try and "appeal" to a people who have no understanding of socialism and who will then perceive it as merely a vehicle for whatever fantastical thing they want, whether that be reactionary preservation or utopian musing.

>>439056
Most leftists are wrong about colonialism and imperialism.
It's a literal empirical fact that most colonial projects actually cost the Empires more in investment than they returned, and most were done purely for Geopolitical and Security Reasons rather than the single purpose of wealth extraction.
For just one example, if you have a big colony for wealth extraction, say India, then you want a bunch of safe ports on the way back to England, this means you are forced, due to logistics alone, to colonise several regions along the route. On top of this, you also want places where you can have military so your ships aren't constantly buttfucked by opposing countries or Pirates.
Good example is the British empire, largely only Raj and Belize were actual wealth extraction colonial projects, most others were for security and other geopolitical reasons.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227468285_Taxing_Colonial_Africa_The_Political_Economy_of_British_Imperialism

>>446118
>so that's the normal communist thing to do. Don't try to appeal to the majority of your local peoples population (unless they are a minority unable to cause economic change). If you look throughout history the stance of revolutionary leaders was never to suit the majority causes, that includes stalin, che, mao ect. Utterly ridiculous
this

>>446118
>so that's the normal communist thing to do. Don't try to appeal to the majority of your local peoples population (unless they are a minority unable to cause economic change). If you look throughout history the stance of revolutionary leaders was never to suit the majority causes, that includes stalin, che, mao ect. Utterly ridiculous

What do you mean by this ? the russian revolution was done by the peasants and the workers, which constituted the majority of the population, it was the masses that changed history. The revolution in China also was a mass revolt.

Not unpopular here, but unpopular among the left.
LGBT movement no longer really serves any purpose and is now just pure Neoliberal hyper individualist fetishism. Somehow the left have let a hyper individualist ideology hijack it. I used to run in BDSM, Goth circles in the noughties and most of them were Lolberts back then, now they larp as Radlibs communist leftists where I literally got banned from their groups back them for being a Communist. They're Lolberts at heart, not leftists and the left should reject this open individualist sex fetishism as "leftism". Somehow these degenerate Libertarian fucks have overtaken the entire left.
No problem with sex fetishes, but keep it in the fetish Fetlife community, don't fucking pretend it's some liberating leftist ideology. Honestly would rather hippie Psytrance doofers than the LGBT scene identifying as left wing at this point.

>>449261

LGBT movement isn't entirely neoliberalist fetishism. The movement has just pivoted on Trans rights now instead of gay rights 10-15 years ago. There are still gay conversion therapy camps for children. Parents send their kids there to literally get starved and tortured until the gay is gone. It's fucked up but most LGBT activists don't care because they are just neoliberal shills who want money and power over caring about people being oppressed.

The gay movement will probably die in another 20-30 years when trans rights are no longer considered controversial in the west.

>>449438
>It's fucked up but most LGBT activists don't care because they are just neoliberal shills who want money and power
this will pretty much insure that
>trans rights are no longer considered controversial in the west.
never happens

the neoliberals will ride the rainbow horse until it's dead and then they will switch to the conservative counter reaction horse
Never forget that shills who want money and power, don't care what hat or badge they have to wear to get it.

As long as neoliberalism is operational, the light at the end of the tunnel is just another train coming towards you.

bump

here are some
>hwites get mandatory bbc
>abortion/birth control made illegal
>citizens with +10 partners get neutered
>trahhny dannies get sent to work camps
>instigate more religions/cults/extremist groups abroad so they get on with killing each other
>computers should be banned for everyone until the age of 24/25 unless he/she has a specialized education relating to it beforehand
>motor vehicles banned for everyone except matters relating to state
>tourists/furries get shot on site
>cities get demolished with its residents inside

My unpopular opinion is that the vision of the future the left once held is fractured and dead. At best we can hope for a more libertarian version of china/market socialism at this point.

>>464745
This is currently the most popular leftist position lmao
Even when leftists claim otherwise they implicitly think this way

>>464748
China is a nationalist state. Most western leftists are faggots who hate themselves and their country.

>>464751
All countries are "nationalist states" by definition.

>>464745
>the vision of the future the left once held
"the left" never ever held a common vision of the future in terms of concrete policies and not vague ass shit
"leftists" should be afraid first and foremost of other "leftists"
that's why we further differentiate ourselves as socialists/communists/mensheviks/bolsheviks/etc to arrive at a common set of concrete policies that we agree with, so we can actually act on them as a group
tho it is never enough as even bolsheviks had massive disagreements about concrete policy actions that could be only resolved in the end by one group physically eliminating the other
that's just the way actual politics work

>>464764
>"leftists" should be afraid first and foremost of other "leftists"
There will be plenty of oppertunity to be afraid of one another later. Me, if I die after the revolution in some purge or another… well, I can think of far worse ways to go out and few better.

>>464752
Point proven about the fag part

<<464769
Dog bless Uhmurrica.

>>464751
>Most western leftists
those exist?

>>464810
People who think equality is a virtuous ideal? Yes, but many of them are cynical state grifters, like the feds, who use it as a rhetorical bludgeon to perpetuate the rule of a small minority.

>>439152
Im not even a doomer but yeah, being a straight up state capitalist industrialist would be more effective at bringing socialism than being the most hardcore of revolutionaries in the west right now

>>464935
How?

>>464938
Retard you literally have to build up the productive forces to even have a base for socialism, industrializing would revitalize the proletariat class as well as advancing the forces of production. Lenin himself said in the NEP that for this reason they should pay attention to the development of Germany and model themselves after it. It’s more of a legitimate path towards socialism than organizing the current “proletariat” which is literally just service workers lmao

>>439493
You're just a fascist retard.