/leftypol_archive/ - Leftypol archive

test

test

You guys are raiding the wrong thread

>>16896
>>16900
Kek-o you have lost face for the fuji clan. you know what must be done.

>>17080
What's the latest numbers?

>>16486
If the chick wins by a 0.1% difference because of gusanos I hope Castillo and gang make the Shining Path look like pacifists

>ayacucho and cusco still not fully counted
It hasnt even begun

>>16496
here:

>>301732

>>16481
motherfucking jojo reference of Castillollo posing with Gonzalo as his stand above him, I can't come up with a name for it tho

Think Fujimori will accept the results once ousted?
How many weeks do you give it until the CIA-led coup starts?

New thread
>>300726
>>300726
>>300726

>>15265
LMAO
uygha Russians like Stalin, even some ex-Warsaw countries like Stalin, no one in Peru likes the Shining Path

>>15800
It's a different anon than the Mautist

>>15627
Discerning voters like yourself are what every democracy needs.

>>15220
>>15220
>emember what Maduro is doing right now, killing communists in the Colombian border

https://www.laiguana.tv/articulos/906893-farc-ep-deslindarse-caso-apure/

>Ejércitos de países vecinos no son objetivos militares: FARC-EP se deslinda de hechos en Apure
Armies of neighboring countries are not military objectives: FARC-EP demarcates from events in Apure


You're sperging lies. Get banned, CIA-Operative

>>15245
>Guys they said it was unfortunate so they're not counter-revolutionary
STOP
COPING

>>15120
Good ideology, absolutely autistic praxis
>>15117
Peruvians don't like the SP white boy

>>15139
Dilate, resorting to conspiracy theories

>>15239
False information, and irrelevant, they're cornered in a single valley and largely just supply coca paste to not starve lmao, even if they are growing they'll just get pushed back, no one is going to join that organization because it's

Zizek avistado em Londria.

Tá na hora de criar uma thread cíclica, não?

>>13515
Discordo. Pq numa cíclica, arquivar o fio vira um pesadelo. Melhor deixar assim, e quando acabar, a gente arquiva e partimos pra próxima.;

New thread
>>288612

>>12387
Awful lot of whining. I post on here for fun and I’m a member of a party that’s over a hundred years old. You’d have a point if I ever tried to argue that leftypol is the nexus for a revolutionary movement, which I didn’t.

>>12389
Since you actually earnestly tried to respond I’ll type up a response after work tonight.

>>12388
>The western left is pretty hostile to the concept of a Labour Aristocracy, simply because that would mean they would have to accept that they are useless
They've adopted not only that theory, but the settler colonial one as well
They don't accept they, the middle class, are useless because they are interested in institutions
The left is more concerned with rurals than the middle class, the labor aristocracy and settler colonialism is used to explain the gap between the latter suburban and urban types and the former.
>What I do however see is that this so called "populism" is laughed at, because it doesn't really mark a shift in power. In essence you have right-populism that is a revitalizing of old domestic industrial capital and left-populists that try to reestablish a sort keynesian social democratic concensus like in the post-war years
Pretty much, but it shouldn't be laughed at. It's challenging what the western left isn't able to
I think its anti imperialist
>>12388
>Can you give specific examples. I don't think I have seen this one
Arguments over the electoral reform or surrogate democratic party reveal that position. You see it in the left and liberals after 2016, a belief that unless we vote blue colonialism will not be held at bay
>>12388
>Do you think it will be better in showing the contradictions between capital and labor
I dont know if it's better at it but it's the closest thing to a force showing it
But it's more accurately a division over globalization, not capital.

>>12389
Okay, back. Gonna be kind of brief because I've got some vidya gaems with buddy to get to. Your argument seems built on the naturalism fallacy (I.E. Nature = "Good") but let's not forget humans are nature's paradox. As the only form of intelligent life that we're aware of, we've taken ourselves out of nature and all the biological imperatives that come with it. You can say that our goal is to carry on our genes, but the truth is we have free will and can voluntarily choose not to.

But even accepting that logic for a minute, by its very nature it destroys Nazism. The iron law of nature is not, as some "Darwinists" misstate, the survival of "the fittest." Rather all evolutionary biology is rooted in adaptation. The creature that survives is the one most able to adapt to its environment. To, in essence, diversify itself. Throughout life, from tiny flowers to mighty dinosaurs, everything ends up changing. When a species stops changing, it becomes an evolutionary dead end.
Look at Nazism; if it were really obsessed with passing on genes to the next generation, then it wouldn't have its obsession with "racial purity." After all, even if the whitest scandinavian had a child with the darkest african, the child would still inherit genes from both of its parents, even if darker skin is the dominant gene. However, Nazism doesn't care about that. Instead it ascribes "cleanliness" and "dirtyness" to certain races and peoples. It tries its damnedest to preserve its supposed "racial purity" by ruthlessly calling diversity.
But its another evolutionary truth that homogeneity in genetics ultimately leads to sterility, just look at what happened to the Aristocrats of Europe with their obsession with "blood purity!"

Rather than enhancing the fertility of German society, Nazism sterilized it. "Degenerate" art was banned. "Dirty" races were exterminated. The end result of all of that was an ultimately sterile society; one that could produce no art, no great works, and ultimately had its genes "dirtied" by foreign soldiers when they lost the war.

Nazism isn't a philosophy based around life. Its impotent. Sterile. Much like Hitler himself. Its violently obsessed with purity which is a betrayal of biological reality. It's, if anything, a philosophy Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>12393
>>12393
> Your argument seems built on the naturalism fallacy (I.E. Nature = "Good")
Common misconception and infact a forgivably understable one.
National Socialism is based around the understanding of the function of biological organsisms being the origin of their morality; not their nature.
There are a great deal of things a human being may be predisposed to do by virtue of his genes or enviroment (such as excessive alhohal use, self harm or homosexuality) which are none the less objectivelly immoral as they undermine the survival and reproduction of ones genes.
Just because you are morn with a mental ilnnes that predisposes you to serial murder does not serial murder in your case is moral (in so far as you are capable of consious action)
>but let's not forget humans are nature's paradox. As the only form of intelligent life that we're aware of, we've taken ourselves out of nature and all the biological imperatives that come with it.
I'm honestly curious if you actually believe this how in the hell you think Marxist Socialism is ever going to arise??
As Marxist Socialism is, after all, first and foremost predicated upon the appeal to material conditions of the working class.
If the material conditions of the working class (which are necessairily biological in character given that the material the workers are made of is bio-matter, responding to stimulous over time) are not objectively important how would you be able to say that Marxist Socialism was the inevitably product of a capitalist economy?
Just through argumentation (Which will necessairily by your frame work be inherntly baseless) and emotional appeal given in hopes of calling workers to the banner of your cause???
Granted i have put the words of this response in your mouth to some extent,
But IF that is the fundimental basis of world view it seems pretty inherently idealistic my dude.
No real scientific study of history to speak of.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>9913
That first pic is at least more honest than some of the more cherrypick-y ones I've seen floating around /pol/ lately.
A couple points though:
- Neera Tanden isn't leading the OMB, appointment was withdrawn.
- It's quite easy for overrepresentation of any given group to occur in a small sample, as just one person will change the % overrepresented immensely. Think about how radical the swing was on the Supreme Court from RBG to ACB for an example (mathematically speaking).

>>9913
>Its pretty easy to se the Trot>Neo-Con pipeline in the US, it isn't even hidden but openly admitted often enough
Trotskyists are generally the foremost anti-communists. Some guy even did a book on it with funny pictures.
The thing that you fail to factor in - and this applies to the USSR, but also to your worldview in general - is that you assume everything is always going to plan. Even for those who are victorious, who can be said to practically have total power, things are usually not going entirely to plan. The world is a fundamentally chaotic place - the USSR collapsed for a lot of reasons, from internal political mistakes to foreign subversion - not because there was some single grand plan of betrayal.

Those in charge are more often than not genuinely delusional. The free traders often thought that economic liberalization would force political liberalization on China. They were delusional, everything did not go according to plan. They were not playing 10 dimensional chess to undermine the United States, they simply fucked up. Anyone familiar with economic history can quickly deduce that the people in power are dangerously wrong with frightening regularity, often acting in ways that shoot themselves in the feet.

>>9907
>Still doesn't explain why they broke the way of the commies in WWII my dude
>From a class consiouss perspective it objectively and undeniably makes no fucking sense
>It ONLY makes sense if they were working off a frame work other then class (which by the way undermines the entire argument of lennin for how capitalist states opperate, but i digress)
It absolutely makes sense from a class framework you fag, and this was already stated to you in another thread. Britain, France, and Germany all constituted competing imperialist capitalist powers. Despite that though, Britain and France showed no interest in getting involved against Germany up until the Molotov-Ribbentrop, as there was the view that Germany would go to war with the USSR given enough time as opposed to expanding further into British and French holdings, thus resolving the issue of both Germany and the USSR. The British even had a plan to bomb USSR oil fields in the event of an invasion, as this would both cripple the USSR and suffocate Germany resource wise. Instead what happened was that the non-aggression pact got announced, which caught everyone flatfooted and forced Britain to actually have to honor it's agreement with Poland to ensure German expansion was stifled, as it appeared at the time that the USSR would not be taking up arms against Germany and Germany could thoretically fix any oil issues it had by trading with the USSR. WW2 would have been a war only between competing capialist interests if Germany didn't then go full retard and decide to invade the USSR under the pretense it would just toplle over and it could just take the resources they needed.

This has been stated multiple times to you, and to pretend that no such argument was ever offered is just downright dishonest. If you don't accept it, fine, but then this conversation is useless to have as there will be no agreement whatsoever.

>>9916
we may also reintroduce class here: So the average American has been staring down stagnant living standards since the 1970s, what of it? the average politician feels and knows that his life is getting better, and in a very human way he generalizes that the country must be getting better. the same of the well paid media professionals and so on - for them things have never been better! the dismal destitution of daily life for the average person is completely outside their range of experience, as distant from you or i as we in the first world are from the people of Haiti.

So if you ask them: have the policies of the last 40 years, the policies that have so transparently dismantled what little quality of life the American people could expect to enjoy as citizens of a developed nation, have those policies been a success? have they made America better? of course they're going to say yes! and in a culture of "fake it 'till you make it" delusion borne of denying the existence of a class system*, of course the aspirational will repeat it! No conspiracy, no party line passed on from on-high, just people relying on their honest day to day experience and (in the most American of ways) declining to look at the data that doesn't align with their worldview.

*the upside of a nation like Britain, with a literal class of feudal lords, is that people are far more aware about how their position in life is determined not by what they do, but by what their father has done. cultural cross contamination with America has dampened this quite a bit, but it is still a very helpful inheritance. Well, helpful for being in contact with reality - it's also a reason British people are miserable fuckers.

This thread is determined to be culturally, historically or aesthetically significant and will be preserved in the leftypol archive after it hits bump limit

telling people who wouldn't otherwise break shit to break random shit as though it'll achieve anything is glowing tbh
(telling them to engage in meaningless property damage because it's cool is fine though.)

>>9047
Over ten thousand people marched for the NHS a few years ago and not one media establishment mentioned it, they even went past BBC HQ. A thousand people gave a few cops a kicking a month ago and it was in every paper for days.
I think there's been a doctrine shift and people are yet to catch up to how the police operate nowadays. I used to see constant evidence of police instigating violence at protests to break them up around 2008, but I actually see less as time goes on and the internet gets bigger. Nowadays they seem content to let the protest tire itself out. This deliberate shift imo most likely occurred around the time kettling became popular.
I think the police wouldn't be able to handle violent unrest nowadays, as we saw with the London riots and even a bit with BLM recently. This shift towards kettling and away from instigation ties in with this.
>>9049
I won't rest until even GCHQ has smashed windows.

>>8920
t. tony blair while gathering support for the iraq war

New thread: >>173342

>>9050
in my role as permanent secretary i can inform you that the manifesto commitment to ensure that "GCHQ has smashed windows" can be delivered immediately, provided you are willing to inform your party conference that you were using those words rather more laterally than the expected. [spoiler]that is to say, to refer to the fact the Windows operating system has more back doors than one of those old trains where every compartment got a door.[/spoiler]

>>9051
Tony Blair achieved more for evil through action than any good person will ever achieve through inaction.
(Unless someone invents a time machine and then ties Tony Blair to a trolley line, then relies on good people not pulling the lever to redirect it in the interest of altruism)

>>9116
I think so, yeah. Nothing says "solidarity" and "equality" quite like a racially waited "progressive stack" amirite?

>>9115
I posted a comment with data

>>9118
Thanks but I was talking about posts.

Bump

>>9063
Liberals (classical liberals in simple English) are rightoids but not far-right.

>>4901
Ginjeet brought up a lot of interesting points, explained dialectical synthesis through example and drank and smoked on stream. Thank you Gentleginjeet you were sick.

Let me TLDR why sage thinks strikes are direct action: sage runs a "tenant union", so he basically knocks on doors and says "fuck the landlord lets not pay rent". That's his fucking union lmao. First of all good for you, you have reached an adam smith ricardo level of consciousness. But not just that, its also basic self-interest. but for Marxists, unions mean a different thing. for us fucking Marxists, unlike sage, we grab the neck of capital and strangle it at the point of production. But sage's labor union shit "No matter how small and local we do our part" anglo individualist meme feel like they are work. its not radical resistance. it doesn't touch basic social ontology. rent strikes wont achieve anything

>>4930
>>4932
Because these guys aren't complete morons and actually based, and since we (leftypol) found them early, we are basically dialecticaly influencing the direction of their channel. We are shaping them up to defeat breadtube.

>>4937
>for us fucking Marxists, unlike sage, we grab the neck of capital and strangle it at the point of production.

Imaging "grabbing the neck of capital" through live ranting on Youtube lol

>>4937
Why does the arbitrary classification of something as "direct action" matter? Is this what you guys have been posting 700 posts about?