/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Proletariat without Borders

catalog
Mode: Reply
Name
E-mail
Subject
Message

Max message length: 8192

Files

Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3

Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

Remember to follow the rules


/leftypol/ is a non-sectarian board for leftist discussion.

IRC: Rizon.net #bunkerchan
https://qchat.rizon.net/?channels=bunkerchan

American Potential Anonymous 12/28/2019 (Sat) 04:33:08 No. 189673
A lot of Euros on here vastly underestimate the potential for American Communism. Frequently they make a big hubbub of Americans being somehow inherently reactionary or "backwards", whilst ignoring that the two largest Communist Revolutions on earth took place in backwards feudal states where leaders were assumed to have been divinely ordained. All things considered, the situation in America is quite conducive to Socialism: >Younger generation mostly priced out of good housing >Rampant epidemic of "deaths by despair" >Near non-existent social safety net >Completely failing infrastructure >Massive wealth disparity. In no other first world country are the contradictions of capital so evident. In no other western country is there such a blatant division between what the people actually want (healthcare, houses, higher pay, action on global warming) and what the ruling class institutes. Similarly, though the elite have tried to hide this fact from the world, America once had one of the most radical labor movements on earth. So why don't we see an equally powerful communist movement? Well there's a few factors that must be considered: >Boomer home ownership >COINTELPRO operations >Liberal obfuscation To go through each point briefly. The mass home ownership of the baby boomers means they were in essence made stakeholders of the country, they're interested in seeing it not burst into flames because they own property within the country. Younger generations are shut out of property inheritance and saddled with debt, and so we see Socialism become much more appealing to them. COINTELPRO operations meanwhile have done excellent work at wrecking and kind of paralegal organizing (both in the mafia and in left movements) Finally, liberals both obfuscate class issues by putting forward an image of the left as half-hearted Keynesians, and where they get involved in left movements they idiotically inject them with a purely middle class character. With these things in mind, is there any reason for hope in American Communism? I think so. But only if we play it smart. Left movements here have thus far been hyper-focused on pointless violence (such as the Austin Red Guards) or engagement in bourgeois activism (small scale protests, near-pointless bourgeois political campaigns) but little in the way of organizing. However there's three things the American left can do right now to benefit American communism >Get out of the suburbs >Organize Soviets >Focus on local issues American Third Parties try to compete in national elections when they can't even win local ones. Meanwhile localism is seen as almost entirely ignored, in no small part because the middle class makeup of most left activists mean they rarely leave their suburbs. But imagine if poor rural and urban-minority communities were organized as though they were soviets? Direct democracy, with a broad coalition of parties (excluding the big two) and focused on localized issues: law and order, infrastructure, and education. By building parallel institutions in towns with low voter turnout, and focused less on winning people over to communism so much as engaging them in direct democracy, the American left can build communism from the ground up. There's plenty of ways to create parallel institutions. Mosques and Synagogues and minority churches can be won over into a solidarity network: "Everyone agrees to watch over each other in case they see a far-right nut show up with guns." Undocumented Immigrants can organize lookouts to keep their communities safe, as well as warn them when ICE is in the neighborhood. Most importantly you start to gain legitimacy in local neighborhoods, such that even if you can't win a national election, you can at least impact it and gain lasting institutional power. As it stands, right now the American left is waiting around for people to "wake up", but passive waiting has never worked. They need to get out there and start organizing: town councils, unions, what have you.
Won’t go into detail but some mates in my city are trying to do what you said, we see a long road ahead but, well, success was never easy.
>>189690 I'm hoping to do something similar in my own city. Honestly though, I think half the cancer is in the suburbs, and I say that as someone who grew up in the suburbs and lived in them. People have to organize (legally wherever possible) to better their lot in life. Any particular strategies your employing? Organizations you're working through?
(118.13 KB 640x718 1423949231458.jpg)
US will go through the motions of Imperial Germany. Complete with two world wars. There was no such thing as peaceful decline of a capitalist empire, and there never will be.
>>189673 >minority churches can be won over into a solidarity network: I suspect you'd be surprised at the number of huwite churches that can be won over here
>>189707 I'm not, actually. Sakaist cynicism over the white working class disgusts me, and I believe that there can be targeted campaigns that can benefit poor white people. For example, meth and heroin overdoses are, if I recall correctly, an almost exclusively poor white problem. A lot of work can be done with rural churches in white towns to try and help these people recover from drug addiction. You can also do a lot of good just by working to fill in potholes or creating community gardens. Anything over bourgeois-led protests tbh.
>Get out of the suburbs why now and how now suburbs are shitty and impoverished btw >American Third Parties try to compete in national elections when they can't even win local ones why not both
The US is nearly no where near as bad as you say it is.
>>189712 >>189707 >church opiate of the masses and so on
>>189714 We should've been doing it sooner. As for the how, well it's as simple as driving to another town. Finally, yeah, we should be competing in bourgeois elections (though not with any hope of winning) but unless you start building a base from below, it's a waste of time. >>189715 You haven't traveled around to the truly fucked parts of the country. A lot of people fail to realize that throughout the midwest especially, parts of America are almost third world tier.
>>189712 >For example, meth and heroin overdoses are, if I recall correctly, an almost exclusively poor white problem. I have some issues with Sakai myself but this isn't true.
Main thing is that the opioid crisis is a bit unusual in that its breadth, which is wiping out poor whites but also seeing surge in overdoses among poor blacks. And Native Americans probably have it the worst, as usual.
>>189705 That was the rise of a capitalist empire. It didn't really pan out. There are no perfect patterns in history.
>>189705 Shut up. Every time I log on here I have to suffer reading about how the United States will turn "fascist." (whatever that means) Is it just you posting this all the time or several of you? Keep your bizarre fantasies to yourself or post them in the balkanization threads that show up all the time.
>>189740 I think it’s a holdover of a lot of European resentment tbh
>>189716 I mean, you might want to put resources for recovery freely available at a needle exchange. Same idea there I guess.
I would say in the coming decades, America will have fantastic potential for a socialist revolution. Many people that I have talked to (both reactionary and left wing) agree that we are in need of a new republic. And while it is fun to dunk on reactionaries, it is important to remember that at the end of the day, they are working class just like you and me. Many of them are just confused / spooked by decades of CIA propaganda. But things are beginning to change. Polling has perpetually shown that when you go issue by issue, that most Americans are more left leaning than you might think. I just had some questions though. How does one organize a soviet? Can someone link me to a guide as to how to do such a thing? Some books / youtube tutorials please?
>>189749 It's probably libshit hyperventilating
>>189749 yuro peon here, I'm one of the poster that is trying to argue against deterministic US-facism.
>>190015 All you need to do is to stop pandering to transsexuals. That's pretty much it.
>>189695 We wanna work with some local tenants unions but that’s about it, step one is that we plan on organizing against the local landlords, step two is dealing with the food desert in our community.
>>189715 Idk, I’d say it is, I live in one of the “okay” cities in the US and it looks like it’s on the verge of collapse, mass poverty, crumbling infrastructure, shit local economy, etc.
>>189738 It was the rise of German imperialism and the decline of the British Empire
>>190211 Lmao the US left would definitely stand a much better fighting chance if it gave half as much a fuck about the working class as it does trannies
(392.11 KB 1024x684 Che_Guevara.jpg)
>>190015 >I just had some questions though. How does one organize a soviet? Can someone link me to a guide as to how to do such a thing? Some books / youtube tutorials please? See that's the rub, as far as I understand there's not much in the way of tutorials on how to organize a soviet. But it's not all bad, I think methods can be gleaned from both solidarity unionism, as well as writings such as Che Guevera's book on Guerilla Warfare. More than just being the meme shirt guy, Che was one of the greatest revolutionaries in that he made his chief concern the strategies and tactics of winning the revolution. I'm not advocating for Guerilla wars within currently established western democracies (in fact I think he said such a thing is unlikely to result in success) but in much the same way that a manager can turn to Sun Tzu and transition his advice on the battlefield to advice in business, someone can read Che's book on guerilla warfare and transpose it over politics. Creating thus a new breed of politics: Guerilla Politics. Think about where the left stands in America. We're disorganized, we're tiny, we're locked out of power. In much the same way we have a great deal of overlap with nascent guerilla movements under dictatorial regimes. So the question must become: how do we organize in such a way that a small group of no more than 12 men can massively influence the political structure of their community? I have a few steps I'm developing that in part come from Guevera's writings on the structure of a Guerilla band >First: Print out a map of your operating region. Let's say it's a large metropolis like New York City >Then, research the poorest, most crime infested, and dangerous parts of the city. Highlight those parts in red. >Then, find the richest, most prosperous parts of the operating region. Highlight those sections in Blue. >Debate among your band, which of the red segments you'll choose first. This will be your center of operations, you'll focus all your attention here. >Next, gather information. Commit a map of your territory to memory. Interview as many people as you possibly can about local issues, about the nature of problems in the community. Learn about every pot hole, learn about every piece of graffiti, every crack house, every local gang, every intersection in desperate need of a stop sign, etc. >Develop an action plan to win over people in the community. If they're worried about kids lacking education, offer to have free tutoring sessions. If people seem concerned about graffiti, then offer to clean it up. If poverty is a problem, run a food drive. Make sure all your efforts stay exclusive to the community. >Its important that structural problems are addressed within the community however. The goal isn't to provide charity, but to uplift and organize the community such that it can start tackling long term problems on its own. >Long term problems are things like crime, failing infrastructure, education. You can tackle all these things initially as organizers, but the goal is to give these people the tools to start tackling them themselves >Once you undeniably win over a plurality of the community, start to organize them collectively. Develop assemblies where they discuss problems and tackle them on the basis of direct democracy and direct action. >Upon a community forming a fully developed assembly council and making it through a full election, split off like a bee hive. >Part of your organizational structure will go to another red zone and will repeat the process there >continue until all the red zones within your operating theater are organized into soviets >Once they're organized, link them together in interdependent charters. Essentially the goal is to make a web of communes that wrap around the blue sections and can share resources and labor with one another. >Divide the blue sections into islands, such that they're isolated in a sea of soviets >Once an operating theater is sufficiently organized, move to the next one. Another town, another county, another state, another region. >The goal is to create a web stretching from sea to sea and bound together with one idea: An American Commonwealth I think I'll be trying to do this through the CPUSA. Also importantly is having this commonwealth, once its sufficiently large, recognized by a foreign state such as Cuba or China. This will give it a sense of legitimacy. >
>>190263 And for the love of God READ THE BOOK. It's one of the most important pieces of organizational and logistical theory you can get. It's more important than The Art of War as far as organizing for leftists go. The Art of War takes the perspective of being an established organization with some degree of official sanction and the ability to levee the masses. Guerilla Warfare takes the perspective of being a small and almost inconsequential group of revolutionaries.
US will go fascist before commie. You can't even talk about social democracy without a big dumb capitalist bitch baby screeching.
>>190287 They're screeching because they see which way the wind is blowing. People absolutely loved watching libs screech over Trump and it helped him plenty. I say make them screech till their throats are sore.
>>190263 Excellent post. I think there's something to the effect of a "1/3 Law" about organizing or even anything in general that deals with a large group of people so here's something I thought of a few days ago concerning members and organization, it's nothing particularly profound but changes/corrections are more than welcome. I probably just re-worded the Pareto Principle or something similar, but anyway: Let's say you have 100 members of your group or ideology X. 1/3 are the most serious, meaning willing to put in an incredible amount of footwork and take up arms if need be. This is your "professional revolutionary" group or the Vangaurd. The next 1/3 are incredibly sympathetic but will probably not take up violent arms. However they are more than willing to do the footwork, campaigning, researching, canvassing, etc,. The last 1/3 are your "slacktivists" and otherwise somewhat principled. This last group is your "I kinda don't really know but if you push me I'll say I'm part of or believe in some of X, I guess." Ironically enough it is this last group from which you can pull the most dedicated assests. How many middle-of-the road folks have been radicalized in either direction, including a lot of us? Exactly.
Americans live in a perpetual 'us vs them' of internal conflict, something like fascism would suit them better. But they worship the constitution like a holy book so I don't see them changing in any considerable way
>>190318 This is the exact opposite of a materialist analysis
>>190321 She's right tho
>>189740 >whatever that means Imagine not knowing what a country going fascist means and involves.
>>190331 Except they aren’t. It’s an idiotic idea based around national stereotypes—about as dumb as saying Russia would never have a revolution because “muh backwards peasants”
I don't understand why so many of you say that America will go fascist. I recall a Zizek speech where he says that fascism in America is an impossibility due to its history and the way it is set up politically and it makes a lot of sense to me. One defining trait of fascism is centralization of authority under one leader and his small clique, but American right-wingers are strongly against an all-encompassing government, and it's probably a technical impossibility considering the size and diversity of the country anyway. One absolute dystopia America could become would be a decentralized system with a board of directors controlling a given area, comprised of the heads of the most powerful companies in this area. You would have Larry Page or Zuck as the chairman of Northern California, Jeff Bezos controlling the Northwest, Peter Thiel for L.A., some Wall Street guy in NYC and so on. The federal government would still exist but be absolutely irrelevant and would have no way to enforce its law effectively against corporate militias. This nightmarish scenario is much more realistic than old-school fascism to me. As for the way out, I don't know, but Americans need to learn more about their socialist history (IWW, Red Hollywood, etc.) They already do, actually. I have no idea how an efficient praxis suited to the current American material conditions could look like.
>>190578 I'm glad there are people with actual sense here on /leftypol/. Even I buy into the AMERICA GOES FASH, but that is just not terribly plausible if you think about it.
>>190578 Fascism will take hold everywhere a communist movement fails. The problem with America isn't that there is no socialist thought, but that there is enough to be a threat, but not enough to win. It doesn't matter what government features you attribute to fascism you think America has or doesn't. Fascism isn't a coherent ideology, it's a coherent goal - to preserve the current system by force. There is plenty of precedent in America in murdering communists and trade unionists, and stomping on the face of the people. What will follow is the logical conclusion to everything America is doing now, but x10. Just like Hitler and WW2 was the logical conclusion to what Germany already did before.
(1.51 MB 3500x2349 0002f767.jpeg)
A lot of analysis of fascism seems to view it as a series of malevolent policy choices rather than an option available to capitalism during a specific historical phase of its development. If that's what it is, then fascism might be a phenomenon of the 20th century, at least in the developed capitalist countries, or at least in the 20th century form. There may be new forms of illiberal or post-liberal capitalist authoritarianisms in store for us. But there's a lot of uneven development in the world and weak, new nations being pulled in different directions. So, fascism is an option. Watch out for India with its 600,000 RSS militia members (the prime minister has been a member since he was eight years old) that is now in control of the government and regularly carries out lynchings. That government has also just imploded the economy through crash free-market reforms and passed a tiered "National Register of Citizenship" law along the lines of the 1935 Nuremberg Laws. https://youtu.be/2HhzvxOVe3s Looking forward to the future war between India on one side and China and Pakistan on the other.
(248.53 KB 593x594 MOIB.png)
>>190583 >Fascism will take hold everywhere a communist movement fails. You see, this is my problem with tankies right there. Your dogmatism prevents you from having an up-to-date material analysis. The world has evolved since 1933. May 68 in France and the Italian "Maggio strisciante" were radical socialist movements — maybe the last ones in the first-world — that failed, but what came after them was not fascism but neoliberalism. >The problem with America isn't that there is no socialist thought, but that there is enough to be a threat, but not enough to win. It's true that it can be a problem. Bourdieu once said that there is nothing worse than a failed revolution, because it makes the bourgeoisie as panicked as a successful revolution but then reactionary forces can organize immediately to stop any future agitation. >It doesn't matter what government features you attribute to fascism you think America has or doesn't. Fascism isn't a coherent ideology, it's a coherent goal - to preserve the current system by force In that case, fascism can mean anything, and it serves no purpose as a distinct noun. We look ridiculous when we label the slightest right-wing thing as fascism. It's time to stop. We need to use a precise language instead. Fascism is a form of government that originated in the early 20th century, it's not everything you don't like. >There is plenty of precedent in America in murdering communists and trade unionists, and stomping on the face of the people. Andrew Carnegie and Henry Clay Frick were liberals, not fascists. >What will follow is the logical conclusion to everything America is doing now, but x10. Just like Hitler and WW2 was the logical conclusion to what Germany already did before. The logical conclusion to everything America is doing now is stock corporations having full control over its soil, i.e. what I've described in my previous post. Or something else, maybe, but definitely not Mussolini-style fascism.
>>190622 >You see, this is my problem with tankies right there. Your dogmatism prevents you from having an up-to-date material analysis. The world has evolved since 1933. May 68 in France and the Italian "Maggio strisciante" were radical socialist movements — maybe the last ones in the first-world — that failed, but what came after them was not fascism but neoliberalism. True. But that's because daddy USA emerged as the capitalist hegemon post-WW2, and they definitely could be trusted to destroy any attempt by a country within its sphere of influence to go socialist. But when the threat is coming from within USA itself, what then? >We look ridiculous when we label the slightest right-wing thing as fascism. It's time to stop. We need to use a precise language instead. Fascism is a form of government that originated in the early 20th century, it's not everything you don't like. Fantastic. Other leftists are too eager to absolve liberalism of its complicity in the rise of fascism, and maintenance of capitalism. >Andrew Carnegie and Henry Clay Frick were liberals, not fascists. It seems we need to discuss how liberalism and fascism are two side of the same coin. >The logical conclusion to everything America is doing now is stock corporations having full control over its soil, i.e. what I've described in my previous post. Or something else, maybe, but definitely not Mussolini-style fascism. Are you willfully ignorant of what US is up to in Middle East, or are you being funny? Or does Madeleine Albright saying that the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children was "worth it" raise no concerns what this country might when it is actually desperate to preserve its status?
>>190015 >And while it is fun to dunk on reactionaries, it is important to remember that at the end of the day, they are working class Most of them are petty bourgeoisie.
>>190578 Fascism adapts itself based on country’s unique history and present conditions(some might argue that the US is already a fascist state). As for right wingers being against government involvement, their deference to trumps 1 trillion deficit, patriot act, their eagerness to control people through shit like banning birth control and their constant attempts at branding Antifa as terrorist organisation makes your point moot. They hate government when it helps other people, that’s why you have boomers screeching about ‘don’t touch my social security’ and at the same time disparaging people on food stamps. Also, Half of the lolbert crowd became fascist after 2016.
(255.00 KB 960x529 forward-960.jpg)
We've seen this thread get derailed by a targeted attempt at claiming America is "doomed" to Fascism (with very little in the way of material analysis to back these claims up) which has distracted from an analysis of how the left can and should organize in the U.S. So to get things back on topic: first and foremost, we should analyze how the left operates in the Modern U.S. Generally speaking, the only "successful" radical left party I've heard of so far would have to be the Socialist Alternative--of course they're Trotskyists, but they held onto a Seattle City Council seat and are looking to expand into purchasing property to use as an actual headquarters. Throughout most of the United States, however, Socialist parties exist as mostly micro-sects. The DSA has seen some success (at least in terms of sheer numbers) with its "party within a party" strategy, but it's extremely decentralized and mostly incoherent, divided between caucuses of SocDems, actual Socialists, and Radical Liberals. It is, however, good for getting a few progressive leftists elected to office. Most of the other parties have some offices in major american cities, and all of them interact with the wider world of politics by showing up to protests and mass actions and trying to recruit people. None of them have seen massive success in recent years, but I think that can be due in no small part to the American economic boom and the rise of home ownership among baby boomers. What we're seeing in the U.S. right now is a kind of "return to form" for Capitalism. Massive income inequality and wealth trickling up to the top whilst actual property ownership goes down. Recruiting among boomers is hopeless, but there can be a lot of success in working with the younger generation as many of them see no future under the current system. Recruitment must be done outside of cookie-cutter suburbs (as they're generally the womb of the most reactionary kind of ideology) and in the real world. Of course this will be a bit difficult as many cities quietly pass laws forbidding the use of flyers or pamphleting, thus there's a few points I feel will be important for pushing Americans left. >Outside of official party structures, there should be a broad coalition of "guerilla" cells focused entirely on recruitment >These cells should be no larger than 10 or so people, as stipulated by Che >Actions should be taken such that people are made aware of leftism, but not associated with any particular party >Mass use of flyers, pamphlets, all done anonymously >This coalition of guerilla cells should be willing to cross ideological and party lines with the sole purpose being communication of ideas and creating independent and democratic institutions
>>191078 I have to point out that disseminating agitprop may not be the most effective route if you’re in a sprawling Midwest city like mine. People simply aren’t concentrated as densely as in the metropole.
>>191335 So I’m gonna make my own point based off Che’s writings. He talks about how by concentrating your fire you can compensate for inaccuracy and sap morale. Similarly, by concentrating propaganda you can overcome a dispersed population. So you say you live in a midwestern city, right? And it’s pretty sprawling? Here’s an idea, which for legal purposes I’ll say is totally hypothetical. If you have a printer, you can easily make a simple ass but of propaganda. Think a red hammer and sickle on a white background with the words “we’re back” written below it. The key to all propaganda is to be as simple as possible to worm its way into someone’s brain. So you print up a ton of these simple ass flyers. Hypothetically you could plaster them to the windows of a place everyone hates—such as, hypothetically, a payday loan building, a Walmart, etcetera. People see the flyers, and there’s dozens of them all spread out manically along the building, you can’t miss it. Well the police can’t point to it being a part of any official org, the passers by can’t ignore it, and you’ll likely get at least a dozen people posting about it on social media and spreading it further. Given the choice between one flyer pasted on a dozen buildings and a dozen flyers posted on one, always go for the latter.
>>189673 It's like you don't know anything about America. The national security states have rendered revolution nearly impossible. The only revolutions which are happening around the world are in states influenced by some foreign actor or the global NGO complex. Aside from the immense difficulty of actually fighting the national security state, the economic and psychological basis for these states create a self-defense against anything revolutionary, while the mob is generally bought off with a pittance of welfare (welfare which always comes with strings attached, including the creation of a permanent welfare recipient underclass which passes from generation to the generation). The middle class of the national security state is far removed from any activity that could be called "revolutionary", unless you believe revolution is some planned marketing stunt which is probably how the "revolution" will happen if it happens at all. I don't think it is impossible to see some American version of "socialism" in the future, but it won't have anything to do with any recognizable understanding of socialism. The seething contempt of the middle class for the masses is such that any "revolution" would simply start disposing of the unwanted excess population sector by sector. For the people at the bottom, like me, the middle class "revolution" will be somehow worse than the neoliberal regime which is killing us. Certainly right now, most of the currents of socialism extant are quite openly hostile to the idea of actual rule by the masses or even the masses having a say in their own affairs. It has been almost exclusively the domain of academics, skilled professionals, union bosses to an extent but never the rank and file, and a few bourgeois class traitors. The lower working class by and large has no alliegance to socialism and recognizes rightly that the current trends of socialism are hostile towards them.
>>190753 The things George W. Bush did to reform the American state are pretty much an application of fascism to American characteristics, or one possible version of it. But the building of the national security state in a very long and ongoing process; basically, from the Nazis onward, nothing has ever been the same, and it is merely a myth that "fascism" came and went. Remember that just as soon as WW2 was over, the capitalists were already making friendships with ex-Nazis in the anticommunist crusade. Nazism wasn't simply defeated - it was absorbed into liberalism, basically. I doubt you'll see some grand declaration that the US Constitution is null and void, but in many ways it already is a dead letter. Free speech is confined to "free speech zones" with open contempt, the police can do illegal search and seizure all day and you're shit out of luck without a good lawyer, and the courts of America are an utter wreck - and the whole private prison slavery business is terrible even by capitalist standards. And of course, it's already law that a fairly large subset of Americans basically aren't actual people and have no constitutional rights as such, and that has been the case ever since the national security state was established - and it would be nearly impossible to operate the national security state without that pretext being firmly established.
>>191489 >>191493 It’s like you don’t know anything about America either. Your analysis is entirely based in superstructure bullshit—“oh no the people have a culture that doesn’t like socialism! Never mind that the first successful socialist revolution took place in a country where people thought the Tsar could cure their syphilis with a touch!” Yeah the middle class is shit, and they’re rapidly being squeezed down to the proletariat. There’s a saying from Trotsky—revolution is impossible until it’s inevitable. Except your idea of the revolution’s impossibility is so fucking stupid that I’m surprised you even call yourself a commie. People have no stake in a system that doesn’t work for them. And for the growing majority of Americans, capitalism isn’t working.
>>191501 America isn't feudal Russia you fucking retard. Also, your "analysis" is completely based on feels, as if the proles just decide for a revolution to happen. Shit doesn't work like that. It took two absolutely disastrous crises coming off of war defeats to bring down the Czar, and even then it also took Nicky being a fucking idiot and the inevitable failures of the feudal system in policing such a large territory and population. Never mind that what the Marxist-Leninist system does especially well is jumpstarting industrialization through state capitalism, which is what Lenin had to do in Russia's conditions. America is not a backwater. (Plus, after the fall of the USSR, nation-states as meaningful actors are dead. There is no "national revolution" outside of colonies fighting for independence or resisting the shackles of globalization. Needless to say, Americans aren't about to fight a civil war to resist globalization, because by and large they are beneficiaries of globalization. More than that, though, the peoples who are interested in revolution and seizing power aren't looking at the dessicated remains of nation-state democracies; they're becoming "global citizens" and getting in on the new mafia, a mafia that has been running strong in the 21st century. It should not be forgotten that the upward flow of wealth has not merely been for the haute bourgeoisie and financiers, but the professional class as a whole; and Obama basically guaranteeing the revenue stream of the privatized health care system by forcing people to pay into health insurance in a regressive way is one of the most successful policies from the perspective of a educated-class global citizen.)
Socialism will emerge only when the people suffer enough. Right now, the conditions are bearable, the TV has good shows, movies are cool, there's new music every week, gas isn't too bad, etc. This incoming recession will be the turning point for this country. Zizek was right on Fascism in the US, it will simply never happen, too many different people, religions, races, history against authoritarianism and 'big government' just forget it. What type of socialism can we expect in the US? The Maoist/ML model must be adapted to our conditions. A chairman cannot be used, anything reminiscent of the USSR will simply not fly for a full and fruitful revolution. An american revolution would be intensely violent and bloody. That's my primary concern.
>>191509 Yes. America isn’t feudal Russia. It has even less backwards and reactionary ideals upholding the system. I mean this is what fucking annoys me the most about you defeatist types, we had occupy Wall Street, we had one of the most violent labor conflicts in the gilded age. “But muh middle class” doesn’t work because any Marxist worth his salt knows that capitalism naturally creates wealth inequality and is constantly trying to consolidate an ever falling rate of profit. Also “muh global citizen” shit? We’re seeing right populism rise throughout the developed world precisely because globalism isn’t leading to any benefits for the working class and a growing portion of the middle class. “But muh FBI!” Again the FBI isn’t invincible, and when the economy goes to shit even they’ll be feeling the pinch. Stop doing their job for them you honorary fucking glow in the dark.
>>191512 This magical thinking where we are rewarded with socialism for suffering enough is a persistent problem with the left. The reality, of course, is that it often matters little how much people suffer. States fall when they are face a crisis or multiple crises and the strain of maintaining institutions becomes unbearable; what people feel is largely irrelevant, and if anything the public enjoying abundance would make them more likely rather than less likely to rebel against a national security state. Americans were much more openly rebellious against the national security state earlier in history, when wealth disparity wasn't anywhere near its present state; one of the purposes of neoliberalism is to simply materially deprive the masses of the means to rebel effectively, which is why neoliberalism always comes hand in hand with police force and why Democrats and Reagan want to take away your guns really, really badly. The coming economic crisis - and it will be a major crisis - will probably break the American system as we know it, and it's practically taken as an article of faith that a great revelation and working is taking place in America today. The authorities are more overt about abolishing what remains of democratic, republican institutions and imposing new global and "meritocratic" institutions in their place, and the middle class that is poised to gain incredible leverage is barely hiding their joy at the thought of crushing the uneducated plebs (hence all the insanity in the libsphere). I think there is a gross misunderestimation of just what America and Europe are up against, how utterly awful the management of our intellectual best and brightest has been and how much has already been lost. So far, this decay has been papered over in the spreadsheet, but eventually reality will impose a correction on the spreadsheet and the true depth of just what has happened will be apparent. I've already mentioned what I think is the likely form of "socialism" Americans - or at least the middle class - will accept, and that the lower classes will have nearly no say and barely any chance to even survive what is to come. But even if I'm wrong, it is clear that whatever comes in the future won't resemble past systems in ways we would recognize, and I highly doubt the US will just ape the People's Republic of China as so many technocrats are assuming. Any variant of socialism will necessarily have to contend with Americans' deep distrust of centralized government; this can either be by a direct attack on American culture itself, or by reversing the strains of coercive socialism that prevailed in the 20th century and finding a way to merge the abolition of capitalism with defending human liberty. I highly doubt that this step can take place, but if it does it will have to break with much of the Marxist tradition. It is very likely that such a project wouldn't even consider itself directly "socialist" or understand their struggle as overthrowing the economic system, but that rather the tyranny of capital and financial institutions would be so perverse and unsustainable that an alternative would be required out of dire necessity. The coming mega-death of Americans should make that need readily apparent.
>>191522 >This magical thinking where we are rewarded with socialism for suffering enough is a persistent problem with the left.... You're right, I agree with this. Socialism with American Characteristics it seems.
>>191512 >Socialism will emerge only when the people suffer enough. Shut up Jason, or the midnight productions will come to you.
>>191522 I don't think the future of America is as bleak as you make it out to be, the power of the capitalist class will decline with the decreasing power of the US empire, reducing their ability to get imperial super-profits, will strengthen the American working classes.
Blessings upon all effortposters in this thread.
Revolution will happen in lardland only through nukes.
>>190603 I think, along the lines of Sakai/Hammerquist, that fascism is a distinct ideology, neither socialism nor capitalism, but much worse than either. It's the demonic spawn of contradiction, a Machiavellian brew with as many heads as the Hydra.
>>191522 >>191810 I think this aligns pretty well with CPUSA. They see a future American socialism being a multi-party democracy with a socialist bill of rights. I really think that is the only socialism that Americans will accept. Aping the USSR certainly won't get anywhere.
>>192289 Good luck getting elected in bourgeois democracy then.
>>192314 I'm talking about a hypothetical socialist democracy in the future. I'm not talking about socialists competing with capitalists in a bourgeois democracy.
>>191810 Americans don't hate the government. What this actually means is we don't like private interests buying politicians and the unaccountable deep state. https://youtu.be/5-TydNlj7d0
>>191821 Show me when any fringe group on either of the spectrum succeeds without crisis? People need to be taken out of their comfort zones at the very least and need to he "looking for answers" for us to succeed. No one was talking about over throwing capitalism during its golden age.
>>191522 >Any variant of socialism will necessarily have to contend with Americans' deep distrust of centralized government; this can either be by a direct attack on American culture itself Everyone ITT are underestimating how deeply authoritarian America is, especially after 9/11. Pandering to people by saying socialism is “libertarian” won’t work.
>>192352 >People need to be taken out of their comfort zones at the very least and need to he "looking for answers" for us to succeed. This has already been done. Things don’t need to get worse because things are already worse. People need to see that an alternative to capitalism is possible. People already know that capitalism is shit even those who defend it. Ex. “It’s not a good system but it’s the only one we have.”
>>192352 >Show me when any fringe group on either of the spectrum succeeds without crisis? People need to be taken out of their comfort zones at the very least and need to he "looking for answers" for us to succeed. No one was talking about over throwing capitalism during its golden age. Maybe that's a strategical error, it might be worth considering a strategy that rides on the euphoria of the boom. It might even be reasonable to look at all the phases of capitalism and lay out strategies for every phase of capitalism.
>>189740 It could just be fascist cope. They think America is the same as the Weimar Republic because muh trans people exist. They look at their minuscule support and say that “Hitler had minuscule support too!” They think that victory will come to them because it did 70 years ago, and ignore their complete inability to organize.
>>192526 And Americans are well aware that Bush was marching around like a fucking Nazi. The right blamed Obama for stuff Bush implemented but it's still about the same thing - they do not like the police state and overbearing professional-class leeches literally sucking their life force out of them.
>>192837 The security state has been normalized. Sure people hated the NSA a week after it was revealed what they are doing. But now people forget who Snowden is. The idea that America isn’t authoritarian is a dumb meme.
>>192853 America is the first truly totalitarian state, or is at least closer to totalitarianism than any state before. It is a state where one's own lack of freedom cannot even be conceptualized.
>>192867 I wouldn’t go that far, public debate and dissent is still allowed, but the amount of Surveillance of people in modern American society is historically unprecedented.
>>192937 Perhaps I'm being hyperbolic, but I do think America is (and has been for quite some time) very authoritarian, just very efficiently which allows it to keep up the facade of "freedom" and "democracy"
>>192853 The security state is normalized conditionally. It's accepted more out of apathy than any amount of agreement with the state that it is a good or beneficial thing to have around. The media could turn people around on it at the drop of a hat, but does not for obvious reasons. The American psyche is not as comfortable with it as you imply.
2nd time as Farce rules here. America will need to escalate it's conflicts in order to force new avenues for it's capital and set off the delicate balance of power established by kissinger,because he, at the very least saw that there was no way to resolve the geopolitical situation leading into the end of the 20th century without dissolving nation states altogether (faith in the market aside). This leading us into the first full spectrum crisis seen in our age, imperial, financial, productive, existential. The moment Capitalism completes itself as a global mode of production it will collapse. The proletariat will be necessitated to move, but move into what is the big ticket question. Fascism will develop into a feverish death cult of clowns this time. Worse, because they're sitting on Nukes. I can't believe I miss the cold, calculating war game libertarians that used to devise american strategy.
>>194010 Capitalism has been in crisis since 2008. GM's bailout merely stilted the company up for a few more years, instead of trying to create a social good from the bailout GM axed their worker cooperative unit (Saturn) and massively expanded GM Financial to produce cheap credit that would sell more cars. A decade after they promised to make small economy cars that laymen could afford with cash, GM is back to making fuckhuge SUVs but this time they are twice as expensive and financed on credit. This is unsustainable. It's simply going to collapse at when the amount of defaulted loans > available deposits. The same holds true for every other industry from plastic lawn chairs to toasters and phones. There's simply no more growth to be had. And when the student loan crisis becomes unmanageable it'll take out most of the academic industry too. There will not be any survivors as the foundation of society; people's educations, people's cars, and finally people's deposits are wiped away. This will force socialization of private property, or some sort of debt jubilee that would destroy Wall Street. Admittedly, this is a US-centric view because I doubt fascism will happen in America. But if it does, it will only happen as banks are burned down and looted for what little assets remain. The global system itself, as it is, cannot survive.
>>190269 art of war is necessary for the totally uninitiated to the fundamentals of tactics. While some of it is pretty specific to the place and time it was written there are a lot of things in there that are so universal they can be used in situations totally removed from actual warfare like politics and business. Lure your enemy away from defensive positions before attacking, defeat in detail, men with no escape route fight harder, do everything in your power to make sure your enemy has the wrong info about your forces, set up the defeat of your enemy through auxiliary and strategic means before the fighting has even begun, and so on. Almost everything in that book is shit you will have already picked up on if you've delved into any kind of armchair military history, but I wouldn't underestimate its usefulness in the hands of people who do not partake in such past times and are unfamiliar with tactics on a fundamental level.
>>189673 >By building parallel institutions in towns with low voter turnout, and focused less on winning people over to communism so much as engaging them in direct democracy, the American left can build communism from the ground up. This
>>190269 Anyone have a PDF?
>>189673 I don't underestimate it, the USA potentially has THE most revolutionary potential. But white settlers have to get over their silly fear of black people and the USA as a country must be destroyed. There will be no "socialist" USA, only a number of nations built on its ashes.
>>190263 Hey OP, got any specific advice for someone a podunk suburban commuter town?
>>218412 We literally masturbate to the likes of Trump and Musk while backstabbing each other for office politics and black friday deals. There is no hope for burgers but to starve to death attempting to prop up an "eternal" status quo.
>>218478 Yeah some people do. I live in Britain and everyone likes their arse as well. I take astrophysics and its full of petite-bourgeoisie nerds who think Elon Musk is the greatest thing ever, even the fucking lecture says things like "mars is a sterile as far as we know... or at least until musk gets there" and everyone laughs and claps. Its not only the USA, every country has these people. Europeans like to make fun of the US and pretend its different, it isn't. Every country has social climbing parasites and idiots.
(499.21 KB 2480x3508 WERE_BACK_2.jpg)
(545.99 KB 2480x3508 WERE_BACK_1.jpg)
>>191355 Hypothetically, you could use these.
message to all anti-americans from a amerikkkan: i get it. i really do. we suck. but no version of successful international socialism will exist while a unified north america opposes it. it simply will not happen. either we "labor aristocrats" will have to lead the charge and wrest power from our ruling class and export a proletarian revolution across the world, or the united states will have to be dismantled as a unified state. good luck with the latter option lad.
>>>218513 The second option is the only option. And I don't say that as an "anti-amerikkkan", Europe is just as bad as the US. But the US is a prison of forming nations, not a nation itself. That's why america has to go, not because the USA is just uniquely bad.
>>218522 And the same goes for Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
(1.41 MB 1916x1076 le smug anime grillll.png)
>America going fascist Imagine being this scared of a boogieman that you think a place with so little history/culture/homogeneity will become fascist. I can only laugh at the idea. "We must secure the existence of our mutt people and a future for le 52% children". Top fucking kek. Actual and unironic fascists have given up on America as a whole, with only the mutts/ironic fascists being unaware of that.
>>191512 Reminds me of this post back on 8ch.
>>218527 You get a movement to force homogeneity and a standardized mythology.
>>218527 American fascism will be more rooted in Christianity than in ethnicity.
>>218527 The USA is fascist. If you thought US fascism was ever going to appear as some German guy screaming and goose stepping you are a fool. Every movement, including fascism, has its own material development and particularities. Fascism in the USA manifests itself as pigs and lynchings.
>>218533 >force homogeneity Ah yes, of course. Just force up to a possible 150+ MILLION people to leave. Simple of course. Easily done. A mere week's worth of work. >mythology Yep, just pull up that nearly non-existent past they have, loads of mythology in there. Ripe for the harvest, so to speak.
>>218537 Also, "le 52%" means nothin. Rce is a structure, its not biologically rooted. Race serves capital first. The biological side of it is just ad-hoc nonsense.
>>218536 With how rapidly the country is becoming atheist? Including how non religious it already is? Top kek.
>>218540 >Just force up to a possible 150+ MILLION people to leave More like 10million blacks. Hispanics will be considered white, and Asians are honorary whites of course. This is really ironic since blacks have more claim to the land than majority of whites considering they’ve been here longer.
>>218544 >10million blacks You mean 12-14% of the population, which is 35-45 MILLION blacks. >Hispanics will be considered white Maybe in your dreams Pablo.
>>218550 >You mean 12-14% of the population, which is 35-45 MILLION blacks. <implying rest of em will not be shot or put into prison labor camps(which is already happening to a degree)
>>218537 >The USA is fascist. Read more.
>>218550 >Maybe in your dreams Pablo. The Italians are considered white now. Where do you think Nick Fuentes comes from?
>>218544 Literally no-one has ever suggested white people will leave the USA. Black and indigenous nationalism will not be "white genocide", nor will there be "revenge" attacks on working class white people. This is a ludicrous position only advanced to scare white people.
>>218544 many hispanics are of african ancestry.
>>218551 You do realize how many people that really is anon? You do know that the current racism that goes on, barely puts a minor scratch on the black population as a whole? This is 35-45 million fucking people anon. Not even including the extra-dark Hispanics that will never, EVER be "considered white".
>>218554 Nig what you on about? I’ve never said any of the things you think I did. I just said deporting blacks will be ironic since they’ve been here longer than most of white Americans, who came through subsequent wave of migration.
>>218553 Italians and Irish were only allowed into the "white" club based on two things. Firstly, they are in the European continent. Secondly, with the rapidly increasing non-European population, suddenly Italians/Irish became more attractive partners in comparison.
>>218556 >>218555 > Black Hispanics account for 2.5% of the entire U.S. Hispanic population. Most Black Hispanics in the United States come from within the Dominican and Puerto Rican populations.
>>218560 No-one is deporting anyone. So there's no need to worry about it. The only people being "deported" will be deportions to the afterlife for whites (and comprador blacks) who resist proletarian revolution.
>>218561 Yeah I know that, the same things will happen to people media calls “Hispanic whites”.
>>218563 Hispanics do not need to be African to be dark anon. Have you even left your white suburb once in your entire life? I suggest taking a vacation to Mexico at least.
Race is a spook. Even as a burger the fetishization of race in this country is fucking baffling to me. It's the horoscopes and new-age crystal magic of the right.
>>218564 Are you thick faggot. I wasn’t even suggesting deporting anyone. ‘It can’t happened here’ is a silly excuse. I don’t think any leftist should subscribe to such dogma.
(132.70 KB 400x300 1386359158084.jpeg)
>>218567 >The same things will happen to people media calls “Hispanic whites”. >The same people whom the media have to whiten up in photoshop so they can pretend they are "white"
>>218574 Are you faggots this retarded. It doesn’t matter what they look like, the fascists will consider them whites to further their cause. Race morphs into whatever they want when it suits them.
>>218577 Think what you will Pablo.
The thing that Americans do not realise is that the USA is a birthing country, not a nation. It is in the process of nation-forming. Its comparable to England in the late stages of the Heptarchy. Just as the Anglo-Saxons started as an invading kinship in the 500's and closed out the 1000's as a river of ethnicities from various streams such as the Britons, Danes, Irish and Anglos, so the USA is in the process of forming multiple nations from different streams made up of carious ethnicities gestating inside it. The USA is pregnant with revolution, it just won't be "white" settlers who inherit it.
>>218582 >The USA is pregnant with revolution Now THAT is a great quote!
>>218582 Smart poster. The only possible way Fascism will come to America would be in at least 200+ years when it has settled into place. On the other hand, a socialist revolution could be just around the corner. All we need is an event to light the fuse.
>>218582 >>218584 Let's hope for a very premature birth
>>218589 That kills the mother
(603.02 KB 1637x1227 guy-fawkes-plot.jpg)
>>218588 We shall light this fuse together!
Ok browderite
>>189673 I think that the chances of an American socialist revolution are very slim. Not because I believe that most people in the country are reactionary, but, because most people in the country are conservative and liberal. The overton window hasn't been shifted all that much, contrary to popular belief about sanders. Moist people still identify socialism as some type of social welfare, banner waving, liberalism. I agree that localism shouldn't be ignored, but, it's hard to build up local assemblies when the entire concept of local and community organization has basically been erased from the minds of the working class as it exists today,. Even younger generations have no idea what it really means to organize; They just follow the nearest CIA plant leading the what ever liberal protest they have going on. Ask anyone under 25 what a union is and you will probably be met with a glassy eyed stare of embarrassment. We can organize simultaneously and locally and I agree, we need too, but, we also have to actually have a plain and clear message about where we want to go in the country and why and what that will look like.
bump
(3.52 MB 4032x3024 20200131_203709.jpg)
(3.71 MB 4032x3024 20200131_203727.jpg)
I made a thread about anti cop protests here in NYC that got little attention. I agree OP there is potential here. Sure a lot of the initial organizing was done by pan african post early 70s black panther optics type groups. But its the groundwork for shit. There were people of all races there and multiple different socialist orgs showed up. Pics of the train cart that was occupied on the way to providing jail support for some folks who want some soft core riot porn.
>>190578 >As for the way out, I don't know, but Americans need to learn more about their socialist history (IWW, Red Hollywood, etc.) They already do, actually. I'm not a member but this is what makes me interested in the CPUSA tbh. Not that I think it'll be the vehicle for a socialist transformation... that ship has probably sailed... but the old timers in the party know a shitton and they have a lot of resources about American socialist history that I find interesting. Most of the books they've published through their International Publishers label are written by Americans involving American conditions. Now going back to the topic, I think there are some serious hurdles in the U.S. because there has been a decades-long attempt to turn boomers into mini-capitalists. It structures their social world and social outlook. But the U.S. has also seen periodic waves of democratic movements that have inspired people all over the world. I think about the civil rights movement and Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr. Maybe the white left too easily dismisses their example because they were not waving red flags. I think one positive thing about MLK's legacy is that people are now going back to his radical and anti-capitalist thought instead of the white-washing version used to sell cars during the Super Bowl. https://youtu.be/AJtr8HXwsEs?t=7738 Listen to AOC there at 2:09:00. "Abloo abloo she's a succdem." What she is saying there is pretty radical by American standards.
bump
99% of burgers are lemmings who would rather literally die to starvation or exposure than so much as question the big faces of their favorite party, let alone the systems they've known all their life.
(678.38 KB 1261x1037 karl-marx-bro50-9d54baa9.jpg)
(460.55 KB 2048x1364 hdd0yqso8yf41.jpg)
>>267863 oh no it's the Discord political movement
American potential = 0 /thread
(138.87 KB 728x485 ucv6.jpg)
>>267863 >literally having the fasces on your flag I've gotta say we're lucky in a way that street-level right-wingers are so overly dramatic and emotionally driven. I mean, they clearly do not have the patience to stick their usual dog-whistles and tricks and manipulations, and everywhere I look they habitually lash out uncensored in pathetic "shows of force". They try to play smart and cunning, but have a tantrum when their "4D chess" doesn't within two months transform everything and everyone. Is it some kind of inferiority-complex? They wanna be the smart guys (and are a bit too cowardly to actually fight for what they want), but have an obsession with direct conflict and a wish for macho heroics, too.
>>267950 That group is trying to emulate some European groups like the NRM in Sweden, Casa Pound in Italy, and Golden Dawn in Greece. The only one of those groups that became a real political force was Golden Dawn and that was also Greece in the midst of a catastrophic economic and political crisis and even they were destroyed because they couldn't stop murdering people. >Is it some kind of inferiority-complex? They wanna be the smart guys (and are a bit too cowardly to actually fight for what they want), but have an obsession with direct conflict and a wish for macho heroics, too. Reaction to Charlottesville which was a complete disaster. What I think they're trying to do is show off an image to create a hypnotic effect for sadsack, socially-isolated young white men online. The appeal of fascism is being part of a team and having power over other people, so even other people reacting to their provocations itself is a form of "power" in a way. But the leader of the group fears his own members more than anybody else (again, see what happened in Charlottesville) so the idea is to have very tightly coreographed and scripted / planned events where absolutely nothing can go wrong. Once they feel bold / strong enough though they will begin more direct provocations targeting various "subversive" enemies of the nation, as they see it, including physical attacks on minorities, leftist activists, etc. when they can be isolated and then jumped with superior numbers. Those attacks will also be filmed and broadcast online as propaganda.
>>268162 (me) Also -- these groups are terrified of the courts which is the big risk they take if they try to do more than tightly coreographed events. Charlottesville fucked a lot of them up because of the legal problems. Also, you gotta remember that being flexed on by white supremacists might be an unusual and novel thing for a white leftist who has never been treated like a Jew before. And that might make you angry if these guys do try to provoke / harass / intimidate you. But black and brown folks I know are a lot more steely about these things and don't overreact like white leftists do, because they've been flexed on by racists many times in their lives including, most of all, the police (who probably comprise some of the ranks of this neo-Nazi group).
>>218530 adding to this. Despite popular perception today Americans are a people of revolution and our culture consistently shows revolutionary potential. Our break away with the monarchy, the civil war (our first true revolution,) our mass labour struggles and revolts through the late 1800s to early 1900s with railroad strikes and battles like Blair Mountain and Homestead. Most recently in the 60s, 70s and today to a lesser extent. Americans take some time get going but once we do nothing can really get in our way domestically if there are enough of us. And an imperialist power wouldn't find it easy invading a nuclear armed revolutionary America.
saving this thread

Delete
Report

no cookies?