[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / dig ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

A collective of people engaged in pretty much what the name suggests

Catalog   Archive

Winner of the 66rd Attention-Hungry Games
/nothingness/ - R I S E U P

December 2018 - 8chan Transparency Report
Comment *
Verification *
File *
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.

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

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

File: e5e757daed4a741⋯.jpg (134.34 KB, 1890x945, 2:1, Dw4o5WOXQAYoRW_.jpg large.jpg)


Lads we hit bump limit.For those who don't know today is the day for May's shit deal to be voted on in parliament. Its pretty much universally unpopular with Remainers and Leavers and is expected to fail some suggest it could be the worse government defeat in history. It could lead to is Labour calling a no confidence motion and triggering a snap general election

388 posts and 78 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 9359b28450ef70f⋯.jpg (300.66 KB, 1448x1080, 181:135, 1547864492272.jpg)


He's changed


File: 7fcd280c5b9dd42⋯.png (390.38 KB, 616x702, 308:351, weareallsinners.png)


File: c698d9c062de28c⋯.jpg (69.37 KB, 613x1024, 613:1024, pFto7Yo.jpg)


File: b6583fec1557649⋯.png (662.87 KB, 697x967, 697:967, ClipboardImage.png)


So as it appears as the Yanks are gonna invade another oil-rich nation, how do we stop more squaddies dying for BP & Shell?

File: 5dacd472a3cf8f8⋯.jpg (28.53 KB, 644x426, 322:213, libshitsarsour.jpg)


Am I the only one who thinks there's something fishy about her?

Years ago I used to work with all the anti-war and pro-Palestine solidarity groups; I knew who ALL the major activists were. I had no clue who Sarsour was until the first Women's March and neither did any of my comrades (keep in mind, I used to pal around with seriously principled activists and journalists, like people who have been to Chiapas and Palestine multiple times, who were in Greece during the 2008 riots, who covered the Arab Spring on the ground, that kind of thing).

All of a sudden, Sarsour comes out of nowhere and is propped up as the "new face" of anti-Trump resistance in the US. She's presented as a big name activist despite the fact that she was unknown to the REAL radical left activists up until that point. Her politics are nothing more than Bernie-tier succdem with some Islamo-idpol thrown in. Not to mention she's come out in support of overthrowing Assad via US imperialism.

I suspect there may be some kind of big money behind her, like she's the lefty activist version of an industry plant (an astroturf similar to what the Tea Party was back in 2009-2010). Again, this is all speculation on my part but I want to know if anyone else sees the same.

24 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.



Muslim Brotherhood doesn't have any international centralization or even coordination.

Like when they took power in Egypt the first thing they did was privatize the shit out of everything and they fought Assad during the Syrian Civil War. Being a member was illegal until 2011.

>Syrian President Bashar al-Assad welcomed the fall of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and remarked that "Arab identity is back on the right track after the fall from power of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, which had used religion for its own political gain.

But Syria has always had Hamas, which is a Palestinian group of it.



She may have had corporate backing in the beginning which is why she was shilled so hard on liberal (NOT leftist, liberal) media outlets.




How do you post something like that and not expect blow back?

It's almost like she wanted to stir the pot



Only liberals like her, because she's nothing but a gigantic liberal.



Sarsour must have a pretty low Autism Level. You can tell by how she shills for Bernie rather than, you know, real socialism.

File: 2843009f43cf1ba⋯.png (29.2 KB, 848x212, 4:1, Screenshot_2019-01-23 r so….png)


What the fuck does it mean to be 'philosophically left-wing'?


I ask because as time passes, I am able to relate to others who consider themselves 'leftist' less and less. It seems that nowadays being a 'leftist' comes with a lot of philosophical baggage and to be a Real Comrade(tm) you have to hold all kinds of views.

31 posts and 7 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



>Marx was a moral realist





Care to give a summary?



Kind of busy, but here's the section on moral realism. There's also the conclusion which you should read, even if you can't get to the whole thing.

iv. Marx’s seemingly relativist statements in this area are not, in fact, what many have taken them to be. They are statements not of moral relativism but rather, as we may call this, of moral realism. That standards of right are, for him, sociologically grounded or determined means that the norms people believe in and live by will be powerfully influenced by the nature of their society, their class position in it, and so on.

It means, more particularly, that what standards of right can actually be implemented effectively and secured — this is constrained by the economic structure and resources of the given society. It does not mean that the standards to be used in evaluating or assessing a society must necessarily also be constrained by the same economic configuration; that the only valid criteria of assessment are those actually prevalent, those harmonious with the mode of production. Marx’s assertion that right cannot be ‘higher than the economic structure’ is a case in point. Its context makes clear — that it is a realist, not a relativist, one. He first speaks of the contribution principle as an advance over capitalism, then explains why it is defective none the less, and says that the defects are inevitable, however, during the first phase of communism. Then he makes the statement in question and says, immediately afterwards, that the different conditions of a higher phase of communism will permit the implementation of the needs principle. Implanted in this context, Marx’s statement is plausibly one concerning the real prerequisites of achieving progressively higher er more advanced standards of right. It is obviously not a statement that there can be no higher or lower in this matter on account of each such standard being relative to its appropriate economic structure.

v. There is nothing at all either reformist or contrary to the cast of Marx’s thought, it is argued in addition, about a preoccupation with distribution as such. He does object to any over-restrictePost too long. Click here to view the full text.


>>2795840 cont.

vi. Equally, there is nothing inherently reformist or idealist, from Marx’s point of view, in criticism of capitalism by appeal to ethical norms or ideals, like justice. True, if such is the sole and self-sufficient, or even the principal, burden of a critical discussion of capitalism, then he does find it so wanting, but while clearly inadequate for him as an impulse to, or instrumentality of, revolutionary change, moral criticism and argument are in no way incompatible with the sort of materialist analysis — of the real historical tendencies towards revolution — that he sees as indispensable. In conjunction with that analysis, and with the actual movement and the struggles of the workers against capitalism, and with the social and economic transformations which these struggles and other developments bring about, a normative critique is perfectly in place and the denial of this just a form of what is called economism. Moral censure and justification are certainly the accompaniment of, and arguably they are a relatively independent contribution to, processes constituting the human agency of revolutionary change, the formation of a desire and a consciousness for socialism.

vii. So, whatever else may be the force of categorizing principles of justice and right as juridical ones, the categorization is unacceptably narrow if it is meant to bind them indissolubly to the existence of law, in a strict and positivist sense. They are, of course, as Marx knew well, standardly embodied in legal codes, backed up by the apparatus of enforcement that is a part of the state. However, such principles can be too, in the first instance, simply ethical ones concerning what is and what is not a morally defensible distribution of goods and bads; and it is possible to conceive their realization without the paraphernalia of state coercion. If these points do not make a juridical conception, then Marx had, or he also had, a non-juridical conception of justice.

File: 473d0d0116007fe⋯.png (1.74 MB, 7895x10000, 1579:2000, ClipboardImage.png)


mods do not delete my thread, I am not here to break any rules.

Ok leftists, I'll humor you. Why would anyone bother working if everything is free? How is socialism a sustainable economic model when clearly no one will bother working?

33 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



This stuff is rather obvious if you're familiar with the Marxist critique of capitalism, but here's the simplest answer I can think of:

The problem with money is that it is freely transferable, and this means clever people can start accumulating it without producing value themselves. With labor vouchers, we're able to give people that produce value a strong assurance that their labor is going to a good end (i.e. another socially productive worker, or someone with genuine reasons not to work), and not into the pockets of some exploitative capitalist.



>>2795701 (me)

You can understand this on a purely emotional level. Say you're working in a shop. What would make you happier about your work?

(1.) You're handing out commodities to people who have managed manipulate others into giving them money. This is what your boss wants you to do as part of his scheme to manipulate people into giving him money. He rewards you for the task with only a part of the money you're bringing in, simply because he owns the place and you don't.

(2.) You're handing out rewards to people holding vouchers verifying that they've either done some good work for the community, or are being maintained by the community because you've collectively decided this to be a moral imperative. This is part of the duty you are expected to perform for your fellow workers, and makes you eligible for rewards as well.

The first alienates people, the second makes them enthusiastic about their job.

It's all about giving power to the workers rather than those who are clever at playing the property game.



This is true of bullshit McCommunist states, which we would call "state capitalist." If they are actually structured to be democratic or anarchic so that the people are in charge, then there is no ruling class. The whole point is to get rid of that, and it has turned out (as Bakunin predicted) that if you have a vanguard trying to lead people to communism, it's just a hop, skip, and a jump to being capitalism again.

>social mobility

This wouldn't even be a thing in communism because everyone's the same class. You either get back what you put in or you get what you need (depending on how developed the system is). If there is a way to be socially mobile, to change your position so that you get a proportionally bigger return, then you are not in a communist system.


File: fc53f14eaa57d3c⋯.pdf (218.49 KB, Marx - Critique of the Got….pdf)

File: 5a6c136f003ab39⋯.pdf (521.89 KB, Marx - Value, Price, and P….pdf)

File: cfa609fd479a363⋯.pdf (221.02 KB, Marx - Wage Labor and Capi….pdf)

Just gonna post some basic pamphlets. If OP is serious about understanding communism, these are a good place to start. They're like 100 pages total.



How do you expect to le BTFO communism if you don't have the slightest clue what that word means? OP is a faggot and so are you.

File: 1b7c917322060fc⋯.jpg (76.07 KB, 1024x768, 4:3, Our Guys.jpg)

File: 0bc5c13dd2148fc⋯.jpg (17.05 KB, 728x425, 728:425, Latin America.jpg)


With so much happening in Mexico, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Brazil and other countries, I think we should have a Latin America general. Any news and information on aforementioned and other Latin American countries is welcome.

72 posts and 18 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



The pro-Chavez people at Puente Llaguno in 2002 used firearms. There was no need to manipulate anything. If you think that the footage was manipulated, you should explain how.



US called for a coup. There has to be a military action now because the US officially said the opposition in the real government. All comes down to the next few days, there is no way forward but a real shooting war.



This, the "coup" failed back in April*. The US will launch military action soon: you should all be ready to help your country resist in joining-in.





They're talking about female cops.



nah there won't be US boots on the ground yet. The CIA will arm the opposition and trigger a civil war tho. When Venezuela is in deep shit and collapsing then uncle Sam and Bolsonaro will intervene militarily.

File: 87da34629adb094⋯.jpg (52.1 KB, 600x448, 75:56, garf.jpg)


Hey, guys, I'm feeling pretty bummed over this and need to "vent" and ask for some advice, I guess. Thought this would be a good place, if it's not just delete the thread.

I've been an activist for a Marxist organization since I was 15, it's been 7 years. I seem to not really be able to feel and act the same way as I did before, and I'm not even sure if I'm even able to work with the Party anymore. I've not lost any of my belief in Marxism at all, it's more like I've lost faith in myself as a Marxist. Everything that the Party seems to do anymore are these "events" where you listen to hours of speeches, and all that we do is hand out leaflets and putting up posters during the time leading up to the event. No one ever comes despite just the usual guys regardless. This stuff is great and fine if you're new to it all and an actual worker, and excited, which I'm not. I'm petit-bourgeois and work a cushy job in a family business (no employees but still), how the fuck am I supposed to look at an actual worker, with a straight face, and tell him that he should spend any of his barely existent free time on coming to our boring ass rallies or attending our circlejerk leftist nerd meetings?

Am I just being a fag? Has anyone gone through something similar?

29 posts and 4 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


Did you just describe the Portuguese Communist Party to me?



Who are you? Surly a wizard, or perhaps a deamon of some long forgotten service.

I need to know why you had chosen this in response to my post?

Truly I had seen this thread and could identify with it, the disenfranchisement in ops post spoke to me so I watched the thread. Not for the same reasons as OP but the same outcome all the same.

I had thought about how to categorize myself as to identify that I am not an antagonist, the very first thing that came to mind was acceleration, because this stagnant march into this fucked up future surrounded by lemmings sweeping me along with them is the source of my disenfranchisement. To accelerate this conflict, to stoke the embers into flames, will wake up the the masses and you will get the people to start paying attention…

I feel strongly about the nature of people and politics but also game theory and how all side are playing a loosing game, the systems game.

After the events of the past 24 or so hours in my life and this thread I felt compelled to share my opinion, something I rarely do. And in response, a gem, which I am still consuming.


Please, to further my own understanding, why did you post that link. Share your reasoning with me and I will share my thoughts with you.

Also, I don't believe in coincidence.



Anyone who has tried to join a socialist organization has had this experience. The problem is these groups employ 20th century tactics in the 21st century where they are totally ineffective at capturing attention or energizing the proletariat. I'm not clever enough to come up with a solution unfortunately, we need some kind of post-modern overhaul of the outdated socialist activist tactics of the 20th century, they just don't work anymore, at least not in the first world.


speeches, leaflets and posters are ineffective



The internet kind of replaced all of those things. Youtube videos, podcasts and memes are infinitely more effective than speeches when it comes to reaching a modern audience.

File: fe3dc2f7946f4ff⋯.jpg (71.6 KB, 850x400, 17:8, Comrade Reagan.jpg)


What did he mean by this?

Is the US' second favourite Ronald a secret commie?

6 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.



Let’s pray that Trump’s image isn’t rehabilitated in the next thirty years and is worshipped as a “great president”. I can see it happening, they’ll romanticize the fuck out of him as long as he did not actually collude with Russia


employee ownership can happen in capitalism just as universal healthcare



He was also severely criticized during his presidency, especially after the iran-contra scandal, but none of this is remembered.


Knowing Reagan he probably meant employee ownership as in ownership of employees by the capitalist tbh


The full context of the quote is that it was part of a speech Reagan was making about a worker co-op in Guatemala "defending itself from communist guerillas". The funny thing about arguing for worker ownership of the means of production is that it's incredibly easy to convince people as long as you don't use the word "socialism". Even conservatives I've spoken to end up liking the idea.

File: 19536ea0e29da0f⋯.png (1.88 MB, 675x1500, 9:20, 19536ea0e29da0fb9a0bd27e0e….png)


What is the deal with these conspiracies I keep seeing saying that the Soviet banks and Chinese banks where "controlled" by larger banking cartels like the BIS?

What proof do reactionaries have to make this claim? what part of it is factual?

(pic unrelated)

54 posts and 9 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



>because only central banks can print currency

Why don't they print an unlimited amount of money if they can just create money out of thin air?

>are you actually defending banks here you retard?

No, but I am criticizing the populist Ron Paul-tier economic criticism that it seems some people are carrying over from their libertarian/OWS days.



>Why don't they print an unlimited amount of money

Hello Nicolas Maduro. There is a problem that occurs when you do this, and it is called "hyperinflation". I suggest you look it up.



>im criticising economic theory

>why cant we just print an unlimited amount of money

you need to lurk for like a few years.

if you print fiat money nothing good happens. your money loses value (if you bought a loaf of bread for 2 dollars yesterday youre gonna have to buy a loaf for 100 dollars today and for 500 tommorow)

people lose their savings (if someone had 100 dollars in their piggy bank theyll become worthless)

people stop using your shitty hyperinflated currency and start using foregein ones.

and fractional reserve banking is one big bubble.

bigger banks can pop that bubble by calling in debts, raising interest rates to unstable levels, and stopping giving out loans.

smaller banks and bussineses collapse, and big banks can buy all the stocks for pennies.

if you think that fractional reserve banking is in any way a good idea you should kill yourself.

it was banned in most socialist countries prior to the 80s.

the only reason its legal today is because it makes the rich even more rich. and its the rich that write the laws, not the learned



So is that why it feels like businesses are run like banks now and they care less and less about their products?



well yeah. i mean most people go to their job to make a living not to have fun.

thats why transition had such a devastating effect on former socialist countries.

factories stopped being there to employ people and produce something, they shifted their focus on maximising capital.

many were fired, employment standards dropped, state or worker shares in the companies were sold off etc.

on the paper it said that they were making alot of money but in reality the whole fucking thing collapsed.

it worsened to the point where many young just started migrating to the west (the old were still fighting for shit-pay jobs), and as post modernism and the internet age set in with service provider and a bunch of other "bullshit" jobs the major industries either outsourced to china or started failing.

thats also why EU politicians want to bring in immigrants; to fill the cheap workforce, but older generations and people in industrial areas (particulary in eastern europe) want to stop that because theyll simply be pushed out of the workforce market because some immigrant will work for half his pay

File: a46710a2ed37ffd⋯.jpg (62.28 KB, 775x514, 775:514, IMG_20180205_092109.jpg)


monitoring the market, trends, fluctuations

original post:

How can a lefty exploit this to their advantage? Is it too soon to try? DOW down about 1000 points since Thursday.


495 posts and 251 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.
Post last edited at


So what's to stop the Feds from just using QE to reinflate the same bubble that's about to pop when it does ad infinitum?


File: 37d0eb3dc7ed685⋯.png (130.43 KB, 1938x566, 969:283, Screen Shot 2019-01-23 at ….png)

from nearly 300 points green to 70 points red wew



money running out tbh theyve spent more than 400 billion dollars since jan 2018 to keep the market alive as seen here >>2794107 they cant simply keep pumping money eventually they'll run out of money and everything goes fubar due to a horrifically more inflated bubble meaning a greater crash



A runaway train of corporations bidding up the stock market so much that becomes obvious that's it's a bubble and all that cash leaves the stock market and bids up real commodities like food, water etc causing hyperinflation. Its already kinda happened in the real estate market. Demand is flat or falling, but prices are rising still.


File: e4c79b407249f36⋯.png (38.61 KB, 662x272, 331:136, Screen Shot 2019-01-23 at ….png)

the fuck?

File: 6ef5c33f3001eb9⋯.jpeg (157.96 KB, 1024x802, 512:401, 6956B81E-550E-4AB6-A03E-7….jpeg)


South Korea is occupied territory, it is not a sovereign state. The United States firmly controls the real levers of power and is fundamentally opposed to a peaceful reunification of the Korean peninsula. North Korea is an advanced socialist state under the aegis of the WPK and united front which has survived the tribulations of the 1990s through a strong adherence to Juche and held off the imperialists through Songun. If you support the Kim family, help me petition the moderation to word-filter South Korea to Occupied Korea.



>have universal healthcare

>universal literacy

>have more than two parties which aren’t crypto-oligarchic

>firm commitment to proletarian internationalism

>doesn’t install fascist states anytime it gets butthurt

>leaders are rightfully honored for freeing their country from Japanese imperialism

America is literally a hellhole compared to the DPRK


There's a DPRK thread.

File: 1295076907141c0⋯.jpeg (126.95 KB, 960x474, 160:79, 3B69820D-BD49-47EB-886F-8….jpeg)


Just send your North Korea shitpost I want them. Give that or North Korean Agitprop.

6 posts and 10 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 8386af779b306ab⋯.png (216.61 KB, 1280x1280, 1:1, 01599035-E85A-4535-AF1A-6C….png)

Socdem Juche gang gang


File: a6b72e2a6506bf2⋯.jpg (20.99 KB, 719x360, 719:360, DeepFryer_20180710_183507.jpg)



Interpreting the Taegukgi as "pepsi flag" shows how retarded that meme and you are



>taking a meme this seriously


File: 37187b73bc94dba⋯.jpg (77.22 KB, 768x432, 16:9, 50a1077632860ce4ba8aa91464….jpg)


>Believing Occupied Korean pepsi flag is 5000 years old and not a pepsi PR stunt

What's next? You'll be saying that Santa Claus used to look the same in medieval times?

File: e439dfe9e720853⋯.png (277.06 KB, 1567x747, 1567:747, Globohomo.PNG)


Not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I figure its better then anywhere on 4chan.

Currently I've been watching a lot of content by The Distributist and 1791l. I'm looking for something which will pull me back to the left. Ideally they should cite their sources and try to avoid moral outrage. I understand why people are angry right now, but I'm a fan of presenters who at least try to appear objective. People like TYT kind of piss me off for that reason. I enjoy Contrapoints, but I put her more in the entertainment camp then serious political discussion.

Pic unrelated, but amusing.

30 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 6c94d21447b28d7⋯.jpg (48.37 KB, 1024x1024, 1:1, Sargons view.jpg)

File: 93dbe139ad04f29⋯.jpg (32.8 KB, 637x523, 637:523, sargon classical liberal b….jpg)

File: 09cf25795038b6a⋯.jpg (79.34 KB, 640x750, 64:75, sargon classical liberal b….jpg)

File: 36aae03954e3024⋯.png (265.49 KB, 750x800, 15:16, sargon of akkad fascists a….png)

File: fb6c5e132af63ea⋯.jpg (36.66 KB, 865x218, 865:218, sargon cuck.jpg)


File: 45d2b51f50cf86e⋯.png (98.35 KB, 295x295, 1:1, 15c2ef2f8eb8d61653f9e2a37f….png)

Here are some smaller socialist/communist channels that deserve more attention:

>Danov - Great video essays on a variety of leftist topics and *epic* shitposts


>LeninLover1917 - This is SCHNITZ but he has returned from death and renamed his channel


>Polinkazh - Marxist-Leninist channel with a focus on debunking PragerU garbage


>Tovarishch Endymion - Superb video essays focused around Marxism and the USSR


>YUGOPNIK - Solid video essays on late stage capitalism from a Marxist perspective


These are the kinds of people that leftypol should be supporting… If Bat'ko can get almost 20000 subscribers after starting from this board then these guys should too.


File: 3a140d53e7b506a⋯.png (388.54 KB, 1605x1592, 1605:1592, schnitz furfag.PNG)

File: 987b5df68df727b⋯.jpg (83.03 KB, 694x500, 347:250, schnitz coup.jpg)






Why have no ecelebs made a video on TRPF yet? Are they just that illiterate that they keep on picking low-hanging fruit?

File: a2ed25637268da0⋯.jpg (68.74 KB, 320x409, 320:409, Veblen.jpg)


>got into a huge argument on another forum a long, long time ago

>advocated for Thorstein Veblen-ish abolition of the price system

>people were opposed to my ideas

>they insisted, "we are liberals"

It really opened my eyes and I began to realize how ignorant I truly was. I know this is pure cringe for me to actually say it, but for the longest time, I thought liberal and left-wing were the same thing.

This is how messed up the discourse is in America; from youth, we aren't even taught how to divide left from liberal, and this is one of the methods by which the radleft is suppressed. If you are raised in a liberal consciousness, believing modern neoliberalism to be the same thing as leftism, then you automatically assume that you have representation whenever the Democrats are in power in the US. You do not. They are not leftist.

This may seem elementary to you guys, but it was a real game-changer for me, and it made me see how much of a lie the two-party system in America is.



Quick lesson

Liberal=pro capitalist

Leftist=anti capitalist (except for succdems who are a whole different story)


nice blog


If their only argument was the fact that you were “liberal” they were retards in the first place


In the US, there is a lot of conflation of "social liberals" with "economic liberals". When people say "the liberal left", in the US, they mean "social liberals" who are pro-human-rights, pro-civil-liberties, et cetera, with no specific economic connotations at all. This muddies the waters and makes it seem like the left and the liberal centrists in the US are joined at the hip. It's a very odd arrangement, unlike anything found elsewhere in the world. When an American hears "liberal", we think "left", even though the Democrats are right-of-center and the Republicans are so far-right as to break the scale. A lot of people in power seem to be panicking now that the real left is waking up in the US and realizing that we want representation. Even the right-wingers and conspiracy types have noticed it, with a former FBI official recently admitting that suppression of the left wing and anti-capitalists was part of their mission.


This suppression could take many forms, from the overt to the subtle, and I suspect that the whole "liberal means left" thing here in the US is actually a cleverly-crafted psyop. It allows us to have a two-party system where both parties advance the same neoliberal agenda, while also calming insufficiently educated radicals whenever "their" party is in power. It allows the Democrats to act as a psychic relief valve for the left, while not actually pursuing any overtly leftist policies that would harm the interests of the wealthy donor class.

File: 47baa8231e40455⋯.jpg (129.29 KB, 1296x730, 648:365, ll_porky_pig_2_copy_-_h_20….jpg)


Any good books on late-stage capitalism or criticisms of capitalism and the free market?

Please dont recommend capital that shit too expensive man


I never understood the term late stage capitalism.

For that to exist capitalism would need an end point

what if there is none



So the main premise of Capital relates rate of economic growth with rate of return on profit, and Piketty himself revised that relationship's meaning to be less important than he originally presented in the book itself. It's a good book and still worth a read, but it's already a bit outdated. >>2795536

File: 1b0b1ccaec027b9⋯.png (112.86 KB, 287x241, 287:241, WorkerLogo.png)


What is left communism? Isn't all communism left? Why does everyone mock left communism?

Please explain to my brainlet mind

29 posts and 4 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



That man is deformed.



That man is 'shopped.



File: ec60141986ae8f4⋯.jpg (9.32 KB, 246x205, 6:5, (YOU).jpg)



The guy gives a somewhat accurate descrption of Leftcommunism but his description of what the USSR is considered by Leftcoms is somewhat lacking. Aufheben in fact regurgitates Ticktin's claim that the USSR was a "non-mode of production", a ridiculous claim, but some Leftcoms like Chattopadhyay do claim that the USSR was state capitalist, while Bordiga was more ambiguous about it. To make no difference between state capitalism and capitalism as communisers have done it seems to be the same sort of vulgarism to think fascism and liberalism is one and the same and there we should resist fascism. But he's generally right that the term state capitalism came from an offshoot sect of Trots, not Trotsky himself but the Tony Cliff school.

Still, Leftcommunism is completely dislodged from the real world these days, as it always have been, you will never hear these theories outside of the milieus of philosophy students or anime-posting Twitter issues, it really has been a stillborn. I assume some Italian workers may or may not heard or Bordiga because he's an historical figure in Italy but that's it.

Delete Post [ ]
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]
| Catalog | Nerve Center | Cancer
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / dig ]