I dont think its about womens rights for the people im referring to, i think its just a moral religious thing. For example the sandinistas in Nicaragua, while banning abortion, are still deeply feminist. They invest huge sums into helping mothers have children, pushing them into the workforce, including into leadership positions. In fact i think they have some of the best gender equality in Latin America. I too would be uncomfortable working with actual sexists, who oppose abortion because they think women are their objects. Thats not the case with the sandinistas, for them its just a moral/religious thing, so i would be fine working with someone like them. My defense was for people like the sandinistas, not for actual sexists/bigots.
Im not asking them anything. All im saying is that no, being against abortion for religious reasons doesnt make you autonatically an enemy of communism. You should read about the theology of liberation and christian socialism. All im saying is working class people who are opposed to abortion for religion are just as welcome in the communist movement as workers who support abortion. Sure we wouldnt elect them to the top leadership, but they are definetely welcome in the movement. Do you see what im saying?
- •
- t.me
- •
- 9M
- •
- •
- 9M
- •
Literally justifying a blatant murder. Floyd was handcuffed and laying on the ground, he was no threat to anyone, yet they still murdered him. US “thin blue line” people are either insane racists who hate black people or delusional who live in parallel reality where police are the victim somehow. Disgusting 🤮🤮
I do want to add though, that despite our heavy disagreements and heated discussion tonight, that you are still my comrade and hope we can reach a friendly resolution to this debate soon. I also want to applaud your extreme professionalism today as a mod. I really thought you would ban me in a fit of rage or something today, but im very happy to have been proven wrong. Im proud Lemmygrad has professional mods like you who can be objective and separate their views from moderation. I look forward to have more amicable and friendly interactions and debates here on Lemmygrad with you in the future, despite our heavy disagreement tonight! I want to make clear that you are still my Comrade. I salute you Comrade Muad Dibber! O7
Yes i did know that, the Congress for Cultural Freedom and all that. However LaRouche is very weird. Hes anticommunist and preaches the “cultural marxism” conspiracy theory that Ben Garrison and the far right love, but at the same time supports China, Iran and Russia, all while supporting Trump too. Very bizarre.
The KKE DOES NOT consider Russia imperialist, where did you get that from? (Edit: My bad, they do, i didnt know that) Also apparently when J Sakai has stupid opinions on China that doesnt discredit him, but when communist parties that disprove your revisionism do it then it does discredit them. Curious how it works.
First of all, the Greek and Italian parties i cited are not eurocommunist, they are as stalinist antirevisionist as you can be, especially the greek one. I cited european parties because the argument here tends to be that patriotism is only ok for antiimperialist countries, so i showed that even communist parties in the imperial core are patriotic and always have been. Are you disputing that too? Socialist patriotism is NEVER okay now? Because ALL AES states were and are extremely patriotic, including modern day ones like China, Cuba, DPRK, Vietnam and Laos. I thought that wasnt in dispute, which is why i focused on Europe, the imperial core.
- •
- 9M
- •
Ok, you want sources, ill give em to you.
Article by General Secretary of CPUSA Joe Sims defending working class patriotism from 2014:
Article by the Spanish Communist Party (PCE) defending socialist patriotism from 2020 (in spanish):
https://www.mundoobrero.es/pl.php?id=10161
2 Articles from the Greek Communist Party (KKE) defending socialist patriotism from 2000 (in greek):
https://www.rizospastis.gr/story.do?id=209459
https://www.rizospastis.gr/story.do?id=329397
An article by the Italian Communist Party (PCI) (not the original since it dissolved, an ML splinter) defending socialist patriotism (in italian):
https://www.ilpartitocomunistaitaliano.it/quale-patria-per-il-ribelle-parte-prima/
All of these countries are imperialist, and one (the USA) is even settler colonialist. Does CPUSA support colonialism? No! It explictly supports land back, but proletarian patriotism isnt incompatible with that, in fact its fully compatible. Same with european countries, antiimperialism and proletarian patriotism go hand in hand.
All MLs are patriotic, proletarian patriots. Im european, and here all communist parties acknowledge this, from the spanish, greek, finnish, russian, moldovan, ukrainian, etc. Even CPUSA akcnowledges it, only maoist ultraleftists deny this. I havent read Sakais book so i wont comment on it, but isnt Sakai maoist? I wouldnt make my gospel a guy who is so “materialist” he thinks China is capitalist and imperialist.
LMFAO you just said that its false that “all workers have the same interests long term, socialism”. Do you realize the implications of that? By saying that, you are saying that capitalism and imperialism is a sustainable system that will last forever, thus forever bringing benefits to the labor aristocracy ie white workers. This is “the end of history”, completely antimarxist and antidialectic, the world is not static, its constantly changing. If US white workers will always benefit from imperialism, why have living standards consistently gone down for them since Richard Nixon? It is simply impossible to keep bringing surplus value to the labor aristocracy forever, the laws of capitalism, the falling rate of profit, make it impossible. Sooner or later the bourgeoisie will start exploiting the labor aristocracy too, because just the value of the third world wont be enough to sustain capitalism due to the falling rate of profit. This is third worldism, this is maoist bs, this is not marxism wtf dude.
Israeli workers dont want to “keep the palestinian land” unless misguided by the israeli bourgeoisie through chauvinism, but its not in their interests. This is the problem with this “settler” bs, it often fails to define the class charachter of things, just an abstract notion of “land”. Workers only want land to live on, but colonialism isnt about that, Israel isnt evicting palestinians because they wanna live in their house for some reason. The proletariat wants land to live, the bourgeoisie wants to land to exploit. Colonialism wasnt driven by an irrational drive to “settle white people”, it was driven to extract profits from the colonized territories, both in the form of natural resources and in the form of slave labor.
Thus, for the bourgeoisie, land is capital, not just a place to live in. However, as i assume you know, by definition, workers do not own any capital, thats why they are exploited, at most they own the small house they live in (if even), but not any capital, nothing that produces wealth besides their own labor. Thus, it is the israeli bourgeoisie, by definition, that owns the palestinian land, not the israeli workers! Sure they may benefit from that now, but that is a temporary concession to divide the working class, and will not last forever due to falling rate of profit and the limits of capitalism and imperialism.
Thus, decolonization involves abolishing private property, taking the means of production (an actual marxist term, much better than this abstract classless notion of “land”) from the colonizer bourgeoisie, and redistributing them to the workers, both colonized and “settler”, while taking into account the damages caused by colonialism on the colonized, which the colonizer bourgeoisie will repay, not the workers. It doesnt involve killing or deporting all “settler” workers. I mean seriously, even the bourgeoisie can be proletarianized, such as with petty-middle bourgeoisie during heavy economic crises, but somehow the labor aristocracy cant? Ridiculous! This is not marxism nor dialectics!
Those “poor proles” are dead, from centuries ago. Their descendants have not evicted anyone, they are just trying to survive amid the low wages, inflation, police state and opioid overdoses, just like nonwhite workers are. Race is a social construct used, first to justify colonialism and the profits it gave to the bourgeoisie, and in the modern era is used to divide the working class and pit them against each other. When white workers go on strike, what do you do as bourgeois? You hire nonwhite workers who are more desperate and resent their white peers due to them being racist.
But when white workers realize that racism only serves the bourgeois through the mentioned mechanism, they stop being racist. And when nonwhite workers see that white workers arent racist anymore and are fighting for them too, they will fight for them too and not work like scabs anymore. Thats the strategy CPUSA used in the 1930s and it worked. United the working class is strong, divided its weak. Racism only divides, racism only serves the bourgeoisie, it doesnt serve white workers.
According to Wikipedia, whites are 60% of US population. If you say whites are all bourgeois settlers and cant be proletarian or revolutionary, you are literally saying that there cannot be a revolution in USA unless you kill or deport whites until they become a minority, which is a ridiculous ultraleft message. All workers have same interest, whatever benefit white workers might have gotten in the past from colonialism and imperialism is only a short term concession to divide the working class and strenghten the bourgeoisie, just like social democracy and imperialism in Bretton Woods era Western Europe.
Long term, all workers have same interest, socialist revolution. The vanguard of the USAs job is to make workers see that, and unite, ditching away this ridiculous “race” idea. Like americans think “latino” is a race somehow, literally just another excuse to divide US working class and pit them against one another. Thats what the Trump people are all about, “illegal immigrants” are the problem. But instead of showing that thats bs and that all US workers have same interests, USA left says the problem are racist poor whites whose interest actually is being racist somehow and thus the solution is to cancel them. That is an unmarxist idea that wont work.
Israel is a similar example, only rolled back in time. Israeli workers do benefit from exploiting and genociding palestinians, but this is again just a short term concession by israeli bourgeoisie to divide the working class of Israel/Palestine. The Communist Party of Israels position has always been to unify palestinian and israelis against the israeli genocidal regime, not to cancel all israeli workers as “bourgeois settlers”. Israeli and palestinian workers all have the same interests long term.
With this in mind, the socialist patriotist position in USA would be to love all US workers and want socialism and equality for all workers, since that is their interest. Same in Israel/Palestine, one would want a united palestinian israeli state, where both languages and cultures are respected and all workers are equal, since that is their interest. It would also be important to pay reparations to victims of colonialism, to decolonize. But the mistake of people here is that such things should be paid by “settler workers”, meaning white and israeli workers. That is a ridiculous position. It was the US and israeli bourgeoisie that benefitted the most from such colonialism, so it is them that should pay it, not the workers.
Also to add, i havent read Sakais book, but i do know that the group that really popularized it, MIM (Maoist Internationalist Movement) were an extremely secretive Gang of 4 maoist third worldist group. They believed that USSR and Deng Xiaopings China were social imperialist, capitalist and revisionist, that the Cultural Revolution and the Gang of 4 were great, and that white americans are all exploiters and will never be proletarian (which is unmarxist bs as you already said). This group was very secretive and dissolved in 2008. There are a lot of conspiracy theories about them and J Sakai.
Ah i see, so “gender studies” is the correct term. Thanks! I agree with your post 100%, 99% of people here attacking Maupin and Infrared have no idea about them. I tend to agree more with Maupin than Infrared, Haz is too hostile to identity politics for my taste, and has some weird twitter takes too. He still has interesting things to say sometimes, which is why i prefer having an open mind.
99% of americans dont support antiimperialism either, whats your point? Also i would dispute the notion that conservatives are more hostile to antiimperialism. In the George W Bush neocon years sure, but since Trump the situation has turned id say. More and more conservatives and libertarians are against wars, while democrat supporters love the Azov Battallion and want war with Russia. Tucker Carlson, of all people, has been the only mainstream media voice to expose lies on Ukraine. I think this reflects a divide in the US ruling class, between top billionaires like Jeff Bezos who support democrats and want interventionism because it benefits their international corporations, and smaller millionaires and billionaires like Rupert Murdoch who support Trump republicans and want isolationism and reindustrialization of the USA since they benefit more from that. I think this explains the Trump movement and related stuff. Ofc this isnt 100% mathematical, for example Elon Musk is a top billionaire but supports republicans, but i still think this model explains the situation quite well.
He does support trans rights, he has marched many times for trans rights in his activist days. He insists on human rights to drive home the point, that even if trans people were “degenerates” and “mentally ill” as transphobes say, that wouldnt justify attacking them and discriminating them. Its to drive the point home that, whether you think trans women are “real women” or not, there is no justification for bigotry, discrimination and hate. He also often says that he does not know anything about gender ideology/transgender ideology/however you wanna call it, so he doesnt take a position on that, which i think is fair.
PD: By gender/transgender ideology i mean all of these studies and ideas on whether trans women are same as cis women, gender vs sex and all that. I dont know what you are supposed to call it, so i call it gender/transgender ideology, pardon me if its offensive.
- •
- 9M
- •
- •
- t.me
- •
- 9M
- •
- •
- youtu.be
- •
- 9M
- •
- •
- m.vk.com
- •
- 9M
- •
- •
- t.me
- •
- 9M
- •
- •
- t.me
- •
- 9M
- •
- •
- t.me
- •
- 9M
- •
- •
- youtu.be
- •
- 10M
- •
- •
- lemmygrad.ml
- •
- 10M
- •
- •
- lemmygrad.ml
- •
- 10M
- •
- •
- youtu.be
- •
- 10M
- •
- •
- t.me
- •
- 10M
- •
- •
- lemmygrad.ml
- •
- 10M
- •
- •
- t.me
- •
- 10M
- •
- •
- 10M
- •
- •
- youtu.be
- •
- 10M
- •
- •
- t.me
- •
- 10M
- •
- •
- t.me
- •
- 10M
- •
- •
- youtu.be
- •
- 10M
- •
- •
- youtu.be
- •
- 10M
- •
- •
- twitter.com
- •
- 10M
- •
- •
- t.me
- •
- 10M
- •
- •
- t.me
- •
- 10M
- •
- •
- amp.cnn.com
- •
- 10M
- •
- •
- youtu.be
- •
- 10M
- •
Based