Why would you think revolution is possible in first world countries...

Why would you think revolution is possible in first world countries? Even the dirt poor in America and Europe live like kings compared to the poor in South America and Asia.

Other urls found in this thread:

marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/wage-labour/ch06.htm
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

third worldism needs to die

Because absolute poverty makes helpless while relative poverty and missed expectations makes revolutions.
Historically proven fact.

The revolution will take place in Europe and Latin America.

That's a fucking lie though isn't it you stupid fuck.

Numbers speak for themselves buddy. Get a grip, there is literal slavery in Libya today.

Because the best revolutionary environment is one in which a previously prosperous population becomes impoverished. If you have been born into poverty and everybody you've ever met was too then you would be less likely to get angry about it and more likely to accept it. If you were once prosperous but are now poor then you are much more likely to want to change things.

the image pictured above is deeply triggering

because the poor are usually white and men, the natural enemies of the left

I never understood how unpaid internships aren't slavery. They totally are, aren't they?

Fuck! The King of Libya is enslaved? You should have included this in the OP tbh.

indentured servitude, morelike. with slavery you dont get out.

Never understood why you think unpaid interns have any revolutionary potential since they are infinitely better off than the poor in India that are born into a literal caste system.

this was a good shitpost

I don't what you're trying to argue. Look I've worked most of my life like most Americans and have basically nothing to show for it. Trust me, it sucks but the average working class American isn't thinking about starving people in other countries while they make barely enough to eat. Going back to interns, yes they're playing the game but it doesn't mean they like it.

People live off a dollar a day in third world countries, you slack jawed yokels have to flip fucking burgers for an hour and you can buy more food than the poor in South America can get in a week. Fuck you, champagne socialist.

You're right the average working America is fucking loaded. They should totally be exterminated when the revolution comes.

Because the economic system is still fundamentally unstable in the first world, even if people here benefit from exploited labor in the third world. Sure, there will be no revolution in the first world today, April 11th, 2017, but these content workers might not be so content when the global economy collapses.

go away unruhe

This is the oldest trick in porky's book, how do people keep falling for it?

did he get mike tysons face tattoo on his shoulder?

MTWs in the first world is the socialist version of white kids calling each other cracker

It is only possible in first world countries. If a revolution happens in the third world, it won't be able to withstand the power of imperialist nations, thus those nation states' power has to be destroyed from the inside.

wtf are you talking about? the imperialist nations DERIVE their power from exploiting lesser nations

jfc read a fucking book please you stupid idiot

the system isnt as broken as the lazy, objectively worthless, zero personal responsibility, overly entitled mass leftists make it out to be

Ever met a 30 year old revolution enthusiast that was an utter and total fuck up?
It's like scapegoat ideologies tend to attract failures who want to feel better about being failures, by having a scapegoat.

Cause the working class and the middle class will live worse lives than there parents
Decline always leads to some sort of unrest

i let you in on a secret: the poor in america and europe… they don't live in south america and asia.

i know, shocking, right?

now go kill yourself, defeatist class collaborationism apologetic proto-faggot

Yea man just look at this man, he sure lives like a king.

A house may be large or small; as long as the neighboring houses are likewise small, it satisfies all social requirement for a residence. But let there arise next to the little house a palace, and the little house shrinks to a hut. The little house now makes it clear that its inmate has no social position at all to maintain, or but a very insignificant one; and however high it may shoot up in the course of civilization, if the neighboring palace rises in equal or even in greater measure, the occupant of the relatively little house will always find himself more uncomfortable, more dissatisfied, more cramped within his four walls.

An appreciable rise in wages presupposes a rapid growth of productive capital. Rapid growth of productive capital calls forth just as rapid a growth of wealth, of luxury, of social needs and social pleasures. Therefore, although the pleasures of the labourer have increased, the social gratification which they afford has fallen in comparison with the increased pleasures of the capitalist, which are inaccessible to the worker, in comparison with the stage of development of society in general. Our wants and pleasures have their origin in society; we therefore measure them in relation to society; we do not measure them in relation to the objects which serve for their gratification. Since they are of a social nature, they are of a relative nature.
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/wage-labour/ch06.htm

tl;dr: Third Worldism is proto-faggotry and anti marxist.