Who's your favorite?

Who's your favorite?

Read Marx

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=R8S19u91Dfs
newstatesman.com/world/europe/2017/01/meet-jean-luc-m-lenchon-far-left-candidate-gaining-momentum-french-election
youtube.com/watch?v=wZsYvkTw4Rg
youtube.com/watch?v=6-T5ye_z5i0&feature=youtu.be
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Quite easily Bernie. He was the best candidate of the 2016 election, bar none, and he helped in making the word "socialism" no longer a dirty word in America. He inspired me, and I still won't leave his side.

All of them.

Corbyn (slighly less radical than Melenchon, but an absolute master of political strategy. Without a doubt /ourguy/ on every single issue ever, just smart enough to slightly hide his power level to seem moderate when it's politically effective)

Melenchon (/ourguy/ without a doubt )


Sanders (a godsend to the sewer of American politics, but is prone to puppet the most blatant and vile imperialist propaganda i.e. "muh ebil dictator putin", "muh assad gas madman" "muh genoidal milosevic" "muh taliban lets invade afghanistan")

Melenchon

Corbyn is what every leftist politician should be, but Melenchon is what every leftist politician must be

None of the above, they're steps in the right direction, but none of them are fully based across the board.

Literally /ourgirl/

and cute ^_^

...

Hold on, why would Marx support socdems?

melenchon>corbyn>sanders

Melenchon is my favorite, but I don't think his success right now would be possible if not for the lessons taught by the American election.

The thing about Melenchon is he's extremely articulate, which can be solely attributed to his success.

Corbyn: Weak. Bullied 24/7 by right-wing Blairites. Won two leadership elections, survived a publicly orchestrated coup and party is basically the same as it was under Red Ed.

Sanders: Militarist. Neo-Newdealer and nothing more. Has been a somewhat useful for (mildly) radicalising some libs. But in practice he's basically controlled left-opposition for Dems.

JLM: Probably the best you're going to get for a socdem? I only know about his vague "sixth republic" and tax hike. Would like to hear more before I judge tho. Can one of you frogcomrades post his platform? Is he actually anti-NATO and anti-imperialist?

What happened to Hamon?

No one cares about him.

...

Bull-fucking-shit. He strictly said that unlike Bush, Obama, Trump or Hillary, he'd actually get our troops OUT of the Middle East for good.

Try proving otherwise. I dare you.

Bernie is an imperialist so definitely not him
youtube.com/watch?v=R8S19u91Dfs

this tbh

Uhh, how about him voting for every other war than the one in Iraq, lol? He talked up how 'anti war' he was and his voting record just doesn't match up. The dude is pretty strongly in lockstep with the establishment on that one. And his views on Israel are really weak, too. That is worrisome given he is Jewish too. I don't want to have "the left" be known for putting in a jew that is also a defender of reactionary zionism as well tbh. Obviously compare to trump or hill he was pretty based on his views toward Israel, but still, all US politicians that fail to stand up to israel i find generally worrisome, it seems being generally 'pro israel' and pro intervention in the middle east go hand in hand ..

Wow damn. Never saw this video before. This pretty much seals the deal for me… fuck him

Heres an article that talks about some of Melenchon's policies.

newstatesman.com/world/europe/2017/01/meet-jean-luc-m-lenchon-far-left-candidate-gaining-momentum-french-election

This.

Why the fuck does every article about Melenchon mention he's 'far left' or 'radical left' in the title?

Melenchon>Corbyn>>>Sanders

Irrelevant. Are you so eager to return to the Keynesianism of the past?

He wouldn't.

As an American watching from abroad, I like that Corbyn seems to have some fight in him

Melenchon seems cool as hell, though
and he has a video gayme

Can't Curb the Corbyn

...

they're all reformist socdems so fuck them

YES

Sane materialist leftism from center to fringe, strong labor unions, the warm embrace of job security decent pay and benefits, low debt, clean low-crime neighborhoods, happy prosperous neighbors and relatives, stable economy…

I want it so badly.

Please tell me this is real.

Yeah he was trying to satirize people who make fun of how he dresses as "not sophisticated enough"

I'd take a socdem over another neo-con fuck anyday

Macron

Why am I not surprised

He's not a warmonger

holy shit

Still very much like Hillary in every other conceivable way

nor was Trump :^)

We have seen above, that ```the first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class to win the battle of democracy.``` The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i.e., of the proletariat organised as the ruling class; and to increase the total productive forces as rapidly as possible.

...

youtube.com/watch?v=wZsYvkTw4Rg

...

You'll see how electable he is after the local elections :^)

To be fair, the things he said about Milosevic were true. Dude was a genocidal fuck. And I don't think anyone knew at the time that the US were the ones that put him in place to begin with.

...

I'm french and I think you shouldn't expect too much from Melenchon.

Even if he's not a liberal (in the european meaning), his economic programme is keynesian.

Furthermore, he's a bit authoritarian (for example, Melenchon is in favour of the conscription).

Fuck everything

French Revolutionary Wars part 2: electric boogaloo when?

Left was split between him and Melenchon, Melenchon performed extremely well on the debates and so the left mostly consolidated by him. Hamon is in the high single digits now.

Melenchon>Sanders>>>>Corbyn

Melenchon is electable and leftist.
Sanders is slightly less electable but still very leftist for US standards
Corbyn is unelectable unfortunately. If there was no risk of moderates taking back Labour he should quit and put someone similar but better.

if Corbyn quits the party will be taken back by Blairites and any remnants of the left wing will be removed from British mainstream politics.

t. Nate Silver

Whenever a revolution comes close to seizing the means of production, it's leaders are assassinated by the intelligence agencies of the West.

Allende in Chile
Mosaddegh in Iran
Sankara in Burkina Faso
Arbenz in Guatemala
Guevara in Guatemala, Cuba, and Bolivia (he was an internationalist)
Kim Koo in Korea

Fuck, even Fred Hampton in Chicago and MLK in Memphis (he'd started talking about class struggle a year earlier). The only way to secure a socialist revolution is to win some fucking elections in Western liberal democracies in order to sideline CIA/FBI/MI6/etc.

Holla Forums still considers us as the "useful idiots".
You will end up disappointed once again, my dearest radicals.

To the best of my knowledge, Kim Koo had no plans to seize anything. Otherwise, you make a good point.


I never thought about it that way.

we'll never make it, will we?

Yeah, I agree Corbyn is a necessary evil at this point for the UK. Alternatively I guess maybe if Blairites take back the party and still fail spectacularly the real left will rise again?

What makes you think the president has leverage over those agencies instead of the other way around?

Melenchon. Still a reformist tho

why do leftists have such a hard on for all these women harassers?

t. Hillary

None of them are in SWP though

fucking LOL

It's no longer a dirty word because people have been taught by Bernie that it means "gubbmerment gibs free stuff"!

You have to be really young to think Bernie is the source of that association

...

What about Iglesias?
youtube.com/watch?v=6-T5ye_z5i0&feature=youtu.be

She's gonna become a danger to the powers-that-be someday, will get shot, and the killer will turn out to be a SPD member, mark my words.

...

I fail to see the problem with euroskepticism, if you were implying that was bad.

FAG

FUCKING SNITCHES REEEEE

And people wonder why I, at times, support gulags.

Anybody got the photo of her Spanish partisan cosplay?


Not in the slightest. I actually like the idea of the EU as a means of bringing together economically/legally similar countries, but its current state as a mad neoliberal experiment is intolerable. Jean Luc's position is spot onto mine: Either the EU must accept reform to become democratic and socdem, or it must be destroyed so that the something better may arise in its place, and unlike Britain, France is crucial to the EU's existence. It and Germany are the linchpins of the union, without both of them, it will implode.

This is now a Sahra thread

Even though she's a market """""socialist""""" left socdem reformist, too.

I have a problem with the idea of it even if it was more democratic. The more people involved in a democracy, the less democratic it is, decentralism bruh lol pass the weed

Elections are bourgeois.

As a Trots, you should know that the French Revolution was not a socialist revolution.

Yeah no shit, but it was unambiguously a move in the right direction

She's a Stalinist tankie, tf are you on about

As an Anons, you should know that the Jacobins did nothing wrong and that you can't have a socialist revolution when productive forces are insufficiently developed.

She used to be when she had her edgy phase. She's basically a socdem now. Read her book, nigga.

Actively refusing progressives and socialists into office and passing another New Deal, USA has sealed its own fate.

The empire is in its twilight.

Because we hate women, can't you tell?

Between her and the Chon, finally a Franco-German axis worth rooting for.

Allende may have started the process of socialization, but with the creation of the working-class cordones (Chilean soviets), he in fact became a hindrance and a moderating effect. The bureaucracy and other branches of government became powerless as the people organized themselves. I may be ansyn, but I'd be down for spontaneous dual power as a means to make democratic socialism work. I'd definitely be wary of the still-existing state, though. Just look at what happened next in Chile, with Pinochet fusing military power and governing authority and privatization under the blessing of the CIA. The state has a will of its own, and it will fight back when its tentacles are chopped off.

So did Obama
And that's far from the whole issue, he means "militarist" as in supporter of imperialist bourgeois foreign policy in general

And somehow you think this means "vote in socdems" instead of "build parallel power structures in the workplace and community to take over those administrative functions of the bourgeois apparatus, exert class power and spread class consciousness"

...

Read Marx. >>1572114


That is implied nowhere, what's implied is only that there's action before and after a revolution, and the "before" entails union struggles and electoral activity that Leftists often reject because they don't read Marx and misinterpret his economic "determinism", focus on revolution and crisis theory as expectations of a messianic event that will liberate the oppressed! And then we wonder why some from the outside think Marxism is a religion or a cult, because that's the caricature of it that's on the lips of every Xexizy of the planet.

Of course, many of those misconceptions and many of the degeneration of Marxism into Blanquism is owed to the guy in your pic. Some say it's Lenin, but that's wrong, for Lenin only (accurately) started from the assumption that revolution is the final goal and that reforms are strategic, not an end in itself (i.e. not the main tool through which class war would be on), but he understood the roads that lead to revolution. Shit, read his articles on american liberal democracy and how excited he was about its unionist/parliamentary struggles in the United States. Even after the Revolution he though many Comintern parties should partake in elections, stay in opposition and fight for higher wages, shorter working days, etc.

It does. Marx, contrary to popular belief, was not someone who autistically preached theoretical sophistication and radical purity as the prerequisite for supporting a working class struggle or organization, nor was he someone sitting on armchair waiting for the revolution. He was not a Lassallist, as in, someone who through electoral reform was the endgoal of all political activity, and neither are Sanders, Corbyn anjd Melenchon.


If you want to read more I could direct you to some research, which I know you won't do, regarding his staunch support for the english Chartists, his conflict in the International against Bakunin, who preached abstention from elections, Engels support for the parliamentarist faction of the Socialist League, etc.

As far as building "parallel power structures in the workplace and community", Marx saw the labour unions as the main vehicle for class struggle, but your depiction of what proletarian institutions should look like under capitalism is completely wrong. If you think Marx was proposing some lifestylist communal takeover of public bodies you're probably a misguided anarchist who thinkes he's a Marxist.

Wow, Rosa-SocDem memes, how's the first week as a leftist going, Tim?

t. Noske

Good posts, although someone must be particularly astute not to descend into being a Lassallist. The modern system of electoral politics is a partially imperfect machine for capital to spread its influence. A perfect representative only has so much influence, but a decent representative is extremely rare. Those who fight for labor are extremely small, and those people often support imperialist policies, as well. Electoral politics must remain an attempt to build hegemony, but nothing more.

On the idea of unions, they represent a certain specification of labor, and more over a body of resistance towards capital. In so much as the revolution is the radical destruction of capital and value as it presently exists, unions will require dramatic alteration in shape and form. Additionally, their numbers are decreasing, due both to anti-labor legislation, and jobs in commonly unionized sectors being exported. I think the unity of the modern proletarian is more than that in their workplace, in which they experience only further alienation.

...

Why no sound?

stop being an idiot burger for a fucking second

=L M A O =

t. Tim Farron

I mean I would support Brexit or a complete overhaul of the EU from a leftist perspective but in this case, supporting Brexit meant handing power to Thatcherite Tories and spooked UKIP retards.

Same reason they call Le Pen far right.

Oh Holla Forums… you crack me up

...

Mélenchon>Iglesias>Sanders>Corbyn

none of the above

do you even know anything about those guys?
Iglesias admitted that he was the "new left" meme, pretty much against marxism, like all of the above. This is cult leader politics at its finest with marketing lifestylism for sudo communists.
Pretty pathetic to see this "jerk off the socdem :D" thread on leftypol

no, you should read marx

SUDO APT PURGE REACTIONARIES

I dunno, LibDems seems to be experiencing a mini reversal of fortune of sorts, and it's probably due to their stance on Brexit.

...

none of those things are happening though, are they? you fucking larping dickhead

Well this isn't my position either.
Come on. Soviets are not "lifestylist." It's not "misguided anarchism" to understand that regardless of how revolution comes about, certain administrative structures are necessary in a period of violent capitalist resistance. I think it's also clear that this resistance will be carried out through the state apparatus, especially after WW2 restructured the bourgeoisie's international, intra-class relations, and especially in the age of neoliberalism and the "one world market." The "state" has changed somewhat in its specific character since Marx. It is now not something that the bourgeoisie can realistically abandon and revert to other means of projecting political power. It's as unreasonable to expect that taking over the state through voting is a precondition for socialism as it was to expect taking it over by voting is sufficient a hundred years ago.
Similarly to this. The labor unions are now a glorified arm of management whose well-heeled labor executives have played a key role in suppressing workers' struggles.
I'm not talking about tactical insights specifically adapted to revolution in the 19th century, but tactics overall. "Means" in the sense not of what Marx suggested could accomplish this, but in the sense of the meaning it takes under current conditions. Why do you presume I'm arguing from authority and hiding behind Marx?
I didn't suggest abstention from elections! It's another front for promoting class consciousness, public knowledge of the system's shortcomings and visibility of its alternatives, at least in a "you could conceivably vote for this to happen, but "they" won't let you" way. It's unwise to close it off as another avenue of attack unless it can be clearly seen not to justify the costs involved. Even the Bolsheviks participated in electoral politics, because it's an avenue for connecting with the working class. As are soviets.
That's literally what Sanders is, though. And even otherwise, "vote for socialists who misrepresent their views to take power, and continually misrepresent their views to hold power" is an utterly cynical, self-defeating line of thought.

"Wrong" in what sense? No, I'd love to hear it.

If there is one thing I liked about Stallin, it's his persecution on homos and fun.

...

Corbyn>Bernie>Melancholy

...