Corbyn Wishes Happy Christmas to Imperialist Mercenaries

Saying it to "MUH TROOPS WHO SERVED OUR COUNTRY" is, you manipulative weasel.

Doesnt mean he isnt gonna slash the shit out of military spending and stop aid to the Saudis when hes actually in power.

Jeremy Corbyn is an opportunist, an imperialist, and he helped kill Rosa. I seriously hope none of you red liberals support him.

Saudi Arabia is the puppet of the USA and Britain. Part of the problem with Corbyn is that he replicates the lie that Saudi Arabia is somehow "manipulating" Britain. As well, he REFUSES to state the FACT that the USA, Britain, and Saudi are committing GENOCIDE in Yemen, but he's fine wishing his mass-murdering troops a happy Christmas!
This is really how opportunists think… If we just elect this two-faced, lying imperialist to power, he'll magically turn around and use all the clout he generated by being a pathetic coward, and turn the whole government around without offending the military!

Ahahahaha

oh wait you're serious

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

It's not nice to misquote people, user.

Do you have brain rot? Saudi Arabia was literally created by Britain, and the USA has been keeping House Al Saud in power ever since WWII.

Meant to quote

He's talked about warcrimes in yemen during PMQs

HALF THE COUNTRY IS STARVING TO DEATH. THAT'S OVER 12 MILLION PEOPLE. OVER A MILLION ARE DYING FROM CHOLERA. THE US-SAUDI COALITION HAS KILLED SO MANY PEOPLE IN BOMBINGS THAT THEY HAVEN'T EVEN ALLOWED A DEATH TOLL TO BE RELEASED IN OVER A YEAR.

Yes that is a war crime pretty much dictionary definition

Kill yourself opportunist. Unless Corbyn condemns the British and US governments for genocide, he is a weasel.

any /DELAYER/ in?

I don't think it means anything. He's a politician, and he has to get them votes.
When he's in power I doubt he'll be any more than a succdem, but only time will tell. He's obviously not going to foster a De Leonist reconstruction of society, but he might at the very least make socialism less of a dirty word and allow people to reconsider the ideas of Marx (although Corbyn is in the cannon of thought associated with Bernstein and Keynes).

t. socdem gang

it means he's an enemy of the workers of the world.

...

If you think that it is a completely dependent relationship you are retarded and should cease commenting on all foreign affairs whatsoever. The US and Britain did not order SA to start their war against Yemen. That was the brainchild of Saudi Arabia and solely their move.

They didn't sign up for the chaos such intervention would cause and already had intelligence links and a working relationship with the Houthis.

Now stop blithering you idiot.

It literally is. Saudi Arabia RAN OUT OF BOMBS, and then Britain and the USA shipped them billions of dollars' worth more. The USA and Britain are in all their control rooms feeding intel and commands, they are participating in the genocidal blockade on Yemen's ports, they are giving mid-air refueling to bombers. Everything Saudi Arabia is using to commit genocide is made in the heart of the empire.
You are a piece of shit who apologizes for empire, you are no better than a Holla Forumstard.

...

You're probably joking but this is childish and I'm exhausted. Goodnight x

Help guys, I love Corbyn and want him to win and build an Isolationalist Socialist Union of Britain after Brexit, but I know he's a a socdem who'll betray us after becoming PM just like Bernie did. What do I do?

read Lenin.

No, I'm dead serious. All socdems are enemies of the workers.

wow

so

triggered

Good job skipping the rest of my post explaining how in March 2015 before the war even started the US wanted a two state solution for Yemen. But that's ok you being illiterate is the least of your problems.

Wow so they took advantage of a situation who would have expected that. Doesn't mean that they didn't have other, differing plans.

Yeah because breaking the blockade and possibly having Saudi Arabia fire on you is such a good idea right?

ad hom nonsense to disguise how weak your argument is. I have brought proof literally showing how the US was pushing for another solution besides Saudi led intervention and you're desperately trying to salvage the narrative you cherish in your head that you did no research on.

...

Why is Holla Forums filled with LARPers?

keep citing utter joke sources like Stratfor, shitsucker. you are an apologist for genocide, you deserve to hang.

...

...

Ahahaa.

I WOULD LIKE TO BRING TO EVERYONE'S ATTENTION THAT WIKILEAKS GETTING STRATFOR'S INTERNAL EMAILS IS ALSO THE SOURCE OF LEAKS FOR USA MEDDLING IN VENEZUELA. IF YOU DENY STRATFOR'S VERACITY YOU DE FACTO HAVE NO PROOF FOR THE US MEDDLING IN VENEZUELA. THANKS FOR PLAYING AND HAVE A GOOD DAY.

Wew, everytime the burger hours start this board gets a slightly increased Neocon vibe. Everybody who even slightly tries to apologize for the role of the West in the genocidal war in Yemen is not a comrade.

Soldiers are not proletarians. What's next, defending cops as proles in uniform? Fuck off

Stratfor is a joke, all of their reports are made to pander to neocons.
Wikileaks is full of irrelevant shit, it's not a gold stamp. You are exposing yourself as an utter nitwit.

>>>/liberalpol/

please die

You really think Corbyn will attain any political power if he spergs out and says 'fuck the troops'?

could have said nothing, or happy christmas to everyone everywhere. fuck singling out the troops at all. that mentality is fucking cancer.

This is like apologizing for fascist Italy's participation in the Holocaust because Mussolini himself opposed genocide, you see, he just had no choice but to go along with it and exterminate the Jews because imperialist alliances come first. Fuck off.

You know that Lenin and Liebknicht came up with that and not me, right? Their slogan was “turn the guns against the bosses”—not “fuck the troops”. Thalmann went so far as to eat that police were proles in uniform btw

You can disagree with what soldiers and police do or are ordered to do withoutdemonizing them like some anarkiddy.

Why should I care if he attains political power if he only uses it to promote imperialism?

OH OK, so "Happy Christmas" was actually Corbyn's coded way of saying "Shoot your COs." STFU you fucking weasel.

1. source on that Thälmann claim
2.

this is fucking retarded

Oh OK, so Corbyn is just regurgitating imperialist propaganda but he's SECRETLY going to totally stop imperialism! You are a fucking worm.

What an embarrassingly shallow definition of "propaganda". What message is he propagandizing with this, and how does it overrule an entire career's worth of consistent anti-war positions?

What SO DEEP definition of propaganda are you working from, shitstain?

Name one war Corbyn has stopped. Name one war he will stop. Hint: you fucking can't.

wow I've always heard from MLs that tan.kies just naturally take over the discourse of left spaces from the strength of their superior rhetoric but I really haven't seen it in play before now. Imperialist propaganda at its basest level would probably push for increased wars but I'm sure I'm going to here a brilliant rebuttal about being subhuman very shortly.

The discussion is "is Corbyn an imperialist". By this standard every person in this thread and 99.99% of people everywhere including in govt positions are imperialists. Of course that isn't the standard you normally use, so please don't insult both our intelligence by pretending it is for the sake of this argument.

he even supported the continuation of the irish troubles when the northern-irish had long gotten fed up with the futility of killing each other over idpol

because that was in the past obviously. if he's pro war NOW and he's asking for votes NOW he can go fuck himself

No need to straw man.

The right-wing majority of the parliamentary Labour party (PLP) is seeking to overthrow the party’s left-wing leader, Jeremy Corbyn, having been desperate to ditch him ever since he won the 2015 leadership contest by a landslide.

Until recently, the PLP and the trade unions always decided on new leaders between themselves, but rule changes now mean that individual members and registered supporters have the final say. Since the majority of ordinary party members have shown that they are pinning their hopes on left social democracy to find solutions to austerity, privatisation, unemployment and war, anybody who hopes to replace Corbyn as leader is forced to use left-sounding phraseology too.

Hence the Labour bigwigs’ preferred ‘unity’ candidate, Owen Smith, who, while polishing his leftist facade, comes reassuringly equipped with an impeccable corporate CV, thus earning him the confidence of the party establishment and imperialist media alike.

A surge of hope

The election of Corbyn as leader brought with it a great surge of hope to all those who still believe that if only the Labour party can get ‘back to its roots’ and win an election on a left-social-democratic platform, the problems of crisis and war can be tackled fairly; that by taxing the rich more effectively and refusing to launch imperialist wars, the government could balance its books and bring back the fast-diminishing welfare state; and that the People’s Assembly is right when it asserts that “austerity is a political choice, not a necessity”.

According to this view, a left-wing Labour government would renationalise utilities and services, rebuild the NHS, re-fund education, reinvigorate industry and employment, bring back social services, increase the state pension, and fund the benefit system so as to provide an adequate safety net to those who can’t find jobs or are otherwise unable to work.

Put simply, most of us long to live in a fairer and more secure world. The surge of support for Corbyn is just one manifestation of this desire, and of the anger at the constant downward pressure on living conditions that the majority of British workers have had to endure in recent decades.

This anger and frustration is also behind the rise of Ukip/BNP-type British nationalism, of Scottish and Welsh nationalism, of black nationalism and of bourgeois feminism. All these movements claim to offer solutions to workers’ problems, but all are based on the idea that the enemy we need to fight is within our own ranks (immigrants, black people, white people, English people, men).

They all act to divide the working class whilst leaving the rule of the capitalist class intact.

Can capitalism be fixed?

Essentially, all the solutions on offer are based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the world in which we live.

The conditions that allowed the Labour government to provide public services, social housing, jobs and benefits to workers in 1945 no longer exist. The USSR is no longer offering its glowing example of socialist prosperity, and the post-war need for massive reconstruction has been replaced in the capitalist world by a deepening economic crisis, which is forcing the imperialists to cut costs everywhere.

The collapse of the USSR, and the consequent disarray in the world communist movement, has emboldened our rulers to believe that they no longer face the imminent threat of revolution. The need to buy social peace has been replaced by the need to pass the burden of the crisis onto the working class, and our potential resistance is being crushed not by buying us off, but by pushing us into the arms of all the charlatans who make careers out of spreading racist, nationalist and other divisive lies to confuse us and to divert us from targeting our real enemy: capitalism itself.

Resistance needs direction

Our party greets with enthusiasm the rising spirit of anger and resistance among British workers, but Marxist science shows that they will be powerless to change society until such time as they have learned to recognise their real, class interests and to distinguish clearly between friends and enemies.

Given the strength and all-pervasiveness of the corporate imperialist propaganda machine, that is no easy task, but life is every day blowing holes through the officially accepted narratives and providing us with lessons that are there if only we are willing to open our eyes and learn from them.

People who genuinely want to change society for the better must help accelerate this process by using every cut, every war crime and every act of scapegoating to prove to workers that it is impossible to provide a decent life for all while capitalism remains.

Capitalism begets and increases inequality; it cannot avoid the waste of unemployment and overproduction; it cannot solve the problems of poverty and unemployment, nor plan its activities so as to avert environmental catastrophe. Imperialism, the highest stage of capitalism, exacerbates all these contradictions on a world scale.

Imperialism leads to war, and imperialist crisis today is pushing us towards a cataclysmic world war with Russia or China or both.

Labour’s history, soaked in the blood of the oppressed masses, proves that it has never been a tool for workers’ emancipation; it is a party at the service of the ruling class against the interests of the working class.

Moreover, with the best will in the world, and even with the nicest of leaders in charge, Labour is incapable of fixing capitalism’s contradictions. Even if he can retain his position at the head of the party, Corbyn will not be able to change that simple fact.

Even supposing it were possible to transform the Labour party, it is not possible to turn a capitalist democracy into a workers’ one by simply changing those who run it. In capitalist countries, prime ministers serve the ruling class, not the people.

No PM in a time of crisis can resist the ruling class’s need to implement austerity and wage war if they want to keep the job. Corbyn would be left trying to reconcile the anti-war and anti-austerity feelings of the masses with the capitalists’ need to wage imperialist wars and effect cuts and privatisations.

Let those who believe Mr Corbyn can win the battle against British capital without threatening the foundations of the capitalist system do their best. For our part, we would be happy to see JC elected PM, since that would be the surest way to disillusion the millions who are pinning their hopes on such an outcome.

Meanwhile, our party will continue to do everything in its power to win workers over to the struggle for socialism.

Hard as it may be to accept, in the end, we have to admit that the working class has no other viable option. Only by completely replacing the capitalists’ economic system and political dictatorship with workers’ social ownership and with production directed to meeting people’s needs will we be able to build a world fit for human beings, and to consign poverty, inequality, ignorance, disease and war to history.
cpgb-ml.org/index.php?secName=leaflets&subName=display&leafletId=115

I agree with this, I just can't reason that one PR move overrides him deciding to debate an entire audience rather than relent on what would be considered a "reasonable" point about war and nukes just a few months ago. If we were just talking about some stance from a decade ago I'd be more likely to agree

So THANK YOU MUH BRAVE IMPERIALIST TROOPS isn't "simple" propaganda anymore, apparently it's too deep for you. Also eat shit, asshole.

It's absolutely relevant here, because Corbyn is allegedly making a bid for power. Corbyn sycophants want to act like all of his posturing can somehow negate the fact that he is a chauvinistic imperialist, no different than Attlee or Cecil B Rhodes. The fact is that his talk is weak, and his two-faced bullshit is a clear indicator he will "cave" instantly to any pressure to continue aiding the imperialist British state.

Jeremy Corbyn: ‘Left’ Labour’s great white elephant
All the wishes in the world cannot turn the imperialist Labour party into a vehicle for workers’ emancipation.
Jeremy Corbyn (JC) himself merely mouths Obama-like ‘yes we can’ platitudes that commit him to nothing much but please everyone who hopes for change, the entire ‘left-Labour’ machine has gone into overdrive, promising anything and everything to whoever will only sign themselves up as a Labour party supporter and vote ‘Jeremy for leader’ in the upcoming Labour leadership election.

Once again, we are being encouraged to believe that, with this election, workers have everything to win or lose, and that the surprise possibility of a ‘left-wing’ candidate taking over the second party of imperialism is some kind of incredible opportunity that we would be crazy to ignore. In fact, however, the entire Corbyn ‘phenomenon’ is nothing new. It basically boils down to the following oft-repeated piece of wishful thinking: “If we could just change the leader of the Labour party, we could push the party in a ‘left-wing’ direction and then our battle to [insert any and every campaign/dream here – ie, end war, end austerity, stop the blockade on Cuba, bring back free school milk, abolish the anti-trade-union laws, etc, etc] will finally be victorious.”

But this argument is not only a misguided way of understanding and presenting the question, it is fundamentally illogical and harmful for the working-class movement. Essentially, such a presentation reduces the entire political question to one of personalities and not classes, Moreover, it is the same argument that was used to get ‘Red’ Ed Miliband elected last time; it was even put forward by people who were desperate for Gordon Brown to replace Tony Blair (another great success story).

Essentially, the problem with the Labour party isn’t who’s in charge; it’s who the party actually serves. Corbyn, even if his intentions are good (and we are by no means convinced that they are, given his track record of subverting working-class movements and tying them to the coat tails of imperialism), cannot do anything about that. The Labour party has no intention of challenging the real institutions of power in this country, which are institutions of bourgeois state power; it has proven this throughout its history, including during periods when it had far more ‘radical’ members and leaders than the latest great ‘hopeful’, JC himself.

The fundamental problem is that the Labour party is firmly committed to capitalism and to the preservation of British imperialism. Over the course of its history, it has had many ‘left-wing’, ‘progressive’ members, and scores of leaders and senior MPs who have had what they referred to as ‘socialist’ politics (actually, social-democratic). Many of these were far more radical than Jeremy Corbyn – James Maxton, for example, who was a leader of the Clyde Workers Committee during the first world war in Glasgow.

But no matter who was in charge, the Labour party has never been a vehicle for socialism. If we can’t learn from the past 100 years’ experience, we are doomed to continually repeat our mistakes.

In its ‘glory days’ following the second world war, famous ‘socialist’ Prime Minister Clem Atlee introduced the NHS, took the mines and other vital industries into state ownership and so on, but he and his government did this in the context of a world emerging from the huge conflagration of 1939-45.

The various concessions that made up our ‘welfare state’ were made to people in Britain because other countries – socialist countries, like the USSR – had already provided, or were beginning to provide following their liberation, free health care, comprehensive education and decent housing to their people. British imperialism was forced to give these temporary concessions to British workers under pressure that they might follow the example of workers in the USSR and the emerging socialist countries and take what the rich would not give.

Our welfare gains were the result of the emergence of a strong socialist bloc internationally, and the pressure put upon the Labour party from the left at home by a relatively strong communist party and a militant trade-union movement. No such situation exists today.

What is also too often forgotten is that these concessions were given to the British workers for a price – and that price was paid in blood. Whilst the Labour party granted British workers these concessions, it continued to facilitate British imperialism’s extraction of vast superprofits from the enslaved, impoverished and wretched peoples who toiled in British colonies – in India, in Africa and in the Caribbean.

Whilst Clem Attlee gave British children a National Health Service to be proud of, he sanctioned the dispatch of British forces to visit death on men, women and children caught up in the brutal Korean war. As our mines were taken into public ownership, children were still being sent down African gold mines to dig and to die, and bonded labour eked out a wretched existence in the fields, farms and valleys of India and other British colonial possessions.

Malaya, whose rubber and tin were then the biggest single contributor to British imperial coffers at that time, was subject to a brutal colonial war, waged by the Labour government against the very forces who yesterday had been leading the local fight against the Japanese fascists.

And, as is now clear, all that was given to workers in this country was temporary. Successive governments have worked to privatise and claw back these sops, having done their job of buying social peace and allowing British imperialism to recover from the blows it had received during WW2.

Conservative and Labour governments in recent decades have both privatised industry and healthcare provision, have both introduced the market into education and have both waged brutal wars of aggression against weak countries for oil and for strategic reasons. Swapping Miliband for Corbyn will do nothing to stop this process.

We all want an end to austerity; we all want an end to war. The question is how to go about making these changes. The real fight the working class needs to wage is not clicking buttons online to register a vote for Jeremy. Communists, socialists and progressives need to organise our fellow workers; we need to sacrifice our time, resources and energies into developing and building a real alternative in our workplaces and communities to cuts, austerity and war.

The working class needs to project its own demands and to refuse to cooperate with the British imperialist agenda – both with the implementation of cuts and with the drive to war. It’s not an easy task, and it’s not going to be solved as easily as the Labour leadership election will be. We have a mountain to climb and time is against us.

We are faced with the deepest-ever economic crisis of the imperialist system, and with a drive to war that will end in World War 3 if our rulers are not stopped by revolution. Workers need secure homes, jobs, services and pensions, and the chance to live a decent and civilised life, free from poverty, exploitation and war, but imperialism is unable to meet these simple demands. Meanwhile, our very existence is under threat from climate change if the profit motive is not soon removed from global production.

In light of all this, our most urgent task is to build up a strong communist party, capable of training and organising working-class fighters who are ready to challenge British imperialism – whether it is represented in parliament by Tory or Labour hirelings. A hundred years of backing the Labour party has brought the working class in this country to its knees; we cannot continue to pander to the illusion that a change in that party’s leadership will bring about any of the transformations in society that our class so desperately needs.
cpgb-ml.org/index.php?secName=proletarian&subName=display&art=1132

why is it that Holla Forums hates cops for being the ruling the bourgeiouse's attack dogs, but defends soldiers even though they have essentially the same job?

social imperialists. literally that's it.

You are literally a child and this reflects in every answer. Please just go back to tumblr and leave less hysterical MLs with more balanced brain chemistry to argue your points for you. The non strawman point is that the logical conclusion of the piece isn't that war is good or that more wars should be fought, and plenty of normie-tier anti-war prop starts with "bring our troops home" shit. This is histrionics pure and simple.
and your track record for this assertion is this clip saying happy holidays to soldiers. weak

They think imperialist conscript armies fighting each other in WWI is identical to voluntary armies sent to 3rd world countries to bomb villages from afar and enforce a colonial occupation.

If you're asking seriously, soldiers are much more likely to turn revolutionary than cops whose job is literally "protect private property". Not that it makes much of a difference in places like burgerland and its allies who function as "world police".

I like my insults more, they take less effort. Like this:
Kill yourself.

See the thing is the nukes thing is where i disagree with him, despite me being anti war. Look at Libya, looks at Iran, look at DPRK, what sane person would de-nuclearise in this world when all you get is a bag of dicks for trying. If anything I would make UK sovereignty over it's own nukes a paramount issue. I want him to get in just so he can invite Kim Jong Un to 10 Downing Street and send Blair to the Hague. Besides that he means nothing to me.

Or maybe I won't? Wow now what

Imperialist mercenaries are literally "World police," they are just cops but worse.

...

Eat shit.

That's literally what I said…

...

nice admission you're a Labor lackey.

...

You said imperialist soldiers are more likely to be revolutionary. There is absolutely no evidence for your claim.

compulsory military service recruiting mainly poor people and their direct confrontation with the terror of war, latter part however is outdated i'd say.
they're still being treated poorly after their usefulness runs out. most of this is remnant of WW1 even.
they can get more into conflict with propagated ideas andreality than cops however.
wouldn't defend soldiers but they have military training and can be responsive towards agitation.

...

it makes sense for NK, Iran, etc. to nuke up because they are under real existential threat from the imperial western powers in the first place. The case for the UK to maintain or up the arsenal is for retaliation to a retaliation which just seems like a meme to me

Then you either misunderstood and/or I misspoke. I said the profession of "solider" is infinitely more likely than the profession of "policeman" to be revolutionary historically speaking, which is unequivocally true. Then I added an addendum that the soldiers of imperial powers (e.g. "the west") function as "world police" so it makes "no difference" (when comparing to cops). Hope that clears up what I meant

See this is how you can tell the difference between a leftist that actually wants to accomplish something someday and a deranged ☭TANKIE☭/anarkiddie who wants to sit happily in permanent opposition, never having to have their ideals challenged because they never do anything.

What do you expect him to say, fuck the troops they're all murderers? You know be actually wants to win the election right?

If Britain decides to check out of Team America then it too would be under threat, just like those guys. Being nuked up gives you way more room for manoeuvre geopolitically.

It's literally the name of the party, spelling it Labor is objectively wrong

...

more like leftcom

Idk to me there's a wide berth between "Trump doesn't like the new commie PM in the UK" and "UK considered part of new axis of evil along with Iran and NK", though I guess things are getting ridiculous enough that I could be surprised yet. Either way I think that disarmament should eventually be a global goal and it's the job of the west to start first (which is a pipe dream i know)

maybe you're just a faggot and plain retarded while talking out of your ugly ass, ever considered that?

Rather than getting into an argument, I just want to ask:
What would Corbyn have to gain by denouncing the troops as imperialist baby killers? Serious question.

I wouldn't even have a problem with this thread if it was just billed under "Corbyn cucked himself to "muh troops"" and not "EVIL BLOODTHIRSTY SUCCDEM LITERALLY BETRAYS ROSA REEEEEEEE" but I guess that's not attention grabbing enough these days

Holla Forums cred

nice arguments, you utterly retarded cumgargling faggot

how many cigarettes will that buy me in the labour camp

I made a light joke and then agreed with you for the rest of the response you assblasted retard

He would secure the crucial demographic of like ten Assad worshippers on Twitter. Oh wait they think voting is pointless anyway.

Bourg democracy is what politics is to ordinary people, the game might be rigged but we still have to play it. The revolution isn't going to built on newspaper stalls.

WEWIE

...

It isn't even just bourg democracy. When the collapse happens and the entire military has a good reason to see the left as rabid troop haters do you think they're going to be eager to mutiny?

For real though I should have just said leftist ultras of all types, this really has nothing to do with MLs specifically, but you seem like a cunt so I'm glad I hurt your feelings

I'm on the other side of this autistic debate but to be entirely fair the argument isn't that he needs to put out a special anti-military message but just no message at all

meant for

lol the post WWI days are over, no developed country has a military staffed with potential leftists. All you can really hope for is widespread disinterest and/or apathy

Ok but he wants to get elected he has to do this kind of stuff. If he specifically excluded military-related PR visits/speeches then people would notice and he'd get crucified as a filthy pinko fifth columnist that hates our brave heroes etc

we're allowed to just make things up now? cool

The British military is the private property of the Queen. They don't fight for the UK, it's government or it's people.

The British Army is incredibly racist, full of alt right weirdos who love killing brown people. Never for an instant think they're heroes.

what am I "making up"? Most of the historical armies with revolutionary potential were because they were conscripts just as cowed by their rulers as any other member of the working class but the militaries of countries like the US or the UK are volunteer armies staffed with primarily non-desperate people despite all the desperation memes. Are there some soldiers with literally no other options? Sure, and those people are the exception, not the rule.

Have you ever wondered why they call their navy the Royal Navy, but the British Army isn't called the Royal Army? Because the maintenance of a standing army requires parliamentary approval in the form of an Armed Forces Act passed every 5 years. Maintaining an army without parliamentary approval is illegal under the English Bill of Rights.

There's loads of enlisted men waking up to the realities of what austerity is doing to their pension, healthcare, families and lives after discharge

tbh I *kind* of don't like the forced genuflection politicians have to make and, yes, some of the hardliners in this thread have a point. I think corbyn had some wiggle room to qualify his message, make sure people understand he supports the armed forces (who, let's face it, have lots of people who are there for a job or because they genuinely think they're defending democracy and the realm) without supporting their mission. I'd write him a speech that would include something like "I pray that all of the men deployed can celebrate next christmas at home, defending our nation from within our borders" or something along those lines.
And listening to his whole speech, he only cited humanitarian missions in the Mediterranean and Caribbean. He didn't go on camera and pray for ten thousand more yemeni skulls before new year's, he attacked May for cutting services and withholding pay

…what else do you want?

let's just give up on communism i mean people really just can't change their minds

of course that's not my point, I'm just skeptical of "actively recruit soldiers to the cause" which - surprisingly enough - used to be a perfectly legitimate strategy. There are certainly ways to diminish the effectiveness/power of the military or to sow disenchantment/distrust with the military and those are all still useful things to do

I know that, and that's why he deserves to hang.

Nothing! This is the definition of opportunism. Taking political stances for short term gain!

Oh dear, if I just flatter the fascist mercenaries enough, they won't turn their guns on me!

This isn't opportunism

The idea that brits are realising austerity is a con is laughable. The brainwashing by the media and Tories has been exquisite. Even relatively intelligent people have been duped into thinking there is no alternative.

Lol you don't even believe this edgy LARP nonsense, but if you do please feel free to go kill the farthest left mainstream western politician in decades because he kind of insinuated something you don't like in a holiday message

and that is why corbyn won the labour party election twice, and the tories are leading in the polls

It's basically a generational gap, no?

That's absolutely disgusting. Seriously, "Humanitarian missions?" Either a PR job or a coverup.

Yeah it is, it's opportunism.

for

...

you just made up the consensus of the british popular opinion dipshit

I Know the british Army does a lot of fucked up shit but isnt this just political necessity for a UK politician?
I ddont blame Corby for that basically Everyone as to get down and suck the Armies dick eventually

TLDR: Meh Dosent matter much

Well it's more a gap between people with assets and those with nowt. And yeah, that divides down generational lines most starkly.

no I didn't, I just questioned believing british polls and for good reason after YOU invoked them

I was referring to the classic

That's correct though. How many people watch fucking Steve keen or whoever on youtube.
When does the British media ever properly explain economics?
The BBC's economics editor doesn't even have a degree in economics, he has one in PPE which is like a Economics GCSE.
Most Brits are low information cockroaches and should be denied the vote for their own safety.

And despite all of that, all signs point towards the anti-austerity candidate gaining more popularity.

Only because the Tories are complete shit. Not because Labour have adequately made the case against austerity.
They've been woeful at explaining themselves, McDonnell is massively overrated by Holla Forums just because he's read Marx he's supposed to be some woke genius.
I'm amazed with the resources the internet provides that this is the best they can do, I would be ripping off Wollf or Blyth constantly if I was a Labour politician.

It's a logical extension of the labour platform. It's what's needed to radicalize the military.

Quitting like this is why the left is seen as weak. Corbyn has been under a consistent coordinated attack by the tories for months and the polls haven't budged.

Yes, and that's why they're all scum, Corbyn included.

When I was in the right I never remember having to fight my former comrades this much. It was only aut-right incel teenagers who were this willing to fight each other over the tiniest fucking slip-up.

I'll never regret changing sides but I'm already tired of all this.

dw b i agree with you most people here whose autism isn't that severe does too, but the ultras just can't help themselves. they mean well

It's a miracle the left even still exists at this point if this meaningless gesture is going to cause people to lose their minds

Too bad you sniveling opportunist, you are still reactionary to the core. Ruthless criticism is a core tenet of Marxism for the purpose of exposing fakes, opportunists, chauvinists, and similar scum like you.

It's just all the greaves-style idiots who only see the left as a way to signal their own unique correctness and would prefer it to remain exclusionary over seeing any agreement or proselytizing in the slightest. To them an actual revolution is anything but desirable anyway so they feel no compulsion to engage in good faith

...

I'll take one Phil Greaves over a million genocide-denying scumbags. Moreover, Phil hates "the left," he is totally correct when he says it's just a vague category any number of diversionary and reactionary fronts.

Oh no, the evil ☭TANKIE☭s have stopped JEREMY CORBYN from bringing the "ACTUAL REVOLUTION!"

Lenin would have absolutely hated you. Read Lenin:
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/sw/index.htm
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/index.htm
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1901/witbd/index.htm
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/lwc/index.htm
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/index.htm

ciml.250x.com/sections/german_section/teddy/english/thalmann_english.html
And eh even tho I lean more towards ML than any other tendency I just fail to respond to outrage porn like the OP or righteous indignation like what you linked. Merry Christmas is a pretty neutral statement it isn't equivalent to supporting a war and I tend to think the ML critique of soc dems as traitors seems to hold good but the critique of Corbyn by the OP seems pretty weak

lmao

Stunning how you've transformed his statement so that he wasn't wishing a happy christmas to all the British troops, but just vaguely saying "happy christmas!"

lmao

If only Jezza hadn't wished the troops a happy Christmas, then the blockade of Yemen would have collapsed and world communism would have been achieved!

KYS you strawmanning Socdem worm.

Why are you so angry Phil?

...

thank you for demonstrating my point for me. the promise of insufferable hysterics and indignation is like catnip to you

lol how do you plan to win a civil war if you call all the soldiers warmongering imperialist mercenaries
teenage trannies won't defeat anything

Numerous people ITT have attempted to excuse Britain for its crimes in Yemen.

I'm not Phil, but I'm angry because socdems will make any excuse for anything their shit politicians say or do, even if it means apologizing for fascist, imperialist "SUPPORT OUR TROOPS" propaganda.

It reassures me so much that you will be calm and reasonable while you stab communists and workers in the back.

How do you expect to GET a civil war if you don't call imperialist mercenaries imperialist mercenaries? You think civil war will just materialize out of thin air if you wish the troops happy Christmas enough?

yeah the russian civil war was started by calling the russian soldiers imperialist mercs

I like this guy

While harsh unrelenting critique is invaluable among the left, no one with a functioning brain will take your lazy strawmans and assertions that the person you're talking to are definitely traitors and backstabbers as proof that you're correct. If you have a point, make it. Otherwise go away to twitter or some other shitty social media platform where being trite and quippy is seen as a strength for some reason

Also lol at some probably western teen explaining to a worker outside the first world how to "properly" deal with workers.

YES, IT ACTUALLY WAS. THE WHOLE POINT WAS THAT IT WAS AN IMPERIALIST WAR AND THAT SOLDIERS SHOULD STOP BEING IMPERIALIST TOOLS AND KILL THEIR COS AND MUTINY.

They literally weren't mercs, so no.

Anyone who thinks fascist, imperialist "SUPPORT OUR TROOPS" propaganda is excusable is already a traitor. That's the evidence in and of itself.

£10 says Corbyn couldn't give a fuck bout the soldiers, but feels like he's gotta play the role of a patriot supporting the boys fighting for "muh freedom" oversees to get elected. SuccDems are what all socialists have to become if they wanna make it into mainstream politics unfortunately.

the bolsheviks didn't blame the soldiers

They were conscripts you stupid fuck.

even american soldiers are better than british ones.
usually they are poorfags who went in to get free health care and education.
bongs just get hard from the prospect of shooting wogs.

conscripts at that point were untrained starving peasants and the russian army's discipline was utterly dire. conscripts in the german empire were also proles but they didn't (by and large) revolt, only france had any mutinies during ww1 and even that was put down. even so, german communists also tried to form "workers and soldiers" councils.
soldiers today are well trained professionals with no real reason to revolt. even if they did, seeing communists call them murderers will make them want to crush revolutionaries even harder, so good luck trying to take on the american/british/french military

Have you seriously not heard of Kiel mutiny?

I have, since I said by and large. Kiel failed.

phil go to bed

I wish he posted here
Why he chose twitter idk

How does Britain/America helping starve out a tiny irrelevant backwater benefit themselves whatsoever

Ruthless critique of all that exists. Except for China, Assad, Venezuela and the DPRK. Then you're just a snivelling imperialist lackey.

There is a plausible theory I have heard: 1. Yemen is close to some of Saudi Arabia’s biggest oil fields and the fear is that the civil war in Yemen could destabilize its largest fields and lead to internal unrest in the Kingdom (which is already experiencing immense crisis, see Ritz Carlton incident:israelshamir.com/article/the-dog-that-didnt-bark/)
2. It is believed by some that Yemen has oil the KSA would like to exploit

Now, Britain and America are both big oil producers, so ironically high-prices harm them far less than their European and Asian rivals but here is the rub: US & UK have either decided that 1. Hurting Russia, Venezuela and Iran is more important than the increased value of their oil industry 2. Other segments of the economy like tech, manufacturing, retail etc. are harmed too much by high oil prices to justify a major price hike 3. the unstable domestic political regimes they have at home are soothed by low oil prices—an oil spike may produce undesirable political results 4. the political class in the US and UK fear what might happen to the global capitalist order if EU, China and Japan get pummeled by high-prices and are thus providing support for world capitalism at the expense of their domestic oil producers and big oil companies

Anyways, this is just a theory of mine. I’m not sure there’s any more to this then an opportunity to sell weapons, and the house of Saud is buying weapons like no tomorrow and since Sodom Gayrabia might not have a tomorrow it’s best to get in while the getting is good.

So many fucking LARPing, Lifestylist idiots that have never studied a revolution here. What the fuck do you think the Bolshevik Red Guards were made up of? What about The Finnish Red Guards, The Rotfront Kampferbund, The People's Liberation Army, et al? Honestly non of you know any actual fucking praxis you absolute morons.

Tbh this sounds about right, an oil price spike would cause mass dissent right now in the UK.Prices are already hiking both due to brexit and wages are actually /falling/, We have hit the peak of neoliberalism: the lowest unemployment in perhaps half a century, yet rapidly rising inflation and a rising cost of living with a relative falling minimum wage. Honestly things are going to come to a head very soon, and if the 2018 crash does happen shit will kick off here first.

Except Kiel was the direct trigger for German surrender, Kaiser's abdication and the crash of entire German military might.

Do you actually know what genocide means?

They were made up of conscripted proles, not professional soldiers who voluntarily and purposefully signed up to go murder some brown people for their Lord and Savior Porky.

Well apart from all those officers that defect to the Red Army and eventually would make-up its back bone: like Mikhail Tukhachevsky.

The KMT mostly relied on a formal, regular army, not conscripts: especially not during the early period. Also the finnish red guards were volunteers since absolutely non of them were sent to fight the Germans: Russia didn't want to risk a revolt in Finland by making them fight the Germans. But sure, 100% of the proles in the British army want to shot brown people, its not because they have no formal skills or training and their nly real attribute is physical strength. See kids, this is why Trots have never won a revolution.

Also you do realise the cossacks: aka the part of the Russian army made up of volunteers that wanted to serve, had a key part in the Russian revolutions? Without their defection it is possible february would have been suppressed.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Cossacks

tank.ies are idealists, every single time
only 400000 more revisionists to purge until communism guys, marx said that when everyone thinks the right way society will change guys

I'll give you my full support when you launch your Protracted People's War in Wrexham or whatever, but until then Corbyn's our best bet. even if he is eventually going to betray us like socdems always do, he is still useful

You think that's why soldiers sign up?

Why is everyone so mad? He's not even leader yet but yeah let's have him ignore soldiers and say "fuck 'em" so he can torpedo the fucking movement he's trying to build.

Fuck off purists.

lmao, they already absolutely hate communists. the #1 form of veterans organization in the USA is fascist underground (FBI-run) militias. the vast majority of them will never be on your side.

The most ruthless factual, Marxist criticism of those states would never, in a million years, evaluate them near to the same low, filthy level as that which imperialist socdems occupy.

Have you ever considered that geostrategic, regional political control is a material interest in and of itself? Aside from the minor oil interests, the shipping routes, the labor to exploit, etc.

...

tankies are literally imperialist socdems

It means millions starving to death as a deliberate policy, and hundreds of thousands dead in a bombing campaign. If you deny that's what's happening in Yemen, you are a genocide denier.

Yeah it actually is. They love that shit. It's Call of Duty.

amazing takes from the infantile leftcoms here as usual

Any quick glance up and down this thread at people substituting "get out you worm REE" for actual arguments marks this as pure projection

No you undermine the military leadership by recruiting the proles who are members of hte armed forces: you know like almost every single successful revolutionary movement in history? Fucking hell how do you expect to fight? Magic trained militias out of thin air? Your trotskyite purist wankery will doom us all.

GOOGLE SMEDLEY BUTLER

Dude, they sign up to get a wage.

So we're just gonna magically recruit people who deliberately signed up to go kill some hadjis and shitskins, who think Israel is the greatest, and who are absolutely infatuated with the USA (not to mention the majority are Trumpites) to the aid of communism by being nice to them. We don't have to get them to disavow the US government, US imperialism, their role in US imperialism, or anything like that. They can just sign right up to the CPSW Communist Party (Soldiers Welcome)! A bunch of undisciplined rapists who get a hardon for shooting little girls in the neck and dropping bombs on weddings, those are the fighters who will win the proletariat to our side.

I'd start by organizing a communist party whose membership consists of communists, rather than people who are the sworn mortal enemies of communism. There will be no "fight" if you recruit unabashed imperialist mercs, they are incapable of fighting capitalism.

Military training isn't some kind of big secret, anyone can learn the skills necessary.

Fuck Trotsky and fuck opportunist worms like you.

They can get a wage at McDonalds. They get to be BADASS CALL OF DUTY WARRIORS if they join the US military.

...

>

Legit have you ever fucking spoken to someone in the military ever? I have a mate of mine, actually my best friend from a child. He intends to join the British Army. No he ain't a racist, he doesn't hate people, heck he said he was worried about a third world war breaking out due to resource conflict. You know why he is joining the army? Because he has few qualifications (he wasn't a slacker, honestly just not that academic) and is physically very fit. He sees that as the best place for him to actually get a job in the current climate for a few years and move into other work afterwards. Your inability to conceptualise the plight of the proletariat and see how the military-industrial complex is fed quite frankly disgusts me: you are trying to tear down systems you don't fucking understand.

HAHAHA, yes, just like Chomskyite linguistics every is born with the fundamentalists of military combat. You know, squad organisation, wide-ranging firearms training, upper tier organisation? Fighting ain't just firing a gun at someone across a street. It requires tactics and knowledge that you can't just get from reading shit online. Fuck me man, you really don't know the mechanics of a fight, do you?

So not only is he delusional (if I just kill enough of my "fellow proles," the porkies will finally hire me!), but he thinks murdering proles is the acceptable and easy route to becoming labor aristocracy. Your friend is scum, I hope the Houthis kill him.

The plight of 12 million Yemeni proles who are starving to death is irrelevant compared to the SUFFERING of your labor aristocrat-aspiring pal. You are chauvinist scum.

Yes, anyone can learn these. If some imbecile grunt like your friend can learn it, anyone can.

Okay it is quite clear you don't know what the fuck is actually going on in Yemen but w/e.

Who is going to teach you lad, if not members of the military? You really haven't thought this through have you?

Are gas station attendants considered "exxon employees"? I'd probably narrow the field down to "people who work for corporate
still more than the average burger flipper, and the bigger point is that they're promised a much larger wage and better prospects
What's even the point of recruiting if every worker who deigns to make more than minimum wage is worth proselytizing to? Is there a list of "good" companies that you're allowed to make more than minimum wage at? Or are service jobs now the only acceptable ones?

*isn't worth

because he's a psycho attention whore who relies on a poor communication format to seem smart?

there's tanks that already post here that are way smarter

Not all of them, no. Unemployment is a thing, you know?

Is he playing 3D Chess?

Succdems are neither socialist or left-wing. It's time to see them for what they really are: reactionary capitalist cronies who would sooner back fascists than any genuinely socialist movement.

You are a genocide denier.

Imperialist mercenaries are the true teachers of communist revolution. Wisdom from a social fascist.

Already said they're not class traitors. Sorry if it wasn't clear enough.

They're also promised to get shot at by rebels, they're not the smartest decision makers.

The pay scale alone doesn't determine your material relation to mass murder and exploitation.

Oh poor mercs, they couldn't get a job so they just HAD to sign up to murder innocent women and children. I've been unemployed for long stretches, it didn't make me shoot, bomb, or rape anyone.

He's just talking what British soldiers do for humanitarian efforts not committing genocide in Yemen, he has already said so much about the war in Yemen it is ridiculous to say that he supports that. I know the mods are iffy on this issue but; there is nothing wrong with soldiers engaging in humanitarian work for those in need.
Corbyn is going to pull soldiers out of the ME whilst giving the returning vets welfare and there is nothing wrong with that

Answer the question: from whom will you learn the art of war if not those who have actively engaged in it?

twitter.com/BartholomewHall/status/944347673452253184

:^)

MEIN GOTT

British "humanitarian efforts" are literally imperialist. Either as propaganda or a coverup/fake narrative to enable more murder and plunder.

We'll definitely learn how to communism from murderers who refuse to renounce their murder. They will totally teach us how to revolution and not report us to the feds or divert us into reactionary adventurism.

Care to elaborate?
It's daft to compare helping hurricane survivors to massacring Yemenis.

Haha you can't answer it can you? You can't admit that the first successful revolution was built on defecting officers (Like Mikhail Tukhachevsky) and heck, the Paris Commune started after a mass defection from the National Guard to the communard council. But keeping on crying, the rest of us will be working on actual praxis.

But I need to hate everybody forever because muh ideological purrity!

yeah no shit, I'm saying I wasn't talking about them when I said "exxon employees" so I was questioning why you even brought them up
Cool, and the position of "poor dumb people deserve what they get" is a fine one for LARPers and liberals but in the real world exploitation happens through inequality of information as well
No one said it was the pay scale, you simply implied that anything above service work is bordering on "class-traitorism", which is preposterous. If exxon or some natural gas plant is the only thing in town, then being an engineer for them (despite contributing to a bad overall cause) is simply rational.

Germany was already finish by that point

Yemen doesn't have the capability to stop Britain or anyone else accessing Suez

This is like saying the assassination of Franz Ferdinand caused WW1.

→ G O A L P O S T S →

who are his advisers? they need to go

FUCK Blairite gang, wet, wet, wet.
THATCHERITE GANG UNITE

is this a thing?

lol didn't realise so many edgy teenagers existed on here
Yes, I'm sure that will speed up communist revolution

Well yeah. Most of them are poor.

leftcoms can be even more Imperialist than trots.

Fuck off, anything even slighty left is good.

says the millennial as he sits in his comfortable government that hasn't been overthrown by an outside imperialist force.

The amount of autism in this thread is bretty high

‘Not enough even for coffee’: UK troops in Afghanistan get £1 each to celebrate Christmas
rt.com/uk/414103-uk-troops-afghanistan-christmas/

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_defeatism

feels good nibba

When the Bolsheviks fraternised with and set up soldiers' councils there were actually helping Tsarist imperialism.

Imagine if revolutionary defeatism took off during the 60's-70's over Vietnam in the U.S., what the hell would everything look like today?

His forced and cringy smile at the end was disgusting.
but I was expecting just that from a SocDem.

Criticising a PR smile is a bit of a nitpick don't you think?

no

oh please like you don't live in the first world

um actually sweaty x

The US, in particular, wanted to channel Britain into the IMF web, where they knew the conditionality that would be imposed would shift Britain further towards the ‘free market’ model that the US wanted to export throughout the advanced world.
On June 5, 1975, the US Under Secretary of the Treasury for Monetary Affairs (Edwin Yeo) visited Britain and told Callaghan and Healey that they had to pay back the $5.3 standby credit provided by other central banks by December or “they would be forced to turn to the IMF” (Burk, 1989: 39).
Burk notes that the US considered Britain to be “hardened financial sinners” and they didn’t want them adopting a “siege economy” because then “NATO … would be at risk” (p.40).

In her summary of the ‘witness seminars’ held at the Institute of Contemporary British History (ICBH) on the IMF Crisis during April 1989, Burk interviewed, among others, Bernard Donoughue, who was the Chief Policy Adviser to both Harold Wilson and James Callaghan.

Donoughue told the Symposium that (Burk, 1989: 43):

>… in the middle of this crisis I was privately summoned to the United States Embassy for a secret meeting with a very senior official there who said ‘You should be aware of something, which is that parts of the Treasury are in very deep cahoots with parts of the US Treasury and with certain others in Germany who are of very right-wing inclination and they are absolutely committed to getting the IMF here and if it brings about the break-up of this government, they will be very, very happy’. He actually showed me a copy of a secret communication between London and Washington which seemed to confirm this. view.

He also noted that:

>I then spoke also to one or two friends in Washington, on the State Department side, who were convinced that something was going on and there was some agitation in Downing Street. What this adds up to I don’t know but I was intrigued a year or so later when in Downing Street we happened to come across a telex relating to the IMF in Portugal which actually specifically said that this economic crisis might possibly be a means whereby an undesirable, which meant socialist, government might be replaced by something a bit more acceptable … there was no doubt that I think some people, on an individual basis … did raise the possibility of getting rid of the Labour government. When I spoke to Ed Yeo he told me that a domestic deficit of more than 3% was not just a question of economics but was a moral issue reflecting the immorality of our government.

fresh take

What are you a retard. Jermey Corbyn needs the support of the military in order to make sure that once he get’s elected there isn’t a coup.

What would it look like?

Honestly the british military is so weak atm I am not even sure they could hack a coup…

There's no point in getting an imperialist socdem elected. If he's so weak he needs to suck soldier dick to get elected, he will not accomplish anything for workers anyway. I hope he gets elected and then the MI5 shoots him, maybe it'll wake up British socialists to the need for a real communist party.

Should be "Las Malvinas are Thatcherite", out of place Spanish NazBol Style.

Or maybe Las Islas Falkland, I dunno.

Agreed tbh
SocDems always fall victim to this, they lose their angry edge that made them popular in an effort to look more presentable to centrist wine moms and wind up looking weak and insincere
Corbyn is nice when he's obviously holding back his desire to turn the isle of man into a massive gulag and send every porky tory to it

when will we ever get rid of name- and tripfaggint avatarshitposters
there is no reason for this to exist, and you're even worse than the fucking yui-cancer faggot

...

...

because they think war hasn't changed since ww1
draftees are very different from contractors
french infantryman at Verdun is very different from drone operator

allende getting couped worked out so great for chile

bolshies never trusted imperial officers
there were plenty of examples where commissars purged officers

contractors will be all dead or limping on one foot when draftees will be called in
that's when we need to appeal to military, they didn't chose to be soldiers, they were conscripted what are you doing dying for some Trump fuck in the middle of fucking nowhere etc etc

the stunning german success at the start of barbarossa was the result of those genius purges

I think you have a point but is there any realistic alternative than "vote for Corbyn" for the average Brit? I'm a burger but i'm just asking m8.

I mean, i feel that way about Bernie. Yeah, he's a shit succdem but what else is there? I'm not going to just turn down a shot at getting people into office who might be open to national healthcare and shit when the alternative is Trump-fascists.

In a lot of these discussions, everyone throws around "red liberal" while then promoting mindless bullshit lifestylism, and its a bit frustrating. I'd support a real working class movement if it existed, but there really doesn't seem to be one… and yet, everyone here regularly berates real world attempts at fomenting them. And don't get me started on Reddit's cancerous "left"….

welp, frenchies didn't purge anyone and it didn't help them either
it really makes me think when anti authoritarian lefties shill for imperial officers and believe that they all suddenly became genuine commies after joining reds

bolsheviks weren't sucking off officers
on the contrary they approved of Aurora crew lynching their officers and in general they agitated for disobedience of orders and desertion with weapons and ammunition

and even if we need to butter the brad for highly qualified officers, why should we fellate some random Bob the Sergeant?

This is a propaganda we can use right now.

...

Your point being?

my point is that on mercs this kind of propaganda does not work

And why would that be?

because they're mercs
it's their job to die in the middle of fucking nowhere

That's precisely why it makes sense to ask them: "what are you doing dying for some Trump fuck in the middle of fucking nowhere?"

we've made a full circle here
they're in the middle of fucking nowhere because they were employed to be there
don't want to be in the middle of fucking nowhere?
quit military and go be a truck driver or something

In both cases they're proletarians, working for Porky. In both cases, we need to agitate them and feed them propaganda. Why you would want to wait for them to leave the army to do so is beyond me. Communist propaganda is not a reward; it's how people become communists.

you forgot to mention pigs our law enforcement comrades
they're proletarians too
wageslave = proletarian amiright? why do we need the concept of surplus value anyway huh?

What, you think we shouldn't feed police with communist propaganda either?

yes, I think we shouldn't waste our time with pigs, imagine that
what would you even tell them lel?

I do have a hard time imagining such a stupid idea. You're making a virtue out of circle-jerking.

"You're exploited by Porky. He feeds you with lies. The only job you're actually doing is defending his property. By doing so, you are not only hurting the innocents you wish to protect, but even you relatives and yourself! Read our press, join the party, leave the police or stay and agitate and give us intel."

...

...

Well, you need to think better.

They want better pay, social security, and working conditions. Just like everyone else.

Police trade unions do exist.

...

a drop in the ocean

you're fucking delusional
go ahead idiot, when they arrest your ass tell them that akshully they're being exploited even tho they do not produce surplus value lel

You're the one who is delusional, kid.

I don't want to even bother with cops because it's a fool's errand, grandpa

just look at these gomrades, our proud boys huh

...

Corbyn actively campaigned against the Iraq war, nearly destroyed his career as Labour leader by refusing to vote for a British bombing campaign in Syria, was one of the few British MPs who called for Blair, an actual imperialist, to be put on trial, called for trial of SAS soldiers who have killed unarmed civilians in Afghanistan and he has openly and constantly criticised NATO as a harmful imperialist organisation and would, when the time comes, refuse to fight Russia and instead open diplomatic solution to peace.
Yeah, sounds like a right imperialist hawk doesn't he.

No, he sounds like a left imperialist hawk.

...

I didn't mean he was literally right-wing; 'right' is informal British slang for the greatest extent/complete

My bad, I didn't know that.

*sits down, vowing never to commit to any actual political action but instead generate political theory from bed until the end of time*
ah but you see, by not supporting imperialist war Corbyn spreads the myth that one can uphold first-world living standards without breaking the backs of the third world, he offers in essence imperialism with a human face where you can placate your soul with perpetual oppositionism while continuing to reap the rewards of the imperialist behaviours of the "real actors" like the United States who will, no matter what, go off to blow up not very white people in very far away countries and take their materiel.

Did Corbyn's opposition to the Iraq war stop Iraq being invaded? Of course not. But did Britain continue to see the benefits of that imperialist adventure, and will it continue to do so under a Corbyn administration? Of course. Indeed, even if Corbyn confines the official avenues of the British state to actions that appear pacifistic, other elements of the state (security services, NATO liason, etc.) will continue to grease the wheels of imperialism with the blood of the innocent.

Naturally that's why we shouldn't vote at all, except if we're going to vote for the Conservative party to force Imperialism to show her true posture, awaiting the day when the proletariat spontaneously breaks into open revolt. To take any concrete action whatsoever to improve our own standards of those of anyone else before then is to accept complicity for failure and death, and thereby sign our own death warrants on the day the revolution comes.

Nobody is saying that Corbyn is the second coming of Lenin.

That has literally nothing to do with recruiting pigs. Not once in that entire booklet does Lenin say cops should be converted into communists.

Police in the Uk used to be pretty working class believe it or not.

Thatcher ended it.

It has everything to do with recruiting cops. And soldiers. And truck drivers. And literally everyone we can, as long as it serves the revolution. We are at war, and if you think our propaganda shouldn't also be aimed at our enemy's soldiers, that it should spare their delicate ears in order to spare your no-less-delicate ideological purity, then you are severely delusional.

Even in Thatcher's time cops where fairly working class. During the miners' strike the Tories prevented Yorkshire police from being sent to striking areas out of fears they would sympathise with the strikers.

No it doesn't you mendacious idiot. Lenin was explicitly saying that all communist parties should keep parliamentary participation as an optional tactic for agitation and propaganda (given certain conditions). This has literally nothing to do with cops at all. Shut the fuck up and stop slandering Lenin with your idiocy.

So if police are irredeemable monsters, what happens to them after the revolution? Are they rounded up and executed? after all according to anarcokiddies and other pro physical force roleplayers here, they are subhumans who cannot be comrades whatsoever.

So what happens to them?

They're not monsters, they're the ENEMY TROOPS.

Yes, the police will stand trial for their decades of crimes against the workers. Shooting unarmed proles, imprisoning kids for smoking weed, giving crippling fines and tickets to jaywalkers or people with a bad turn signal. They have to face justice.

You are a cop lover if you debate this.

So who's gonna put the handcuffs on them?

The people's police.

armed workers or a drone with a gun attached to it.

I really hate these situations where you can't tell if someone is being serious or not

I am 100% serious. Every existing socialist state has a military and a police force that serve the people.

"serving the people" is what all police claim to do.

So what? We evaluate the objective material situation. If the police are part of the proletarian state, then they serve the proletariat. If they are part of the bourgeois state, they serve the bourgeois.

Will they still act like thugs?

And everyone knows no victorious army ever aimed propaganda at enemy troops.

How come half this thread hasn't been banned for supporting US imperialism?

They don't operate under the delusion that they can trust them either. The goal of propaganda aimed at enemy forces is demoralization and acquisition of assets.

It's a mystery

...

America purposely undermined and dismantled the British empire. (to strengthen her own position, of course, not because they're good guys.)

And yet still they remain greatest allies. The only bigger ally America has is Israel itself! America merely wanted to be the only empire around. As long as the Bongs don't step on burger toes, their ideals and goals are aligned: complete Anglo economic hegemony.

...

police would be purged, so many of them would be forced to seek another job
keep the detectives and experts, purge the random tacticools
soviets had the right idea with their people's militias
socialist state has no need for mad dogs who had a taste of human flesh

I don't blame a stupid dog for its owner
but if it dares to bark at me I will put a bulled in its head

Succdems aren't leftists. They are traitorous bastards who would sell out actual leftists for fascists if they could.

"You're exploited by Porky. He feeds you with lies. The only job you're actually doing is defending his property. By doing so, you are not only hurting the innocents you wish to protect, but even you relatives and yourself! Read our press, join the party, leave the police or stay and agitate and give us intel."