Joint Dictatorship of the Proletariat of Oppressed Nations

I have proposed, in the past, that the JDPON should disperse the Amerikkkans throughout the Third World instead of allowing them to remain in occupied North America. Here are some of my reasons:

1) A geographic concentration of Amerikkkans would facilitate counterrevolution. It would also be difficult to exercise proletarian dictatorship over hundreds of millions of enemies: we would need to import a huge unproductive sector of police and such from the Third World. As a practical matter, it would be better to thin the Amerikkkans out, making them minorities in the Third World, where they could easily be controlled and supervised by the international proletariat.

2) Amerikkkans will need to undergo re-education. It would be very difficult to re-educate them in their own kkkountry. They need to be in a proletarian environment where they can learn from the masses.

3) There are land claims to settle, mainly for the First Nations, but also for Aztlán [occupied Mexico – MSH) and perhaps the Black nation. Conceivably some other nations could be moved to North America if they wished to be, such as Nauru or the small nations in Ghana whose land has been ruined by imperialist corporations. Amerikkkans are going to have to move out of much of North America and make room for other nations.

4) Amerikkkan kkkulture is almost totally reactionary. There is little worth saving in Amerikkkan kkkulture. It would be better to force Amerikkkans to assimilate to the more culturally and politically advanced peoples of the Third World. There is also historic justice in forcing Amerikkkans to assimilate, just as they destroyed so many other nations and cultures.

5) In the early stages of socialism, the Third World will require skilled workers and technicians of various kinds, including medical personnel. These persyns are disproportionately concentrated in the First World. Moving them to the Third World will be a practical way to address an urgent need.

6) The Third World is also owed big reparations. An excellent way to make those reparations is to put Amerikkkans to work building infrastructure in the Third World: roads, housing, water supplies, sewage, electricity, telecommunications, schools. Amerikkkans can also work in Third World factories and fields to expand production for the benefit of the Third World.

7) Part of the process of civilizing and proletarianizing Amerikkkans will be putting them to productive work–for a change. Amerikkka has so little productive capacity that there may not be many ways to put all those people to work in occupied North America. They may have to go to the factories and fields of the Third World.

8 ) Amerikkkans will need to be reduced to a Third World standard of living. If they stay in occupied North Amerikkka, they will benefit from the vastly better infrastructure and all the stolen wealth that they currently hold. It would be better to move them to the Third World as a way of accelerating the process of re-education.

9) There are historical precedents for relocating large numbers of enemies. Millions of Germans were forced to move after the Soviet victory over fascism in World War II. Even enemies like the united $nakes and the "united" KKKingdom agreed that it was necessary to move Germans off land that was needed for Poles, Czechs, and others. Again, this is related to the national question of the First Nations, Aztlán [occupied Mexico – MSH], and the Black nation.

Is this a good idea? What are its advantages and disadvantages? How can we improve upon it?


the latter burgeons at the expense of the former

build communism and not be a ideologue

Nice argument fagtron

You don't afford nonsense its equal ground, and certainly not on its terms of debate. If any of this tripe is serious, you're not a communist, by any stretch of the term.

As usual the Maoists prove to be reactionaries with a coat of red paint.

How do you plan on dealing with the uneven development up to this point then?

Is this a copypasta?


Communists are materialists. Materialists recognize that the revolutionary character of a nationality is dictated by the material conditions surrounding it.

For Amerikkkans to become revolutionary, they need to go through a re education process i.e. a radical change in material conditions that will in turn change their class alliance. My OP simply details the process in how to do so. None of this falls out of line with communism, but I could see why it would make petty bourgeois liberals squirm.

Nice pasta. Still it's important to point out that no one ethnic group "owns" land. Third worldists need to watch their idealism.

mexico is just as much of a settler state as america is


Except I didn't say that. I said that ethnicities don't own land. To suggest otherwise is ethnic chauvinism.

The alternative to ethnic chauvinism is Israel/SA style takeover and exploitation

Nations are spooks. In reality everything is my property.


This must be the hottest take of the day.

Punishing lower class workers because the upper class and media have pretty much brainwashed them and the middle class into being good little capitalists. Sounds like turd worldists just want revenge for the sake of muh oppressed people kin instead of just re-educating the American populace.


Yes, I'll happily drag you beneath my boots as I march over your censorious cultural obsession and all of your "sensibilities"

I guess communism is doomed, we'll surely have to surrender ourselves to the self-precipitating violence of modern capitalist logic

Instead of tearing the first world down to the level of the third world, use the productive capabilities of the first world to bring the third world up to the level of the first world.

This is Holla Forums tier retardation.
Hell, it might even be dumber, and that's saying something.
Bravo, OP.

Where are the proofs?

If the revolution success it will mean the prols are already class conscious enough. And each nation must have it’s own revolution. The revolution can’t be forced on any nations. That’s how capitalists justified imperialism against kingdoms in Africa because said kingdoms were slave states or medalist.

This is ancient history. Americans settled America around the same time Turks moved into Balken countries like Macedonia. Does this also mean Macedonian Turks should be removed from Macedonia.

Not really. Yes the American state is very reactionary, but there policies aren’t supported by most Americans.

Yes skilled professionals and teachers should be sent to the third world, but they must go on there free will. The last thing we need is white supremacist doctors administering medicine in Africa. Because it should be obvious to all that they will give people who don’t know any better poison.

No they don’t. American prols had no say over imperialism. To enforce punishment on people who didn’t commit any crimes is reactionary in and of it’s self.

American prols are already prols. They don’t need to be "proletarianized” because there already prols. Also over twenty million Americans work in factories and around five million work in agriculture. Also many americans work in engineering and technology. To say these aren’t productive careers is wrong.

The goal of socialism is to increase people’s standard of living, not decrease it.

No they don’t. American prols had no say over imperialism. To enforce punishment on people who didn’t commit any crimes is reactionary in and of it’s self. The movement of Germans out of Eastern Europe was a form of genocide which was reactionary and unjust. It was one of the few things the Soviets did wrong. We should celebrate the Soviet’s successes, not there failures.

by a dereliction of the capitalist system of mediated comparative economy and the HOS theory? y'know, the thing communists fight for? Why would a change to a universalist doctrine like communism incite or aggravate developments that are one hundred percent contingent to the capitalist mode of production and its ideology

This is already happing. Leftist movements are starting to become big here. Also the American empire is falling and will be five in five years. America will basically be third world in a few decades.

*in 20 years* I support the american proletariat in their struggle against chinese imperialism

There are around 350 million people in Burgerland. I don't think that's realistic. Plus, you're essentially treating the entire Burgerland proletariat as enemies, which I don't think is the right thing to do.

I already support the future struggle of the American proletariat against Chinese and possibly Indian imperialism. That is if no communist revolution occurs in India and no Orthodox Maoist coup occurs in China.

A Communist revolution in India than an Orthodox Maoist revolution/coup in China because the Chinese state has a very large control over people’s information through shit like the great firewall of China.

these two posts sum it up

third worldists btfo

That's what the post said though…