This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.
See this GitHub page for a collection of sources about socialism, imperialism, and other relevant topics.
This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.
We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.
Rules:
Welcome again to everybody. Make yourself at home. In the time-honoured tradition of our group, here is the weekly discussion thread.
☭ Matrix homeserver and space
☭ Theory discussion group on /c/theory@lemmygrad.ml
☭ Find theory on ProleWiki, marxists.org, Anna's Archive
Marxism-Leninism without a third-worldist corrective is just Trotskyism.
Marxism-Leninism with too much third-worldism is just Maoism.
In all seriousness I think it's an analytical mistake to assume the proletarian identity or category is homogenous, and the most stark differences you're gonna find are between imperialist-proletarians and colonized-proletarians. Trotskyists imagine some revolutionary essence that they think exists equally in an Israeli worker as a Palestinian worker, for example.
It would be an overcorrection, though, to then essentialize the category of imperialist-proletarian as homogenous and static. A corporate worker with a home and 401(k) benefits more from imperialism than a service worker that rents. And the first subclass is shrinking while the second is growing.
Maybe the settler-colonial or imperial incentives played a part in revolution failing in the West (for now), but it's an influence that ebbs and flows among other influences that ebb and flow.