Roo vs. Muke

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Songun

check the further reading section

the only difference in "analysis" is that fascists view this as positive, this has nothing to do with ML, third worldism is reactionary cancer

If you think that the vast majority of the white working class, including minimum wage earners, are labor aristocracy as both Sakai and MIM held then it simply makes sense to argue the entire American working class is embourgeoisified regardless of color. The vast majority of the working class, including whites, don’t make over 18 an hour. 73% of minimum wage earners are white females.
jacobinmag.com/2016/05/white-workers-bernie-sanders-clinton-primary-racism/

The Sakai thesis just doesn’t make sense

Class isn't reducible to income though. Not even Marx believed that.

Third worldists just use the same argument as Fox News. “You can be poor because of an iPhone!”.

like clockwork

The West has always been more radical in terms of demanding socialism as a future than the East.

Eastern "socialisms" turn fascist 9/10 times.

Block Your Path

Attached: EugeneVDebbs.jpg (1469x1129, 244.65K)

name 9 times this happened then

...

China, North Korea, Libya, Zimbabwe, Nasser's Egypt, Assad's Syria, Kampuchea, Israeli kibbutzim, Somalia, Ethiopia.

The point is, socialism has to be universalist. It can't be nationalist. Ever. As soon as socialism loses its universalist and inclusive nature it immediately descends into fascism.

This is why Turd Worldism is essentially bullshit. There is no way an eastern nation which rejects western, secular Christian Enlightenment values can lead a genuine socialist revolution. All eastern "socialisms" fall into fascism because the East is tribalist and lacks a "there is no Jew or Greek" mentality.

If you think making a typical wage in the first world makes one petit-bourgeois/labor aristocracy then it’s illogical to claim that a white guy earning that wage is a labor aristocrat and a black guy earning the same wage is a true oppressed prole.

I’m not even saying I believe in MTW myself but Sakaism is obvious bullshit

IT does make sense, because Brandon benefits from the settler-colonial apparatus (at least, according to Sakai) whereas Tyrone doesn't.

Who wants to bet during the first 10 minutes of the debate Jason Unruhe is going to bring uphis doxx and accuse Muke of having dropped them?

One can rely on the concept of a universality, independent of particularity - to presume otherwise is to regress to the conception of the 'East' as an essential category, one that would violate the same universalist corpus that socialism would lay claim to.
One could as easily characterize this as simply the passage of event into being, not at all particularly predicated by the specificities of the Christian faith, except in referential context.

You will be hardput to find a single non-Christian country where socialism maintained its universalist attributes.

Christianity was the first religion to not be held down by tribe, race, or language. Even Islam is very akin to an Arab tribal religion which simply became "universalist" only due to empire expansion. When socialism comes about in the West, or a Christian country, it becomes internationalist and seeks to spread its influence. When socialism is established in an Islamic, Buddhist, or non-Christian country, it becomes ethnocentricist, racialist, and heavily fascistic.

Barring consideration of the other confounding variables, of which there are many - to suppose necessarily that the production of Christianity as a unique institutional entity was to the abridgment of the category of the particular (certainly to afford it more gravity than even it may carry) is to assume an ontological basis from constructed or social bodies, all of which are bound to their antinomies and sublimations. This is not to derelict the universalist character of the Christian faith in its nascent form, but that one can appreciate this without then assuming the non-universal derivation and pursuing orientalism as an explanatory variable.
Were we to approach the telos of this particular universal Christianism, for it is certainly not the Christian Universalism of Badiou, we will fully ensconce ourselves within the idea of a monistic development of universalism - which would bind you to the contradictions of equally attempting to prove that Christianity and Universalism necessitate one another AND that the incidences of the modern forces of reaction are derived from this mysterious force inimical to the Christian character and that of the enlightenment (given that the two become unified in this theory). In the end, we find ourselves as trapped within representations of being, subject to static teleology and unable to overcome the force of ideology.

I, in all candor, deny those Christian countries their 'universalist' socialist character. If they fully encompass the breadth of socialist being, then we've failed egregiously.

From whence comes this sycophantic cathexis that we must be subject to a body. If what we can learn from the distinctly European and Christian origins of fascism, as well as the preponderance of the state entity as representation of ethnic or racial antagonism on behalf of its valent population, it must surely be that we are subject to no scalar or purely static conception of thought. Just know that always something slips through the cracks, and can't be explained by a simple set of axioms. There are a huge number of ontological assumptions made that must be accounted for

lacan.com/badeight.htm

Wat even is that?

A theoretical concept that the colonizing powers retain some plurality of economic control in formerly colonial possessions which allows them an absolute advantage over the economic function of the relations between the two states. Its common critique is that it relies on an essentialism that stipulates that the contours of modern global exchange do not impinge upon the imperial relations of states. From a purely economic point of view, Paul Cockshott wrote a short polemic about this common theoretical conception of post-colonial, sub-altern, and liberal theorists

reality.gn.apc.org/polemic/imper.htm#tthFtNtAAC

Mai 68, Action Directe, the RAF, the Weathermen, the Black Panthers, Movement2June, and the anarchist movements currently taking place in Greece and Italy would like a word with you.

It doesn’t make any sense because in that situation there’s no tangible economic benefit that Brandon has that Tyrone doesn’t. Blacks can also be considered settlers according to an extreme anti-colonial outlook, believe me, I’ve read indigenous nationalists who believe things like this, and it does make a certain kind of sense since blacks helped massacred Indians after the Civil War.

The Sakai’s work just isn’t relevant to 21st century socialism in the US or elsewhere imo

Attached: Koala.jpg (1024x768, 762.53K)

lmao

1. What time is the debate? Date?

2. Whose channel will it be hosted on?

Also, benefits here does not have to mean he benefits in terms of wealth. See: nationalists that genuinely believe that their ethno-state will justify all differences in power. They're almost giddy to bow to power as long as it is white and they feel they are living in a "natural" world in which their team is winning.

But I didn't finish Settlers so I don't know if Sakai specifically claimed that white proles weren't real proles because they were paid off. I was under the impression he just thought they had some spooky racial solidarity.

twitter.com/MaoistRebelNews/status/975817110558576645
What did he mean by this?

Do these brainlets know that foreign trade was making up not more than 5% of their entire economy, even in revisionist times?

They mean that a nation actively involved in the process of market exchange, metering of trade terms by comparative advantage, the consumption and accumulation of foreign securities, etc.
Perhaps in relative terms, but that amounted to 110.7 Billion dollars (9th Global, 1989). This was comparably less perhaps, but that isn't the assertion made. Intrastate trade or the other scalar values being the majority means nothing when the assertion is that the economy is organized in a didactic manner, or according to market mechanisms. End result, USSR = capitalist…no, not at all. China, on the other hand, one hundred percent is.

They turned revisionist, not really fascist
primitivism that got crushed by vietnam
not even remotely socialist to begin with?

As if naming a bunch of utter failures in organizing the first world did shit to "disprove" Third Worldism.

It shows that there is the will to do revolution in the first world.

Kibbutzim are fascist? What in god's name are you on about, son?

The existence of other states still forces USSR to extract surplus value from its own population to exchange for technology/resources/innovation. Hence, alienation and capitalism are still forced upon it. Hence, abolish other states.

Why do we keep giving these numb-nuts time?

Attached: DNA.jpg (1190x898, 59.26K)

says the anarcho-prim flag

TBH I like Chaya's take on Third Worldism much better than Roo's. Third Worlders are "closer" to communism since they haven't been corrupted by postmodernity/progress and still possess communal aspects within their cultures that white people lack. I do agree one reason state-socialism always ended in quasi-fascism is because the emphasis was placed on development of factories, tech, and output rather than the creation of communal spaces.

I say this as someone who studied anthropology BTW.

Any attempt to withdraw from the world economy at this point will turn fascistic pretty fast.

In what ways?

this

Living trainwrecks can be hard to ignore

Attached: c4a.jpg (600x484, 23.06K)

See

Any underdeveloped nation seeking autarky will have to develop its closed economy fast in order to be able to defend itself against the imperialist powers, that means a repeat of 20th century Stalinism.

National liberation made sense in a cold war context, when a newly liberated nation could join the socialist pole, the same cannot be said today when a new socialist nation would have to go at it alone. It can be argued that if enough countries were to go at it at the same time that would btfo me, and that would be correct, but without internationalism you're just getting national flavours of Juche.

While we are on the subject of Juche and the enlightenment I will always find it ironic that, contrary to orientalist myths about them (muh confusianism, muh Kim is the mommy gf of the Korean people) the DPRK sees itself as the true bearer of Enlightenment values ("Man is the master of his own destiny") while for them the West has deviated from the true path into PoMo relativism.

What about a Pan-Third World movement like Roo proposes? That would solve this problem immediately. China or India could lead it.

Roo's twitter says it'll be the last weekend in March, topic "Was the USSR socialist?" They don't seem to have settled on the exact time or location yet.

So what date? I've heard March 22nd but I could be wrong.

As someone whose read the whole thing, I gave to say that this is exactly what he thought. He alluded to it in the subtitle: “the mythology of the white proletariat”

On the surface you might think that he means that white proles have some myths that need busting but once you get to the end you find out that what he really means is that there is no white proletariat and that the notion That the white proletariat exists on the Left precisely IS the myth that he is attacking.

I have to admit I found the book convincing the first time I read it. But subsequent re-reading and real life/a deeper understanding of Marxist theory made me doubt it’s thesis

That's the crux of the issue, what reason does China or India have to lead such a movement? They already have a somewhat privileged position within the world economy (China moreso than India, but yeah), I wouldn't go so far as to say that they are embourgeoisified but they certainly are not the centers of world revolution they could have become just half a century away.

I wouldn't say this. What about Iran? It nearly cut itself off entirely from the world market post-1979 and yet isn't doing too badly. They are also internationalist as fuck, supporting both resistance movements in Lebanon and Palestine and also helping safeguard Syria from western imperialism.

Very little. Roo will back himself into a corner like he always does. Thankfully, Muke will be too stupid to recognize an advance.

You're forgetting there's a counter-imperialist bloc.

Jason will go hysterical during the debate, I'm 100% certain. He could barely hold himself back when he was going at it with Soygon.

I mean, just look at him here. He refuses to understand *why* he's being criticized and called out to begin with, he simply folds, doesn't respond, and opts to play the victim - "all these FIRST WORLDISTS are ATTACKING me".

I can't believe he's almost 40. For fuck's sake, I was more mature at 16.

Attached: Screen Shot 2018-03-22 at 12.22.09 AM.png (596x542, 133.77K)

Have been involved with the TWist movement for years. I still reluctantly call myself a "Twist" - although I believe the term itself is "problematic", and some of the theory is dated.

Most "refutations" of TWism either confuse TWism - which fundamentally, is a economic theory/criticism, with Sakaism, which can be summarized as a kind of "whites bad, brown/black people good" in an almost mystic/spiritual way, and is about as anti third-worldist as it gets. Unfortunately, the "RAIM" group is largely responsible for this conflation.

Either that, or they claim something similar to - eg, "Third Worldists are defeatists, they just don't want to do anything, they think revolution is too hard".

In reality, Third Worldists have been trying to get shit done for years. During the height of LLCO, they were sending thousands of dollars a month to revolutionary movements in the third world, and running all kinds of bizarre front groups. For a while, the largest Zeitgest movement chapters in America were front groups for them, on top of that they were running liberal charities & protest movements as fronts. Some of the largest, most nauseatingly liberal social media pages/profiles are being shadow run by them to dupe liberals into funding revolution even today - although I don't know if any of them still have an on the ground presence.

That being said, while the party had a surge of life after they kicked their screwball drugged up ex-leader out in 2016 (and prior to that from 2010-2012, when it was it its height) they have basically fallen apart since then.

Why did Jason leave the LLCO? Was he kicked out or did he leave on his own free will?

The party had been stagnating for some time. That stagnation turned into decline. He left the org with a larger group of people, most of them being in the top levels of the party.

Since then, the party (in North America, at least) has basically collapsed in on itself. The party within Africa is healthy & growing. We're talking growth from less than a dozen cadre into the hundreds, with a mass base in the low thousands in the space of 2 years. There are a couple villages in rural Ghana where the party is practicing dual power - churches, farms, sporting teams, and soon, likely schools/clinics. It is really unfortunate that there has been almost 0 transparency on it all. I wouldn't be surprised if "LL" in Africa - or at least whatever succeeded them, turns into "the next big thing". LLCO itself though almost certainly won't be a thing in 12 months.

I used to work with a lot of pro-Palestine groups, and my impression is that western activists claiming to "do activism" for people in the Third World is always a clusterfuck.

I mean, on what planet does a white suburbanite speak for Palestinians or get to decide what they "ought" to do? I'd rather hear about the struggles Palestinians face from ACTUAL Palestinian people. It's the whole "Can the Subaltern Speak?" but also just recognizing your limits as an activist who isn't on the ground and can't do much aside from marches, boycotts, and petitions or internet "activism".

Not to mention there is always the problem of epistemology or culture. A white college kid running around in a keffiyeh trashing the kosher section of their local supermarket out of solidarity is the kind of antic which would leave most Palestinians embarrassed, especially if something like that was done in their name or the name of their people. I can only imagine trashing the Indian section of the supermarket out of solidarity with Kashmir or all the peoples whom Modi is persecuting, or throwing all the Turkish products on the floor out of solidarity with Afrin would harbor up the same feelings of resentment. Westerners act like children, easterners typically don't.

I don't disagree with you. Leadership should always come from the community that actually constitutes the movement. That was one substantial problem with LLCO, although to their credit, they later tried to rectify the issue after PF was kicked out. The idea was that the "Central Directorate" which replaced PF's CC, would serve as a temporary body, and would be abolished in favor of a third world central committee by the time of their 2nd party congress.

That never came to be, though. Right now, the "TWist" movement in the first world is in disarray. There are a lot of questions - both ideological (as political/economic developments in the last 5 years have severely dated elements of TWist analysis) and in terms of practice, that we are going to need to work out before a new movement can be formed.

Wut?

So what does the LLCO actually do in Ghana?

They operate as any Leninist/MZT party does - party building.

In that, they have seen a lot of success. West Africa is one of the poorest regions in the world, and there is a lot of nostalgia for the post colonial socialist governments (Nkrumah, Sankara, etc). Unfortunately, there is no real established communism movement in the region, and there hasn't been for decades (unless you count some very small student study groups).

Their organizing has mostly been among rural peasants and proletarians. In the country side, they have won over a small handful of villages. They've got a handful of farmland where they are growing crops for STP type movements, a church which is on board with the org, etc.. In a lot of TW countries, the bourgeois government has limited reach in the rural areas, which is how movements like Boko Haram, taliban, etc, rise up. No social services, little policing, etc. Within these villages, the local government is basically their party.

That being said, LLCO in Africa really needs to be separated from LLCO in the first world for the sake of honesty. LLCO in the first world is practically dead. Whether or not LLCO in Ghana will continue to operate as LLCO, or whether they'll adopt a new name, I'm not sure. I'd say the latter will likely be the case.

Yes, and when people outside the culture try to take it over it always turns into a mess.

The issues I had with SJP, BDS Movement, etc. all had to do with the contrast I saw between what the actual Palestinians wanted vs. what the ivory tower white people wanted (not to mention, all the reactionaries who would creep in). What's ironic is, most of the Palestinians and Arabs held views that were far more benign than the ivory tower westerners (so much for Arabs being "savages"). Palestinians would say: "We don't care if the Jews are living on our land or not, we just want Israel to stop killing, displacing, and torturing us," whereas white activists would say something like: "JEWS NEED TO GTFO OF PALESTINE AND GET THEIR ASSES BACK TO BROOKLYN". Right off the bat you see the contradiction. Even when Palestinians would call out white/western activists for acting really unruly, the whites would just blow them off and insist they were doing the right thing. "The only way to get to Israel is to destroy Israelis' sense of identity or force them all to self-flagellate" - except no Palestinian actually says shit like that. "Deconstructing identity" is purely white epistemology.

I'd add most of those "study groups" are no doubt filled with students who are bourgeois or petit-bourgeois since the average slum-dweller probably can't read, much less comprehend a complex theory like MLM.

youtube.com/watch?v=v32VvrxpHVk

Jason exposed as satanist.
Finally, I've always suspected this.

Well Chaya Bat-Tabarnak did say turd worldism is mysticism, so…

...

This is your brain on burgers

Good

Attached: 1c87ba93fbb962a1a4f2e1d5c85c29c417fa4135fcc92528ae2b340de1fcb8e3.png (820x420, 173.74K)

The Roo is satanic
Dugin is satanic
Ergo
The Roo is fourth position

wtf I love third worldism now

Attached: DWC9g8QXcAAZJtj.jpg (450x329, 14.49K)

MADE BY 4PT GANG

Roo turns alt-right in 5..4…3..2…

Attached: Screen Shot 2018-03-22 at 8.32.55 PM.png (609x563, 116.16K)

He's telling some pedant off on twitter. How is that aut-right exactly?

Latinos have never called themselves a race and there are "Latinos" of many races. Look at Jason's first tweet. Clearly he's invoking some kind of racial chauvinism.

Yeah, is the same paranoia that feeds the alt-right: "clearly 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧they🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 need to be told that"

Keep in mind, Jason calls BlackRedGuard and BlackDiaMat "punks" because he can't call them "n*s".

No he's mocking that person. It's like interrupting someone who just used the term "white people" to inform them that "white people" don't actually exist because whiteness is a socially constructed category. It's completely irrelevant pedantry.

Third Worldism is incompatible with actual Marxism as Marx wrote about the economic processes of industrialized nations. Also first world proletariat don't really benefit from the elite in any substantial way.

I like how fascists liked Jason's original tweet whereas actual Marxists called him out for it. Good job Jason.

Check out the comments under his videos, Jason has a solid right-wing fanbase (so does Jimmy Dore btw). There is this guy called Henry Johnson whose a fat, deluded White Supremacist and comments under every video.

They possess communal aspects due to purely selfish tribal reasons. It's anti multicultural.

It would probably be harder to implement state socialism in a third world country. It usually ends up with one group of the population leading the revolution while other groups naturally oppose that tribe. When the group leading the revolution wins you will just get an oppressive regime to the other groups and it will devolve into some corrupt dictatorship monstrosity which has happened frequently in nations in Africa.

twitter.com/HalfAtlanta/status/977007855751581696
A race studies professor is now attacking Jason.

He's done.

Attached: smug sucy5645.jpg (484x458, 23.38K)

...

Red liberal detected.

Attached: jason 34235435.jpg (540x560, 52.64K)

lmao I'm dying

Attached: arktos.png (1080x795, 826.83K)

Roo's views on race are closer to fascism than Marxism.

That’s because there is no feudalism in those areas. Seriously the same was in Europe before the Enlightenment. Tribs are rarely horizontal entities.

Where has Roo ever mentioned race?

Russia isn’t counter-imperalist. There alt-imperalist.