The big imperialism discussion

What do you think that stance is exactly?

As one of the people banned in that thread I’d like to know why supporting the DPRK against imperialism means I have to be a supporter of Juche. Do I have to be a Shiite Islamist to support Iran against imperialism?

Zig Forums is best described as trying to use reactionary myths about 20th century socialism to argue in favor of their untainted version of socialism
I'm not even an ML but this is just a bad angle to argue from, you're using the same arguments as literal fascists and liberals but with a different conclusion
pic related is something I literally just snapped, WW2 was just stalin wanting to kill german workers

Attached: leftpol.png (783x88, 7.62K)

I'm not saying that? I unbanned you after all.
It's just that it falls under the "excessive and pathological demonisation" which I mentioned in the OP.

First off, despite that being a shitty post, there is plenty to criticize about Stalin from a leftist perspective even if you don’t buy into the propaganda. Second, I don’t see what their position on Stalin has to do with modern issues of imperialism. Third, leftpol isn’t a single person.

Why? It's possible to legitimately not care. Indeed, in many cases it's the default state, especially if you're a reflective human being. Nobody walks around 24/7 in a furore over US foreign policy. Even Jason Unruhe sleeps.

I feel like this rule has the possibly-intended, possibly unintended consequence of locking out all the absolutely insane takes that made Zig Forums so entertaining to use in previous years. If you're just a boring neocon then your opinion has no place here, but if you've got something unhinged like supporting the invasion of Iraq on the principle of letting a man continually hit a hornet's nest and get stung until finally the hornets kill him, you're delusional but it's an unusual position. It's also almost always a position taken by people who know they won't fit into the broad pro-war coalition. (i.e. Neocons made up with Christopher Hitchens because he became a warmonger, but they didn't go hunting out random ⛏️rotskyist sects with insane takes. Those people aren't repeating from the position of power or boosting their message, they're propagating insanity instead.)
In short analogy, "I support the USA launching a first strike against the USSR in whatever circumstances they choose because they're totalitarian and bad" should be banworthy repetition of establihsment positions on alt.politics.leftypol, but "I support the USA launching a first strike against the USSR because the massive concentration of nuclear blasts will draw the attention of futuristic aliens who have already arrived at socialism bringing us to a new state of enlightenment and allowing free communication with dolphins" is so far unhinged from that position - despite sharing the key practical tenet - as to completely abandon it, and should not be banned just for the most passing similarity to rote repetition of an establishment message which could actually pose an ideological risk.

Correct, no disagreement here. The problem is that Zig Forums does tend to buy into the propaganda. CIA support for the anti-soviet left should ring some bells.
It's the german workers thing here which is completely retarded. Once could apply this into a modern context if it weren't for the fact the US was never invaded, but if it had then maybe he'd talk about commies wanting to kill american workers.
No, but the tendency there is indeed to try and change anti-socialist smears into pro-socialism.

Probably one of the most interesting posts I've read in a while. I wanna ask BO if he thinks supporting first strikes against Iran cause posadism is legitimate.

Attached: kiri think.png (427x399, 57.4K)

Fair enough. Small issue for me anyway as long as people arent getting the hammer for silly shit like supporting Kurdish national sovereignty without calling for anti-Syria, Iran or Iraq action. Which does raise the question sort of going along with this anons point , where does something like Tibet fall in this discussion? Because historically of course Free Tibet was an anti-Maoist talking point to try and undermine communist China and conveniantly ignoring that Tibet was a feudal slave state before the Red Guards got there. But in contemporary China the question of sovereignty of nations within China's borders seems like as blurred and contentious a topic as the question of whether China is in any way socialist and worth supporting beyond in a broad anti-imperialist sense. Of course saying something like "NATO should support the balkanization of China" is pro-imperialism and bannable even if for the stated purpose of national liberation, but what about "nations within modern China's borders have the right to/should oppose the Chinese state for the sake of their own independence", maybe even if the latter is in a situation in which they recieve some aid from western powers as in R*java. I'm not even a R*javafag and never was, I just always opposed banning them and had issues the moderation of the discussion surrounding it and I figure this is the thread to play devil's advocate.

Attached: 1535678350766.jpg (640x466, 88.83K)

I think you should be even more strict and kick out all the anarchists/leftcoms. Especially that annoying black cats fag who - conveniently - always finds himself playing devils advocate for imperialism. No agenda there!

Also I'm tired of this bullshit about the "good ol' days" of Zig Forums, yes the good days of when people shilled zionist anti-communists like bookchin LOL.

Attached: HowDoYouDoFellowCommunists.png (1900x138, 17.17K)

Attached: aae51d7abb5c9d82d057d9315b92d9d7cd07c2ed330e7e4802a453a03fad7b3c.png (780x1200, 760.06K)

We both know that if Marx himself had risen from the grave and led a brutal anti-revisionist revolution against Gorbachev then he would have gotten CIA support. The American position in the Cold War was anti-communist yes, but more specifically it was anti-Soviet because the USSR was the single greatest threat to capitalism at the time. Meaning that the US would opportunistically back literally anybody who might damage the USSR. Nixon sucking up to Mao doesn’t make Mao a counter-revolutionary, and the US opportunistically backing the anti-Soviet left doesn’t make them anti-communist.

I’ve literally never done that.

more for BO than vols, but
1. when it comes to something like this, actually give warnings rather than going immediately to permabans
2. actually read ban appeals and approve them.
3. don't immediately assume bad faith, especially when someone isn't taking a firm position themselves/is soliciting a wider viewpoint on a complex situation and that person has a reasonable post history.

Attached: 2b9cdaa7e4e92f7a684fafafdadc8ab021df7b9e7953e6cda06dd618414dc9e8.jpg (1024x574, 60.84K)

I agree with this. But I have a question, I use leftpol almost as much as leftypol but what exactly is it that makes you believe their stance is damaging and anticommunist?

So we have come to this
Great :)
The biggest problem is that you can say x and not get banned and after a month say x again and get banned for imperialism
So what can we do?
1) As other anons said historical imperialist incidents don’t deserve bans even following BOs theory
2)You CAN be indifferent to third world shit, most of us live in the west(and the some active posters are NEETs so..) so we are free to just be neutral
3) Criticizing third world leaders ,especially non leftist, is ok
4) Debatable shit like one big US military base in Syria should also not be banable
5) Supporting intervention, while not deserving perma, should not be tolerated
Those are my ideas

Tbh leftpolacs are quick to say some very anarchist shit
But you don’t get banned like hear if you disagree

Oh and imho i dont think the pic is that bad

I am sorry for being too controversial but op asks for honest discussion

Attached: 85d08a5fa8c899f3274c156b1b87362e0a364d8a3e75629ac1773b8172426053.png (2400x3300, 7.68M)

Of course YOU wouldn't because you're the same refuse that got sent to Zig Forums in the first place.

I don't get it, don't we have 500 IPs here at any one point? Why is it always the same gang of Zig Forums outcasts trying to dictate how this board operates?

I fully agree. I once got banned for criticizing government of Venezuela, while I have always denounced anti-Venezuelan policy by the US and EU.

Ok BO the american soldiers are bad i never claimed otherwise
But i dont see how a socialist coup in montenegro is bad…..

Attached: Merrymaker.jpg (581x822, 179.68K)

That seems oddly specific. Why Montenegro?

Check the poll in the collective decision making thread, the vast majority of the board is fed up with the BO.

I tried to find a state that no one will call impeialist

Attached: imagesroo.jpg (235x214, 11.44K)

It really is pretty hard thinking of a country that isn't vaguely leftist and/or state capitalist that has never done anything which could be considered imperialist.

Is this a question ?

Attached: 112882a15236ff10bb5aaf53420107311a01483cc37fcf8a1b99fd03889b3c3f.jpg (255x245, 14.49K)

No

I think he is talking about joining the cuban or n.korean millitary but that has nothing to do with Zig Forums
Do we have any ips from there?

Attached: 4b2eb6bf446dc2c5d518e86a18dccedffdae7d97456639965258aa9cf56421f8.png (1063x1388, 1008.98K)

I’d love to try to clarify my position on joining the military but I don’t want to be banned again.

No.

Attached: ok retard.jpg (264x264, 13.15K)

Good initiative.

Definitely agree with all of this.

What about discussions of the liberation of minorities like the Baluchistanis or Arabs in the southeast of Iran? Are those legitimate national liberation discussions to be had?

Who the fuck cares what you think, you're not BO. Purge me then you'll get purged yourself.

Hello Saddam

Honestly not even worth engaging with. Shoo shoo wrecker. I'm not purging anarchists and leftcoms and neither is BO.

Attached: doge think thank.jpg (900x1107, 106.57K)

I'm Qasim motherfucker

I don't understand why people expressing retarded decisions have to be banned to begin with. This isn't some r*ddit board or a shitty sign up BBS, it's a fucking chan. It is not supposed to be a hug box. Some of the best threads we've had over the years were started by Zig Forumsyps that came here to spout their usual downy babble, it provided important talking points and some of them were even convinced that far right ideology is horseshit when they were willing to have an actual argument. We have probably done more to rebuke meme concerns like race statistics and the Islamic question than the rest of the leftist Internet combined because chan users are not liberal wieners that can't handle discussions about distasteful topics. Rightards want you to censor them because it is how their ideology spreads, by appealing to emotions and pretending to be martyrs for expressing an inconvenient truth. The last thing they are hoping for is a fair argument, because they will lose to anyone with half a brain that is familiar with their nonsense. This is why they are so insistent at debating at liberal arts colleges or with random people on the street–they can only win when they go out of their way to find the least informed and emotionally mature people they can find. When they are smug enough to post here with the assumption that no one will be able to find any flaws in their smooth brain arguments, they always get torn apart, so why would we give them an excuse to think they won when we can humiliate them?

Assuming bad faith is why the left wing Internet is so shit to begin with. It is a perfect example of the petty resentment that defines culture under capitalism.

bump

Honestly, this. I know we also ban rightwingers to keep the board from going to hell from raids or shit like that, but this is something we should consider.

A question I have (from someone who hasn't been around that long) has this board always had the same BO? If so then when and why did everything go to shit?

Sounds good, but "it's veiled in anti-communism" is a bit broad.
If I call china a capitalist hellhole, say mao was a retarded statesman and that the chinese communist party is not in any way communist, is it anti-communism?
Is anarchists opposing any ML out of principle anti-communist, or are they just dogmatic?

Now now dont say such silly things

National liberation an sich is not a leftist position, its arguably a right wing position, since its basically ethnonationalism. It is only when an occupied people liberates itself from occupying rule that it becomes supportable for left wing and can take left wing characteristics.
If the baluchistanis or arabs arent second class citizens then there isnt much to be liberated.

The problem is that if you're on /v/ and you shill some game that other people dislike and get banned for it, even if you're opinion was shit you weren't actually causing any harm by shilling it. On the other hand, if people are allowed to push imperialist and anti-communist propaganda it can actually turn people who otherwise might be communists into supporters of the CIA (even if they don't realize it).
t. someone who used to have pretty atrocious politics because of the shit people spewed on reddit and the old Zig Forums
(That said I do think the moderation on this board is sometimes overzealous.)

If you silent them instead of disproving them, you will turn CIA shills into martyrs, that's what his post was about, I think.
Also a chan is for discussion, not recruiting people into your ideology.

Imperial shills like the black cats faggot and other anarchists on this board don't suddenly turn off or go away when they're disproved, they throw out red herrings or gotchas in an attempt to confuse the one doing the disproving.

Best example is bringing up shit false equivalences between the modern US army and the red army of 1917.

Black cats fag argues for the sake of arguing, he's autistic.

i think ur the one who appears autistic bucko

What is that supposed to mean?

Attached: suspicious.jpg (640x360, 20.95K)

You're also another misinformation spreader. All the usual suspects come out to cover for each other.

As I said earlier, this thread is purely full of Zig Forums rejects butthurt that their shilling was exposed.

How can you pretend to be anti-imperialist if you can't even disprove imperialist propaganda?
It's like being anti-capitalist without being able to disprove capitalists shills.

The difference is that it's "safe" to argue with outright nazis because we all know their beliefs are totally ridiculous, no one is going to see a Zig Forums graphic posted here and think "wow, maybe the Jews *do* want us to race mix to destroy western civilization!" So we can have some fun with them without any risk to the integrity of the board. But the kind of pro-imperialist propaganda that gets posted here sometimes is much more insidious, a lot of posters who are new to radical politics will accept it at face value. That kind of shit can poison your mind.

I do disprove it though, what happens is that arguments devolve into semantics and the other retard becomes an ultra-left talking about his pure revolution in a vacuum.

Also here's an exercise, can YOU convince an educated beneficiary of imperialism to denounce imperialism? Are you going to speak to his ethics? What if he doesn't care about the human loss? Tell me how you would argue.

I only recently started posting under this flag and there are plenty other posters using it.

As an yuropean I can only say that this is the most arcane shitfag tendency (if we can even call it such) you can grab up under the rug.

Reminder to kill all burgers.

this

If you talk about Zig Forums your mostly right because a lot of posters here are ex-Zig Forumsacks, so they know the shit they have been into previously.
If you're talking more generally, you're overestimating people, if all the people knew nazis and other facsists ideologies were ridiculous, Zig Forums would not even exist at the first place.
It's the exact same thing with imperialism, chans population are mostly teenagers and young adults who don't know shit about politics, most of them will trust the first radical ideology they will see, you can't "save them" for the rivals ideologies even on Zig Forums, because banning them will make them more "cooler" for them.
tl.dr we should not based our rules to recruit edgy newfriends.

If he's ultra-left maybe you should using ultra-leftists anti-imperialists arguments instead of the usual MLs.

If he benefits from it he won't denounce it, because that's not a matter of ethics, it's a matter of interests, even if you "win the debate" he won't denounce it. But the debate will remains useful because other people will see it.
Even if I seriously doubt anyone posting on an imageboard benefit from imperialism.

When I was a vol I drew a fine line between what was acceptable and unacceptable. There was a thread about the new embassy in Israel that attracted all kinds of anti-semitic posters. I left any criticism of Zionism in place but any poster who began inserting anti-semitic propaganda was identified & given a short ban, plus I deleted their posts.

What BO does is far different. He has, for a year, handed out mostly perma-bans to anyone who criticizes Nicaragua, Iran, Venezuela, talked about recruiting from the military, criticized Robert Mugabe, etc. He equates any criticism of these countries or support for the idea of recruiting soldiers as being prima facie support for imperialism. BO has lied and said that he only bans people who support imperialism against those countries or for recruiting for the US military. It's all bullshit. BO is fucking mentally ill. None of the other volunteers* even enforce BO's insane rules on those topics because they clearly don't make sense.

Which is why the only productive thing that can be done at this point (after having lost over a thousand users) is to fucking get rid of BO someway, somehow.

as far as I could see none of the vols banned people for the stupid shit that BO did. in fact, BO's main activity on the board was deleting baboon-posts and banning people for criticizing the countries above. he rarely even cleaned up shit threads or spam like the other vols did.

foreign policy is overrated tbh. it may be too inefficient but i feel like FP takes need to be weighted against post-history. if someone's got a good strong line on domestic and revolutionary politics, but then thinks America should stop posturing and either invade Venezuela or be quiet, it's probably a net loss to have them go. Especially if they can just be warned instead of banned.

I keep wanting to have a vulgar and vaguely tongue-in-cheek "pros of invading venezuela" type discussion that isn't about advocating the invasion of venezuela, but about throwing vulgar thoughts to the open for discussion - that is, for example, that if Venezuela continues to have difficulties then "socialism" will be tarnished with the acts of weird social democracy, but if Maduro is overthrown we'll have the advantage of "what could have been", or more vulgar, the spectacle of live invasions on television satiating the American need to feel stronger than someone, or the fun of playing bingo as the initial invasion is a success before absolute chaos sets in like it always does. It's essential to distinguish those things from being in favor of an imperialist invasion. It's not even devil's advocate, it's just exposing vulgar, stupid, selfish or bizarre thoughts for collective discussion, since none of us actually has the power to cause or prevent whatever action the US government decides to take. (Well, except the fedposters naturally.)
None of these are talking points you could repeat in polite company to say that such an invasion should go ahead. It's just the kind of weird, one-dimentional silliness the internet breeds: confessing to everyone that "I want there to be a war so I can look at pictures of fighter jets going pew pew pew on the internet." or whatever. Such blunt, banal vulgarity should if anything make the case for invasion seem weaker. Deep down, the warmongers are like that, after personal gain and pretty TV footage of missiles going up like fireworks. That's something it's worth thinking of.
(If you think that's stupid, focus on how it's stupid/should be banned, please don't turn this thread into the ""pros"" of imperialist warmonging thread.)

You're a retard who literally thinks that just saying that countries besides the US can be imperialist is somehow covering for US imperialism. I've never shied away from denouncing western imperialism, you're just an autistic marcyite and your incessant screeching reeks of COINTELPRO as does BO's wrecking.

I'm not even ultra-left, I'm a Leninist. That poster is just a retard who doesn't seem to even understand why my positions are let alone why I hold them. He thinks I'm a Zionist because I said that a two state solution in the middle east could be a step on the road to a one state solution. He thinks I'm a shill for US imperialism because I think Russia and China are imperialist. He thinks that wanting to use US military training against the US state means I support the US military. It's all absurd.

What a slimy fag. Muh popular resitance amiright? Muh brutal dictator huh? Muh spreading freedoms eh?

Attached: 1537377069895.gif (200x153, 2.48M)

t. BO

take your meds

The only people who don't want the BO gone are the ones who are as mentally ill as he is.

Lol this gaslighting. Holy fuck we're in a microcosmic imperialist psyop right here.

MUH BRAINWASHED KOREANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Take your meds, and then look at the poll.

Every other "leftist" group has been inflirtated and subverted, I think this was a long time coming. All the shills taste victory, and now they're flooding in to pick at the carcass of the last genuine ML forum on the internet.

This is how it ends. Now the board will be an anarcho-liberal pit of shit.

Imagine being so new that you think that Zig Forums was ever an ML forum.

A poll you probably spammed your VPN on faggot. We know how much of a loser you are. Think that's crazy? Ask yourself how many times you've evaded bans - or is that something you want to deny as well?

It was on its way there, now the detritus of the west have subverted yet another gathering of genuine communists. First as tragedy….

I don't need to evade bans, they've all been removed remember? Guess you better just off yourself faggot since a handful of leftcoms, Trots or anarchists on an Zig Forums board will surely be the difference between victory or defeat for the glorious revolution of a tendency that was synthesized in the 30s.

Lol that post hoc rationalization to why your stench has persisted despite you being banned ,over and over ,BEFORE that retarded rogue mod unbanned people.

Just realize that you and your ilk were always in the minority. Nobody ever wanted you here, and you'll just be another autist screaming in the wind.

What a damn fag LOL. Trying to make a community out of anons, do you know where you are? Well you may as well be a tripfag because your idiocy is recognizable from a mile away.

MUH TREEHOUSE CLUB.

Sad that you can't go back to the days of shilling bookchin and crying about drumpf and ebil racists?

Seriously learn how to reply to people you insufferable reddit newfag.

I'm sure pedantry makes a rebuttal to whichever mental ward you're from.

Tell me black cat friend, what do you get out of posting on Zig Forums?

This is what I am talking about, the witch hunt mentality. You cannot just accuse people of having ulterior motives in lieu of refuting their opinion. It's no different from Zig Forums playing the JIDF card in every thread.
For that matter, what constitutes "anti-imperialism" according to the BO is a classic case of Third Worldist contrarianism: America is bad, therefore everything that is not America is good.

It staves off boredom, and to my knowledge there is no other leftist forum that is not equally oppressive and full of idpollers to boot. I started posting about a year before he split and have been holding out hope that things will go back to the way they were.

Zig Forums has literally never been an "ML forum", newfag. Not even when the split happened, a bunch of anarchists got banned and there was an influx of twitter ML's, was this ever an "ML forum".

Never thought I’d say this, but thank you based mods.

Are you a Wobbly?

Not technically, as in I’m not a member. I’m a Leninist but I have a few differences from ML so I hesitate to call myself that. In terms of the actual policies I’d support I’m probably closer to a Trot but I don’t have a raging hate boner for the USSR so I wouldn’t consider myself that either.

What the hell is a wobbly

A member of the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW).

newfag pls

Figures that a ☭TANKIE☭ would be unaware of actual organic expressions of working class resistance.

Okay, fellas, not everyone is a part of the Anglosphere. So, stop bullying tankfriend.

hard bump

Most board users probably agree, but this will NEVER be actually implemented as long as BO is running the board.

Trotsky is no longer filtered. Russia-hating "Maoist" escapes banning. Black cat poster is not banned. These are good progress, except for the Maotist tbh.

Tbh it seems like the BO has just stopped caring, and the mods are being far more lenient. I was pretty shocked to see China flag Russophobe poster rambling for so long without getting banned.