Reminder that Maoist Third-Worldism is idpol! It's literally putting racial identity over class issues and takes away...

Reminder that Maoist Third-Worldism is idpol! It's literally putting racial identity over class issues and takes away the struggle proles face in developed nations.

Attached: 1362084077784.jpg (375x375, 20.44K)

Jason Unruhe explicitly said that racial minorities in the first world enjoy first world privilege. Though he doesn't speak for all Maoist Third-Worldists

on the nose, its the marxist equivalent of blood quantum

Why are the shills so hard against MLMs?
Makes me want to consider joining them if anything tbqh

It is identity politics but it isnt neccecarily racialist.

But a genuine argument can be made for third worldism on the caveat that you readjust your definitions of third and first world, or use it as a general view on the dominant rich countries vs the poorer exploited ones, since there is no clear cut lines.

Attached: 1492612132400.png (128x128, 30.61K)

We know.

MLM and MTW are two different things
Both are pretty cringe though

New People's Army is the most advanced commie struggle in the world man

The fact that there exists a group in rebellion and that it esteems itself communist, these are not the sole criteria for a "communist struggle"

Attached: 93001_84185_800_auto_jpg.jpg (799x614, 35.63K)

Everything is idpol. People who complain about "idpol" are reactionaries.

It's more about national identity, but the point still stands. Porky doesn't stop being a bourgeois swine just because he's from a poor country.

Libtards BTFO

Attached: trumpvshitler.jpg (477x279, 37.41K)

Hitler didn't gas bankers though. He didn't change anything about the Reichbank. He also had a Rothschild captive and let him go. Gassing people isn't anything to be proud of either.

While imprisoned he was visited by Heinrich Himmler. Rothschild apparently impressed the SS leader, who subsequently ordered that Rothschild's prison conditions be improved with better furniture and sanitation facilities

Attached: wall-st-front-cover.jpg (247x400, 15.02K)

idiot

“Third World” is an economic category, and not a racial one. Third Worldists have been saying forever the global class divide has nothing to do with race or “white supremacy”. The term “third world” just means a region or population which is primarily proletarian, and “first world” means a region or population which is primarily non exploited (in economic terms).

So eg, there are millions of “first world” ppl in the poorest countries in the world, and tens of millions of “third worlders” in the imperialist countries, including millions of whites. There are proportionally more “third worlders” in white
countries like Romania, Ukraine, Moldova, etc, than in the Black/Latino communities in America, although the TW population of the western imperialist states is rapidly increasing.

“Twism” rejects racialism.

No its not

I think they are generally correct when they say revolution most come from the third world. Not because of idpol but just the logistics of it. You're not going to have a vanguard revolution in America, It's just not possible.

Attached: f7b0f779c95640db870336360020ac05bcad5f049e33a826d2648256f110920b.png (506x417, 266.1K)

All Communists in the First World should use their wealth to bribe their way into power in the poorest third world and then build up secretly.

Why are you posting a capitalist here?

Fuck off we support 3rd world anti imperialism over socialism now.

It's not.

It doesn't.

Attached: 71-o46CzdiL._SY355_.png (355x355, 15.85K)

I think MTW is very dumb indeed but this is a strawman.

but it is
"you can't be oppressed because you have X"
they're both stereotypical XY problems.

What do you mean?

it's literally as "Marxist Memes" described says in that Facebook image. it's tallying up "oppression points" for a ridiculous "oppression olympics". it's complete CIA division tactics.

I don't support MTW, but imperialism is a very real thing and Marxists ought to differentiate imperialist and non-imperialist nations in their theory.
So yes, the third world is more oppressed.

economically speaking*

that doesn't mean we should be looking to the third world for revolution. it has to start where there's capitalist infrastructure.

Most of what is colloquially referred to as the "third world" already has capitalism. What it doesn't have is super profits, large populations of reactionary labor aristocrats, "middle class" professionals, and/or massively influential petite bourgeoisie that would rather turn the world into ash than accept socialism.

Yes, I disagree with MTW on that revolution in imperialist nations is unachievable. However it is much more difficult as they are in the economic center of imperialism's grasp. I think it is the duty of communists in such nations to reduce and stop the imperialist wars as this would lead to the weakening of global capitalism and the increase of revolutionary potential.