Does anybody think that third worldism is pointless?

does anybody think that third worldism is pointless?
Socialism is supposed to take place in advance capitalist societies.
If third world countries adopt socialism it slows their development.

Attached: 6b8wrcezkz101.jpg (1024x754, 78.2K)

Does anyone except Jason Unruhe think anything else?

I think that first world is pointless and it must be destroyed
Absolutely undialectical. Citing Marx won't save you. You will all die in the nuclear holocaust.
…

Attached: 7c0b67b834646f6f2b196099a52c61969bba127258f6265f35cb35c2cd70738c.png (583x293, 30.18K)

Yo how can a man understand many concepts of marxism but yet spout so much regurgitated dogshit?

Third Worldism is literally idealism, say that Madagascar or the Phillipines have a revolution, and overthrow the government. Now the entire combined military might of the world is against them, and those militaries are more advanced than any others, with drone warfare, modern arms, etc. It literally can't do anything but die and suffer a new dictator being installed after a year AT MOST.
The ONLY way for socialism to take hold is if a revolutuion happens in China, America, Russia, etc. Because they are militarily strong enough to deter military action. Fuckn Nigeria doesn't have that ability.
It's idealistic because Third Worldists think that a revolution will succeed because it has better ideas, and they ignore material reality, that any third world nation is so underdeveloped that it won't be able to fight against the largest combined military complex in history.

just liberal starbucks sipping faggots
But its not because workers are too brainwashed and dont suffer enough to organize a socialist movement. Whenever there is worker discontent, the bourgies always give keynesian concessions fueled by exploited 3rd world workers and imperialism. This is an eternal cycle as long as the 3rd world remains capitalist .
As shown by latin america and burkina faso, this is absolute BS. Western imperialism and slows down socialist countries.

If you have socialist governments in the 3rd world, porky loses his cheap labor to brutally exploit, and that means no means to fund the backup welfare state for the western proles.

IDK why you liberals are so blind towrads this extremely basic anc clear truth.

Attached: liberalscum.jpeg (680x657 8.87 KB, 280.69K)

Jason is a lumpen retard

Attached: 42157442_454266881750147_8880161406389846016_o.jpg (1300x697, 81.28K)

If the phillipines had a revolution, porkies would lose a huge amount of cheap labour in east asia, stocks will go down, and capitalists will have to look for somewhere else to exploit.
As long as there are multiple 3rd world revolutions, this guarantees more to spring up as long as revionist scum or proky agents are prevented from killing off their leaders.

Being invaded is not a problem because as long as the revolution has popular support, there can be a geurilla war. If a flat desert like iraq was toomuch for the combined power of the US and the UK, then a latin american jungle would be devastating to the budget. In order to supress the revolution, the west would have to be increasing brutal, as brutal or more as in vietnam, and even brainwashed 1st worlders will protest such wars. Even 2 or 3 3rd world revolutions happening in super populous countries would mark the beginning of the end of capitalism.

If 3rd world revolution is so useless, why does the CIA and western intelligence go to such great lengths to suppress them?