Reminder that Third Worldism is, in praxis, futile until this happens

Reminder that Third Worldism is, in praxis, futile until this happens.
A post-revolution US would simultaneously remove the state that practises the greatest quantity of imperialism but also place the greatest quantity of surplus value in the hands of the proletariat for redistribution.

Attached: communist_usa-flag.jpg (600x316, 18.21K)

No it's not. There are countless different scenarios that could come about. Instead of wishing this fantasy that Americans will suddenly overthrow their government because they've decided to support socialism or communism, it's more realistic to try to create a multi-polar world where the US has weaker economy and less of a global military presence, and any country that the US has aims to invade is armed with nukes (like DPRK and hopefully Iran in the future). This is the part of the long game Russia and China are playing.

I kinda agree. I don't think it's entirely futile but it would remove the main obstacle. I always then leftists I know here in Brazil to learn english and help create content that reaches american and european masses online, because if we happen to elect a left-wing candidate (or, less likely, have some sort of revolution) we would need the sympathy of the people living in these places or turn into Syria, Venezuela or Allende's Chile.

This but unironically. Imagine how beautiful it would be if a vanguard seizes the US government and starts enacting a top down policy of ecosocialism in one country.

Attached: jqaevcj3xfw01.png (1244x524, 316.45K)

Socialism is pretty much unthinkable in a country where people don't know the difference between Keynesianism and the Soviet command economy and giving a shit about poor people is unironically seen as a moral failing. Being right wing is inherent to American culture.
That said, burger hegemony is not unbeatable. It's become increasingly volatile as it tries to fill the void left by the USSR's collapse, which was the basis of its justification to the international community, and Dengland is rapidly outpacing it in economic dominance. Elephants in the room like extreme debt and the inevitable collapse of the fossil fuel industry can't be ignored forever.

Well even if a revolution doesn't succeed it could throw a lot of wrenches in the works

I find it comical that red neo-lib shits somehow think that the first world has any revolutionary potential. Do you honestly think that a oil worker in Texas who earns $100k per year has any class solidarity or shares any class interest with the Bangladeshi child who makes his jeans for 0.13 cents per hour?

If everyone was to live like an average American we would need 7 (seven) earths to sustain it. The average American owes everything to the imperialist subjugation of the global south and the extraction of super profits to subsidis their way of life.

I’d suggest that OP form a ‘workers co-op’ at his local child hunter drone factory which supports the apocalyptic march of empire :^)

first of all the difference between those two (besides the massive income inequality that occurs in the third world) is that the child worker is in abstract essentially a serf who is only obligated to some form of currency by National law. Proletarians aren't serfs, and the proles Marx and Engels knew in their time in the German Empire certianly have more in common with the 100k salary oil worker than the serf child.
secondly, both of those people lack revolutionary potential because of – and only because of – their lack of second-hand education. if people knew that 50% of what the make went to the M-I complex we call a state they would gradly revolt.
Not to mention the neoliberal corporate empire as it stands holds almost no sway in their people anymore since the rise of the internet. Most people, even those in the echo chamber that is Zig Forums, recognize there is something wrong with the fact that we have no formal health care system, lower wages than ever, a dying middle class, lack of union-busting regulations, and lack of EPA regulations. And I'm not just talking about rational, formally educated people; I'm talking about the vast majority of voting Americans. the neoliberals in Washington D.C. continue to ignore these issues. One survey noted that 33% of people today would readily join a revolt against the U.S. Government. To me that is much more revolutionary potential compared to the Keynesian states of Europe and Southeast Asia.

superprofits do not derive from "extraction from the south", we don't live in colonialism anymore dude. advanced capitalist locales are just the places where the bourgeoisie who accumulate the most surplus reside, and they accumulate the most surplus due to various factors from market participation to tech superiority.

t. third worlder

What a stupid screncap. It talks about post-apocalyptic setting, and not Eco politics.


Very correct. US lives of imperialism, and it's citizens are content with it.

Are you suggesting that western corporations don’t extract cheap resources and labour from poor countries?

Only when the west doesn't have access to resources,markets, commodities and cheap labor, this will cause distress between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie in the first world

I'm suggesting it's not "western corporations", but capital as a whole. The national dichotomy is false and very often these "western imperialist powers" are more interested in creating a framework for capital social relations to develop than "muh superprofits" (for example a lot of the countries that participated in the middle east operations did so while knowing it was unfavorable to their local capitals). Whether a US-based capital has factories in poor countries with no labor movements or it is the local bourgeois of that country who exploits the same working conditions, our struggle is unchanged.

Third Worldism merely requires that the American hegemon fall and for its imperialist apparatus to collapse. It doesn't matter if there is a revolution, a civil war, or a Yellowstone eruption. That said, a civil war is probably the best option because all the other lesser imperial powers in the world would focus their attention there and turn away from their third-world projects. The best possible option for third-world revolution would be a proxy war between Canada, the EU, Russia, and China being fought on American soil.

Attached: mountainbalkanization.png (510x477, 50.33K)

But in practice is there not a net flow of wealth from the global south to the global north?

"In practice" is there not a net flow of wealth from minorities to white males? Therefore we need to struggle against white males.

No, you're missing the point. It's not about where capital is at its most concentrated, or where its contradictions are most visible. The practical implications you draw from this are misguided. There is no contradiction between "the North" and "the South", there are no exploiter and exploited nations, there is only the ever-growing contradiction between capital and labor which finds its way to every pore of world society. We don't live in Lenin's time anymore, there are barely any real colonies or otherwise sectors of the global economy where the surplus extraction is performed in a way that isn't a capital-labor relation. This same dynamic of "more wealthy areas" technically already existed 150 years ago inside the countries themselves, and to an extent it still does (compare northern and southern italy, or the big LA suburban centers versus rust belt inner cities in the USA, or generally urban vs rural areas inside capitalist countries, etc) and yet when the capitalist historical agenda called for national unification against feudal and petty-owner localisms, Marx and Engels understood it as historically progressive and in need of superation, not crushing.

The only possible direction in the 21st century is that of transnationalism. Anything other is distinctively reactionary, and this includes third world movements. Where I live (Argentina), the peronist 'socialdemocrats' always attempt to formulate this dichotomy between the exploiter imperialists (nowadays they call it simply 'neoliberalism') and the exploited nation ('the people') and the trot-dominated left even humours them in some of these calls, claiming that the country is in need of national liberation as if it was a colony. This is laughable and only responds to petty-bourgeois insecurities and intra-bourgeois surplus scuffles. There is no nation to be liberated, no 'people', only the working class, which, again, can only possibly be transnational. Otherwise communism is doomed.

Synthesis between SJWs and MTWs when?

In practice they already are the same, and we call them twitter ☭TANKIE☭s.

I'd actually agree with you that capital has transcended national boundaries and that its inaccurate to suggest that imperialism has a national character. Your earlier posts just made it sound like you doubted the existence of imperialism in the modern era altogether.

I do not wish to be ruled by commissar jamal or commissar Cletus

if you support any class society you are a bootlicker no matter what

there is literally nothing wrong with licking boots

if you're a masochist, I guess

go share your fetish in leftytrash