What can be done?

Is there anything revolutionary that is possible in first world countries today?

Over the last 50 years voting and educating and online discussion have been completely useless

Attached: ee4dc1102d8a96f89df9a5a2b277609654a473b1a074d83c0b757d01845158be.jpeg (768x960, 162.64K)

This should have been clear from the beginning.

As long as there is a unipolar capitalist world order world socialism is not possible and state socialism is next to impossible to maintain over the long term.


Attached: ClipboardImage.png (800x450, 510.43K)

no, of course not
the only legitimate thing is to create a youtube channel, condemn your viewers and everyone as useless leeches on the third world and tell them not to do anything except joining you in telling everyone not to do anything

First worlders can stand against imperialism however most are loathe to do so. I wonder why?

yeah, wonder if something in the western imperialist nations happened
like some kind of anticommunist scare and persecution
hmmm nah
it's just that they're all just dirty imperialists by nature because there are no classes in imperialist nations or something like that
long live unroo thought!

Attached: activism.jpeg (474x430, 27.79K)

Not in most of them. The closest thing I am aware of in recent memory is the success of Syriza in Greece but that totally fell apart. The key issue is the neoliberal model has shifted the most exploitative and brutal abuses of the working class over to the third world, abuses that would have surely radicalized the first world by now had they not been moved overseas. There is no revolutionary potential in the first world because the brutality that our societies thrive upon is comfortably out of sight and out of mind, thousands of kilometers away in Bangladesh or Thailand or what have you.

Revolutions across the third world must come before the status quo of the first world is ever to be threatened.

Revolution won't be possible until the ruling class can no longer placate the working class with superprofits generated by imperialism.

At least post a coherent ideology you fuck.

Maybe the government literally murdering them has something to do with it… hmm…

In all seriousness I do think first world westerners today are absolutely pathetic when it comes to anti-imperialism, they aren't even doing the bare minimum to counteract it (i.e. voting for the few somewhat anti-imperialist representatives they can vote for).

Attached: kent-state-student-reacting-to-death-of-slain-protester.jpg (1200x841, 235.9K)

If this is bait, it is too real. Fails the whole point of bait, doesn't it? I mean, yeah, you got them but it was totally believable, practically anything could be bait in that case.
I can't tell you what to do user, but you should stop engaging with bourgeois institutions to undo them. That is retarded.


A small group of ruffians throwing temper tantrums because of something they and only they saw on the interwebs is not going to cause revolution. Their actions are actually likely to be perceived as a scary outside source to the status quo and it might even make the masses afraid of going down that path in fear of emulating them. Activism is detrimental for this reason, when the material conditions are right for the general populace communism will happen.

There should have been a lot more than just protests going on during the Iraq war and occupation, during Vietnam there was at least Weather Underground doing some radical shit, the first world anti-imperialist response to the Iraq war was not good enough.

Ah yes, ineffectual bombing campaigns: I wonder why people didn't try that tbh.

9/11 didn't happen, that's what caused tthe hatred of the middle east in the U.S, and "justified" actions against tyranny in the 2000's.
Those made it harder to convince people that you were dying, or being put in danger for nothing

There was at least an effort, terrorism is obviously not an effective solution to anything in the first world, but there was revolutionary fervor and if that energy were to have been better utilized I think a semi-effective revolution could have occurred. Meanwhile during the fucking Iraq war you have a few sign wavers spending an hour outside shouting every now and then. Then they go home to drink their literal slave labour derived tea and get ready to go to work for their imperialist corporation the next day. There is absolutely no comparison between the anti-Vietnam War movement and the anti-Iraq War movement.

Sorry but this is a pile of steaming horseshit. You are complaining what people did was useless by advocating they should have done something else more useless that would have got people killed: great logic there lad. And you don't just bomb your way into a revolution, read Lenin on the SR's tactics.
There is no ethical consumption under capitalism, stop being a bourgois moraliser.

I'm talking about the revolutionary potential being higher during the Vietnam war than the Iraq war, because during Vietnam more people actually gave a shit about anti-imperialism, I literally said bombings and terrorism are ineffective, but it was at least a sign that there was energy behind the movement. You can not possibly imply that westerners care enough about anti-imperialism when they barely did anything during the Iraq war to protest it.

And I know there is no ethical consumption under capitalism, nice little buzzphrase there, but during the Vietnam war there were significant movements among the people to attempt to cut capitalist consumption out of their lives entirely, they at least attempted to establish communes and alternative methods of living under capitalism that significantly reduced the benefit their consumption offered to imperialist powers. Literally none of these things happened in response to the Iraq war.

9/11, and the spooky "muh Arabs make things go boom" mentality justified it for a decent amount of burgers, that and the "respect muh imperialist soldiers after nam" militarism

I forgot about the rest of these comments. You all need to stop being such fucking insufferable moralists. Yes, we understand. First worlders are all the big Satan, misled by the evil media or their own evil impulses or a lack of vitamin lsd or… Can you all just get over it already? I get it; it sucks having to listen to bourgeois propoganda, especially from peers, but this is just the way it is. I'm not being defeatist, but there is this insidious idea that these people "don't deserve Communism" and that we should thusly not make any revolutionary attempts. That shit is 100% retarded. Almost everyone from every point in time has been an asshole and a retard. You don't have to like it, but you need to accept it and deal with it in a way that promotes the development of Communism, otherwise you have no reason to be here and should fuck off.

Every time anybody has ever organized, no matter how bottom-up you lot say it's not organic enough.

I agree with you completely, I think the solution to the weak anti-imperialist sentiment in the west is building awareness and encouraging direct action, anyone condemning and discouraging westerners just for being idiots sometimes is engaging in counterrevolutionary activity, we need to be doing the opposite, we need to be encouraging and engaging with these people on a meaningful level in order for them to realize their true revolutionary potential.

Outside of a rupture that disrupts the regularity of post-industrial bourgeois life occurring capital will continue to present itself as a real human community where all authentic human activity has been subsumed and sublimated by the impersonal demands of value to which no outside-of-capital exists for a resistance to foment.

Attached: 6e684d001a894fcbcdde4dc36a8c00082907e77845c7b881bd412c7cfd153ff4(1).png (368x367, 322.61K)

It's just a perfect example of how the US government is fascist.
They just rinse and repeat this process any time it is convenient for them, the fascist modus operandi.

only thing 1st worlders can do is anti imperialism, maybe in the coming decades with the collapse of the american empire things will change but for now a revolution in the first world is a pipe dream.

Presently you can not engage in anti-imperialist activity without also engaging in economic disruption, because the primary method of imperialist power projection in the present day is through economic means. Economic disruption is anti-imperialism, it is our greatest weapon against imperialism, so in a way the revolution in the first world does not simply necessitate anti-imperialism, it literally IS anti-imperialism. When imperialism is eradicated, so is the ruling class.

Online discussion has only existed for 30 years.

I was thinking about trying to form some kind of leftist group or secret society, what does Zig Forums recommend?


I said leftist Nazi cuck

leftist schmleftist just become a noctulian bro

The only people I've found who can really offer much are the people for whom collaboration with capitalism is impossible or highly problematic, and those people generally aren't in a position to fight. At the end of the day, people aren't going to fight because they want to take a principled stance against the misery of some brown people over there. Sure, they're right that imperialism is wrong, but I don't see most of those people giving up the luxuries imperialism offers them.

About the best you can do is avoid the state and offer support networks outside the tentacles of the state or its church allies. The state tries to put a lid on stuff like that because it recognizes the danger posed by such organizations. It wouldn't surprise me if the state forcibly shut down food banks once shit really hits the fan, for instance.

Super Smash Bros Ultimate might not be revolutionary, but it is the ultimate version of Smash.

Revolution is a pipe dream anywhere, precious child. The "third world" is no bastion of socialistic sentiment just because they are poorer.

Note: I didn't mean to sound defeatist with this post and I personally think OP is pathetic for even making this thread. I merely meant expecting socialism anytime soon is pure nonsense.

But yes, there is plenty of revolutionary action we can do at the moment. We can lay the groundwork for a real worker's movement so in the coming decades we can have a real shot at revolution when our chance arises.

The only way is to break down the system.

Use anything to break it down. Use Nazism, Communism, Anarchism, Liberalism, Islamism, and etc.

It must be wiped out so that something new will take its place.

As Communists, we must embrace the image that has been given to us. We must strike terror into the system.

reminds of something that the Unabomber said when someone asked him in a new article

If you wanted to destroy modern civilization according to Ted it would be very easy, you would just have to sabotage one or two things, sort of like unplugging a few cords. Like destroying the electrical grid. or destroying the place that processes all the oil in america, apparently its all located in some place in New Orleans.

Only developing nations such as the People's Republic of China are capable of actual revolutionary mass action.

That's nice, but what does that actually mean and what are people doing towards that end? How can people join those movements?

It is obvious that the reason the Vietnam War had angrier Anti-Imperialist is because of the conscription, people didn't want to be conscripted to fight the war. Meanwhile the Post-9/11 wars did not have conscription so there is less of an outrage.