Yfw america will never be socialist

Denver teachers are launching their first strike in over 25 years. Massive strike waves are about to hit the US and the unions which represent them are sure to fail. Keep in mind that Sanders and AOC will not fail to support the actions of the unions and thus when workers see the betrayals before their very eyes, support for soc-dems will decline. Sanders is a gatekeeper and its the job of socialists to expose him for the fraud that he is rather than support him due to having anti-marxist conceptions of the unreliability of the proletariat to be revolutionary.

It should be remembered that no communist movement has ever sprung fully formed out of nothing. Class consciousness develops gradually through class struggle, and takes time to manifest itself as a truly revolutionary movement. If Lenin is to be believed then this process requires the active role of communists in transforming trade union consciousness to class consciousness, but that’s another debate. The point being that world historical movements enter through phases of development before they reach maturity, just as the Chartisrs and Luddites were the vulgar but essential precursors of the real worker’s movement, or the Boxer Rebellion the vulgar predecessor of proper Chinese anti-imperialism. Social democracy marks the re-emergence of a worker’s movement in America which was long dead, and with proper encouragement and agitation will lay the groundwork for something more radical.

what exactly does 15/hr accomplish?

not much, but that's the point I was making. America is so far gone in hating workers that 15/h seems like a huge deal when it doesn't really solve many problems. It is a movement which is coinciding with med4all and all that other Justice Dem stuff so USA is heading in the right direction, at least. I think class consciousness is rising in such a manner that Trump won't even get a second term, which is a powerful symbol against the populism of the alt-right.

why wouldn't he? He has a higher approve rating now than the day he got elected.
Also most people approve of his SOTU address

Who in the running could actually beat Trump? Note: they need to get the nomination to beat Trump.

If 15 dollars an hour is too much it encourages automation, and automation literally moves the dialectic forward

...

this
Never underestimate the support from the hogs to their king hog. The man can literally have a tape saying he wants to destroy the working class and subjugate blacks into slavery, nuke Manhattan and they will claim 7D chess.

If exterminism was the goal, they'd just figure out how to make a sustainable society without the mass of proles and then leave us to our own devices. Look up "breakaway civilization."

In the long term a $15/hour minimum wage will accomplish nothing concrete by itself, indeed for a great many it will likely already be inadequate due to increasing cost of living by the time any such policy could be enacted. The point is less the policy itself but laying the groundwork for future action which can affect a meaningful change. It can't be emphasized enough that the state of class consciousness in America is abysmal correctly points out that no revolutionary movement will spring forth from the masses of American workers perfectly formed, it's going to be a long process of half-starts and education through failure before anything of the sort comes about in any meaningful sense. Like it or not we have to engage with the working masses where they are not where we wish them to be, and for Americans right now that means working with the woefully poor class consciousness which pervades their own working class.

How exactly do we go about doing that? When any type of political discussion arises, whether its between coworkers, friends, family, whatever. The most I can achieve is tipping them over to succdems. Never full Marx. I encounter a lot of roadblocks with the complexity that surrounds Marxism in general and I don't want to dumb it down any further than I'm already doing so.

Attached: talking-to-liberals-be-like-dialectical-materialism-14250273.png (500x431, 75.98K)

Bernie is trying so that people will stop cringing at the S word. As soon as the revolution comes, he'll outlive his usefulness

anyone with bernie's support will win

Talk about things in terms of concrete experiences that people can relate to rather than just abstract concepts. For instance, bring up the facts that US wages were at their peak at the same period where union membership was also at it's peak (in the 1950s). Tell them that the reason for this is simply because businesses want to pay workers as little as possible in order to make more money, and that workers have the opposite interest. Therefore, it is in the interest of the capitalists to drive down wages as low as possible, so they can live rich off of our hard work. The working class has the opposite interests, they want high wages. So through unions and other forms of working class power, they are able to extract concessions and make life better for themselves for a bit. However, since the capitalists still control the means of production as well as the state, they are able to roll back these concessions with time. A concrete example of this is Taft-Hartley.

Basically, tell them in simple terms how labor and capital have ENTIRELY opposite interests. One of these groups must win in this struggle. However, there is an important distinction to be made. The capitalists needs the laborers in order to survive, but it doesn't work the other way around. In other words, in order to preserve and strengthen the gains the working class have made, the working class itself must take power into it's own hands and do away with the capitalists. Otherwise, the capitalists will just roll things back and make it worse and worse for us.

Attached: original.jpg (631x588, 47.53K)

Good advice. Thanks comrade.

In all honesty I would say that that's enough for now. Like I said earlier, it is participation in the struggle itself that builds up the revolutionary movement. The fastest way to radicalize a moderate leftist is for them to watch cops attack a peaceful demonstration, or see how even the slightest reforms are met with hysteria and stubbornness from the right. So if you get them to the level of succdems that's fine for now, the next step is to get them active in the movement. I'd say keep up your Marxist critiques of their socdem ideas, but more importantly you should be ready to provide a Marxist interpretation of why their own experiences are happening to them. This latter point will be much easier of these people are engaged in struggle directly.

How do you debunk, in layman's terms, the trickle-down shit? Like you said The working class has the opposite interests, they want high wages. One may respond

Honestly trickle down economics has been pretty thoroughly debunked even by bourgeois economics. You can just point to the fact that numerous studies have disproven it, they shouldn’t even be hard to find on your own.

Assuming he won't lead the revolution.

he’s to old

he can give one mean sucker punch

but socdem is the best option.
no

Socdems do plenty of mowing down people with tanks. Did you forget about 1914 you filthy traitor?

He was always more than a succdem. He's a Democratic Socialist, the same party as the party of Karl Marx himself, in his times.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (900x1200, 1.61M)

Bernie was killed and replaced by a reptilian in 2016. It's literally the only explanation for why he became such a piece of shit.

of that there was never any doubt. the real question is whether the Marxist-Leninists are doing to Trumpism what Trotrskyists did to Neocons?

That wasn't Warren, it was some other Republican woman who had almost the same dress and short hair. Not defending her, I know she's just slightly to the left of Obama.

S-so Reagan?

Attached: spook of gommunism.gif (215x194, 312.89K)

There are not complicates explanations, just fake left-wingers trying to get power just like nazies did it. They're the new facism not the alt-rigth or the retard 'nazis' of Zig Forums

When and where was this image taken?

nvm
it's fake…

Except he was saying pretty much the same thing for 30 years.
youtube.com/watch?v=RU3NKvvxcSs
You smell a lot like Zig Forums though.

He's always been kind of a socdem with semi-imperialist tendencies.
He can be critical of U.S. intervention, but look how he can't even bring himself to give full throat support of Maduro despite knowing the history of U.S. interest in Latin America.

Sidenote, if he is hiding his power level, I don't know how much longer he can do it without taking the gloves off.
His opponents are already doing opposition research on him, and they found of a video of him hanging out in the soviet union on his honeymoon.

This is post 2016 reptilian Bernie. Find me some pro imperialism from Bernie from pre 2016.

Bernie Sanders is a socialist seeking power in the very heart of international capital, of course he's going to make some small compromises

Bernie has only dropped in influence and popularity after coming out as a piece of shit bootlicker.

Why, because I'm not a left retard and instead I'm a based formed tanki?. Whatever, USA will never been socialist like Trump said, your contry is brainwashed and the other side is just faggots (lireraly), jews (enemys of marxism and marx), and feminist trash.

Well I see that video, and… Ok I'll accept his discurd pre-2016 was at least some socialist, but, the present day is only important now, and reptilian or not, he's bulshit now and a traitor of himself.

I see my nose didn't fail me. Back to Zig Forums with you.

hmmmmmm

Attached: Iy9FeCa.jpg (491x491, 65.88K)

Read fucking Marx and redpilled yourself, or you're so retarded thinking Marx was nazi too?, and remember, fags deserve gulag too just trotskyists and revisinist like americans 'left-wingers' support them, faggotry is just bourgeois vice:
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/On The Jewish Question.pdf

Attached: 58512aa15d9ba315986aeb060b2fd50d873b58cf2f68e0423a7357e1a8d6c183.png (381x412, 155.17K)

If you really want to falseflag as one of us, I suggest you LURK MORE you absolute faggot

You'll fit right in over at >>>Zig Forums

Sorry revisionist, Communism is not a sect, is a scientific theory.

Well, leftpol is too SJW to me, leftypol is contaminated with those people though.

Corbyn ALMOST getting elected in the U.K. Almost triggered a fucking military coup
If Sanders got elected in the US and actually attempted to implemented his SucDem policy the US would just smashed its liberal skin and become a banana republic

He is actually technically correct in that in primitive communism, which for lack of a better model is how social relations will play out under communism homosexuals tend to either get tagged with a third gender or the bottoms assume a feminine gender like sister girl or the like that emphasises their lack of womanhood

But yeah, he needs to fuck off to the containment board where we've gulaged the Not Socialists, anarchists, liberals, greens, national bolsheviks, etc etc ad nauseum until he's lurked moar and knows how to take a scientific tone and attitude

No idea where this tirade came from, but ok.

Just like with any scientific endeavor it does have a living tradition though

And this board has a culture that supports this, it's not your opinion that makes >>>Zig Forums a better fit for you, it's your attitude

Remember son, science is a cooperative endeavor, sharp destructive rhetoric does have its place but it has to be excercised with great discretion

Elaborate your thoughts here, I'm interested in your reasoning

I mean, the totally not a nazi basically just said "kill the fags" and you say he's technically correct and then go on some psychoanalytic analysis on the structure of a homosexual relationship. I have no idea why you first said he's correct and why you made this analysis.

This is the answer to what perplexes you, but I can elaborate if there is still any confusion

Yes please.

>>>Zig Forums a better fit for you.
I guess you try to said leftpol. And idk what attitude you mean, not be a idpol fag?

Ok so where are your facts and scientifics argumets to debate about the homosexuality isn't a vice. I'm not english native, but your sophism don't scare me, your empty argument don't make sense and is just ad hominen try.

Where are your arguments that homosexuality is a vice? Burden of proof, motherfucker.

Because liberalism is a bourgeois ideology and the modern structure of the homosexual relationship is a liberal one, he's clearly correct and to deny this removes us from scientific discourse and risks pushing the dialectic into revisionism and opportunism

Revisionism and opportunism aren't curse words, they have meaning

To build communism especially full communism a scientific attitude and approach is required, opportunism and revisionism damage or even destroy conceptual clarity, which is the radical base of any scientific endeavor

Therefore the level of truth of his claim needed to be acknowledged along with an instrumental hint that if he wanted to enjoy a non scientific discourse leftpol would be a better fit for him

Yes, I should have put more effort in, I think you'd enjoy leftpol more as its board culture is closer to pol as it stands now, leftypol board culture is closer to the culture of pol that is, at least by appearance now a historical matter

Except you rejected leftpol and came here, and are still arguing which suggests you're looking for something else, something new

Now vices kid, they aren't magic or supernatural, which is another way of saying they are not sacred

Vices are vices because they cause harm, so what harm does homosexuality cause?

Hard mode, what harms does it cause that aren't, fundamentally, from it being a bourgeois institution?

According whit the principes of materialism and not pseudo cientifict theorys and thougt, like conductivism and structural linguistics Freudian, the humans relations are just for needs and production, the pleasure you get with them, is jus part of both.

So, the relationship between a mens and womans fit with those concepts, Is needed for the individuals becasue his bodies demandad them, and for production because is a part of evolution, and the place of reproduction in any social system is requied for renews forces of production.

Speaking of biology, the homosexual relations dosen't have a production feature, just pleasure or lewd needed.

Compared with another needs of humans, for example, hungry or thirst. Homosexuality is just the need of sex, but as desviation, humans have hungry and thirst, but theys find out and reliaze of certain aliment and drinks are more pleasure than other, so they change their habits of consume, and excess, now, if you add a social structre with classes and hierarchies, you get a vice which affecte and harmed the persona who practiquet it or the society in where is paratiqued by one, with the before example you have alcholicsm, tabacism, drugs, obesity, the only difference is the class where these apperece.

And fow what homosexuality cause harm, well, not for oneself but the society, homosexuality aren't and won't form part of production system, and for the revolution the same problem is heredic, because, you'll need new socialists if you want lead a new society. Homosexuals cannot be part of production, and their activity is denigrand for socialits values, and that's why I considere a vice. Perphaps migth be wrong, nevertheless this discución just be proof with facts, and the only facts we have is the expirience in URSS with this topic in first year, and don't work and don't fit with the system.

10/10
Now consider material constraints
We are fast approaching 10 billion people on this green and blue covered rock floating in space that we call earth

What level of population should an international scientific socialism support, what about a communist Terra (leaving aside a full communist Terra on the assumption we'll be reaching for the stars at this point)?

I was really looking forward to some hard hitting theory. What a disappointment TBH.

Communism should do away with reproduction entirely and humanity should die out comfortably.

Why are people responding to the sexpol trolls again?

Oh and Bernie died inside when the USSR fell. He knows the writing on the wall, socialism as a force with teeth is dead and he has to roll with the punches. I kind of like the guy, but he has no chance in hell of winning, and he'd be a pretty lousy president. Guy can give a stump speech and do some campaigning, but he doesn't have it in him to make any of his plans work even with a cooperative Congress (and that isn't going to be a thing, they'll be 100% dead set against him and the two parties will join forces to work over his head).

Trump isn't winning 2020 unless the Democrats engage in monumental stupidity to top 2016. Of course, it's Democrats, so they can always find a way to fail harder. Trump has pissed off some elements of his base already and shown that he's just another neolib. They'll certainly try to fabricate the same narrative, but it will just be that little bit less effective.
The only way I see Trump winning is either Hillary Clinton loudly inserting herself into the process and selling her neoconservative shit that no one anywhere likes, or actually selecting Bernie to represent them in which case the professional class base of Dems will leave en masse. The left doesn't have a choice, the centrists do and have shown they would back Trump the moment they have a convenient pretext.