"liberation" wars

[flaming bolshevik]

Let's say that the whole world turns socialist except Mexico, which turned fascist somehow, would an invasion of Mexico by America to "liberate" the proletariat be an option or would the Mexicans have to free themselves?

P.S. accidentally started in OI so sorry In advance.

P.P.S. ignore what I said above ^

[Sea]

This isn't part of some evil plan of yours, is it?

[Sinister Intents]

Let's say that the whole world turns socialist except Mexico, which turned fascist somehow, would an invasion of Mexico by America to "liberate" the proletariat be an option or would the Mexicans have to free themselves?

P.S. accidentally started in OI so sorry In advance.

P.P.S. ignore what I said above ^

I don't see a reason why other liberated peoples wouldn't assist in liberating the people of a fascist nation, assuming the whole of the world is socialist, and that is the last nation remaining. Let the revolution flow over like a tsunami and crush the state. It would also wither away and die on it's own because that corporatist state must be able to expand, and it wouldn't be able to expand with an almost wholely socialized world.

[BIXX]

This scenario is so convoluted and impossible that I'd rather not even think about a world where that could happen.

[Sinister Intents]

This scenario is so convoluted and impossible that I'd rather not even think about a world where that could happen.

Indeed, but these were the kinds of things I thought about a few years ago, like five or six, when I was first starting to really explore and get to know things.

[consuming negativity]

This scenario would be impossible for many reasons but the underlying question still isn't answered; namely, is it appropriate for free persons to support or start revolutions in other countries to free those people? The answer is yes, and you're asking this question from the context of someone who recognizes borders as something other than the useless, artificial constructs that they are. People in Mexico are just as deserving as people anywhere else of not being exploited.

Moreover, you could extend this seemingly-normal-but-strange social question to any logical extent you wanted to - would it be okay for a Texan to fight in New York but not in Mexico City? What if a Texan wanted to fight in another city in Texas, could they move over? The answer is "why not?" Why should communists respect the arbitrary borders of capitalist states?

[exeexe]

Let the Mexican people move to other parts of the world. Then the fascists mexicans would have no one to feast on. And if the mexicans builds a wall to prevent the people from escaping mexico then bomb the fuck out of them...

Also im currently a bit drunk..

[Jimmie Higgins]

people went to Russia and Spain to aid existing liberation movements during those revolutions. Aiding other revolutionary workers is internationalism. But a revolution from above (or without in this case) is not going to lead to liberation if there isn't existing social forces fighting to liberate themselves.

[tuwix]

Let's say that the whole world turns socialist except Mexico, which turned fascist somehow, would an invasion of Mexico by America to "liberate" the proletariat be an option or would the Mexicans have to free themselves?

Why an invasion? If whole world beside Mexico were socialist, there would be thousands methods of other pressure to turn Mexico into socialist territory too.