Maoist Third-Worldist Propaganda

[ZrianKobani]

+ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TS43ur1RI7M" title="View this video at YouTube in a new window or tab" target="_blank">YouTube Video

I've been meditating on this and while I disagree that there's nothing to be done about America's working class, part of me is scared they might be right.

Thoughts?

[Hebrew Hammer]

+ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TS43ur1RI7M" title="View this video at YouTube in a new window or tab" target="_blank">YouTube Video

I've been meditating on this and while I disagree that there's nothing to be done about America's working class, part of me is scared they might be right.

Thoughts?

I don't really agree with all of it, just bits but I also don't understand why you're so entranced with this 'Third-World' LinBaoist thought.

[ZrianKobani]

I guess it's because I'm afraid of it; since I was 14, I've been dedicated to the idea of alleviating human suffering and the idea that my country, the United States, is beyond help and the only way to liberate the oppressed is to destroy America scares the hell of me.

[RedSunRising]

I think its stupid to say that US proletarians arent exploited...However the fact is that the white nation has been bribed into siding with its exploiters against the black and first nations. Most of the white working class of the USA are firmly within the enemy camp but that doesnt that they not exploited. Infact they should be a lot better off than they are.

[Thug Lessons]

There's really very little to dispute in that video beyond the particulars of third worldism and some of the Maoist elements. I'm not sure why people here are so hostile to it.

[ZrianKobani]

I think it's because of how hostile it is to everyone else; read their platform on Monkey Smashes Hammer and see what I mean, they're very sectarian.

[RedSunRising]

There's really very little to dispute in that video beyond the particulars of third worldism and some of the Maoist elements. I'm not sure why people here are so hostile to it.

Calling the Naxalites and the Shining Path revisionists may have just a wee bit to do with the hostility. Also LLCO are more ultra-leftist than MIM in that they dismiss the oppressed nations within the United States. MIM at least remained open to the bottom 20 per cent.

[ZrianKobani]

I think there's an amount of truth to MTWism but I think it's advocators might be whitewashing a bit in it's attitude toward Americans. Hostility to a government is one thing but to actively call for people to hate "Amerikkka", "the United Snakes", "the Great Satan" (just a few of the names I've seen used) is extremist.

[Thug Lessons]

Again, I was talking about that video, not the LLCO's entire platform. Whatever you think of their particular points, method of presentation, organizational style, etc., they're clearly right on the basics.

[Hebrew Hammer]

Granted the aristocracy of labor is very real, 'third-world' nations are being plundered by imperialist 'first-world' nations and workers in developed 'first-world' nations do have it objectively better than 'third-world' workers this doesn't totally negate their revolutionary potential nor does it mean that a proletarian revolution within developed Western imperialist countries is impossible, just that it's more unlikely to happen than say in other nations were class differences are much more pronounced and brutal. The reason being because of the concessions won by working class struggles, the reform of total free market capitalism and the aristocracy of labor. 'Third-Worldism' or Linbaoism or whatever you wish to call it, is inaccurate and wrong.

I also think it's funny how the production value of this 'propaganda' is very good, he sounds white and American but yet he's talking about the people's war waged by third-world workers and "our," struggle and all this shit when the narrator, is obviously, based upon his own theory, not apart of.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

There's social peace in America? That's why angry young boys and girls are shooting each other dead in the street trying to get a slice of the pie.

[Thug Lessons]

Granted the aristocracy of labor is very real, 'third-world' nations are being plundered by imperialist 'first-world' nations and workers in developed 'first-world' nations do have it objectively better than 'third-world' workers this doesn't totally negate their revolutionary potential nor does it mean that a proletarian revolution within developed Western imperialist countries is impossible, just that it's more unlikely to happen than say in other nations were class differences are much more pronounced and brutal. The reason being because of the concessions won by working class struggles, the reform of total free market capitalism and the aristocracy of labor. 'Third-Worldism' or Linbaoism or whatever you wish to call it, is inaccurate and wrong.

That's essentially what third worldism is, so to conclude it's wrong from those premises is rather strange.

[Revolutionair]

It is wrong to see it as a socialist tendency. They are bourgeois nationalists.

They also seem to not use any Marxist analysis. The only thing they use that is Marxist is the word class. But they base your class on your nationality, unlike Marxism: "The workingmen have no country." I realize that there is more opportunism in the first world, you must be stupid if you don't see it. But I analyze it through Marxism not through bourgeois nationalism. If these people are even remotely Maoist, then I will be on the barricades against any Maoist revolution.

[L.A.P.]

Maoism-Third Worldism is such a god awful ideology. It is revisionism at its worst.

[Thug Lessons]

It is wrong to see it as a socialist tendency. They are bourgeois nationalists.

They also seem to not use any Marxist analysis. The only thing they use that is Marxist is the word class. But they base your class on your nationality, unlike Marxism

No they don't. Have you read anything they have written or watched the video in the OP?

[Hebrew Hammer]

That's essentially what third worldism is, so to conclude it's wrong from those premises is rather strange.

How? I am just speaking from (what I have read) standard Maoist theory. I am not saying the revolution should start in the 'third-world', that 'third-world' workers should rise up and take over the 'first world' or any of that nonsense. Nor am I saying that revolutions in 'first-world' nations can't happen, that the proletariat in these nations aren't being expolited, alienated or oppressed or any of the lines said by 'Third-Worldists.'

[Obs]

That's essentially what third worldism is, so to conclude it's wrong from those premises is rather strange.

No, Maoist Third-Worldists deride workers in the First World and side with the bourgeoisie of the First World in labour struggles, etc., under some strange idea that lowering the standard of living for workers in the First World will make things better for the Third World. Beyond this, they also conduct nothing that even resembles class analysis in deciding what is and what is not a "Third World" country, since they divide between the First and Third World based on national borders rather than actual class relations - for instance, they place China in the Third World, as an 'exploited' country (we're talking ALL of China here), ignoring that the Chinese bourgeoisie are currently running mines etc. in Africa. Also, if you look at the video, skip to 1:07, right after the text that (laughably) reads "Global Class Analysis". You'll see a map, with all the countries that these LLCO-clowns call 'exploited' in red. Notice that Greenland, an honest-to-god colony where the native population is wracked with poverty and the natural resources are divided between imperialist countries (Denmark, the US, Russia, Canada), as an 'exploiter' country.

What's even more ridiculous in this video is how they will show bourgie types in suits drinking champagne and shit as being representative of the population of the first world, instead of, say, unemployed Spanish youths (that is, 40% of youths in Spain) living in tiny apartments with their parents way into their 20s, or Russian workers who have to starve themselves for days just to afford rent.

Of course, the good people at the LLCO know nothing of this aspect of the first world, as they all come from well-off families and as such have no connection to the working poor in their own countries, whom they are eager to think of as greedy leeches, just like their petty bourgeois friends and families, only with a third-worldist streak so they can feel better about themselves without actually doing jack shit to change anything, except make stupid videos like this one where they might as well have filmed themselves jacking off to a photo of themselves jacking off to... (repeat ad infinitum) while chanting that they're gonna be leading the great proletarian third world revolution.

Fucking dumbasses.

[Thug Lessons]

No, Maoist Third-Worldists deride workers in the First World and side with the bourgeoisie of the First World in labour struggles, etc., under some strange idea that lowering the standard of living for workers in the First World will make things better for the Third World. Beyond this, they also conduct nothing that even resembles class analysis in deciding what is and what is not a "Third World" country, since they divide between the First and Third World based on national borders rather than actual class relations - for instance, they place China in the Third World, as an 'exploited' country (we're talking ALL of China here), ignoring that the Chinese bourgeoisie are currently running mines etc. in Africa. Also, if you look at the video, skip to 1:07, right after the text that (laughably) reads "Global Class Analysis". You'll see a map, with all the countries that these LLCO-clowns call 'exploited' in red. Notice that Greenland, an honest-to-god colony where the native population is wracked with poverty and the natural resources are divided between imperialist countries (Denmark, the US, Russia, Canada), as an 'exploiter' country.

What's even more ridiculous in this video is how they will show bourgie types in suits drinking champagne and shit as being representative of the population of the first world, instead of, say, unemployed Spanish youths (that is, 40% of youths in Spain) living in tiny apartments with their parents way into their 20s, or Russian workers who have to starve themselves for days just to afford rent.

Of course, the good people at the LLCO know nothing of this aspect of the first world, as they all come from well-off families and as such have no connection to the working poor in their own countries, whom they are eager to think of as greedy leeches, just like their petty bourgeois friends and families, only with a third-worldist streak so they can feel better about themselves without actually doing jack shit to change anything, except make stupid videos like this one where they might as well have filmed themselves jacking off to a photo of themselves jacking off to... (repeat ad infinitum) while chanting that they're gonna be leading the great proletarian third world revolution.

Fucking dumbasses.

The LLCO doesn't side with the first world bourgeoisie in labor disputes. You made that up. They're perfectly correct in determining first world and third world on the basis of national borders, because that's what first world and third world nations are - nations. They don't deny the existence of different classes within these nations. They're also correct in labeling colonial nations as exploiters, I can't understand why you'd disagree with that. The rest is just whining and crying about how they're all filthy rich and don't understand the real poor, and on that you're welcome to rage all you want.

[Thug Lessons]

All this is really weird because there's more than enough to criticize about the LLCO without exaggerating and outright making shit up. I guess people just don't want to read?

[Obs]

The LLCO doesn't side with the first world bourgeoisie in labor disputes. You made that up.

Did not. Although I'll admit that I can't remember if it was the LLCO or Monkey Smashes Heaven (aren't they the same thing?), I do remember distinctly reading an article of theirs about the unrest in Europe some months back over European governments making austerity cuts on welfare, wherein they specified that they sided with the European bourgeoisie on this matter.

EDIT: I did some digging and found out it was a YouTube video, luckily Kléber, that handsome devil, had a transcript of the video handy, which goes:

The first worldist crypto-Trotskyists of and the Swiss Party of Labour have sided with the Greek and French reformists in fighting for their little wage cuts. Do these "proletarians" realize that the struggles of Third World workers? When you compare the two, the Greeks are fucking laughable. The French cry because their retirements are cut back two years. Boo goddamn hoo. Third world workers don't have pensions. They work until they die. These Greek and French crybabies have cars and food and homes while most of the worlds population live in huts and starves to death. Their "fight backs" aren't something to glamourize or to take seriously. I am appalled when I hear these petite bourgeois "Communist" or "Socialist" parties side with the idiot workers in Greece and France. So what is the alternative? I say, more austerity. More cutbacks. More attacks on the Greek and French complacent, lazy, and privileged "workers". Maybe then they will become radicalized. I pick the side of the French and Greek bourgeoise and their decisions for the austerity cuts. I support them because if more cuts occur, if there is more unemployment, if there is more homelessness, if the Greek and French workers are reduced to Third World conditions, then THAT is why they will become revolutionary. Until then, these "worker movements" are not revolutionary. They are not insurrectionary. They are a fucking farce and a spit in the face of workers worldwide. First Worldist little Eichmanns have trouble understanding but until they are reduced to rubble, they will realize. Once again, Maoism Third-Worldism proves to be the dominant ideology and the actual next step to worldwide Communism.

They're perfectly correct in determining first world and third world on the basis of national borders, because that's what first world and third world nations are - nations. They don't deny the existence of different classes within these nations. They're also correct in labeling colonial nations as exploiters, I can't understand why you'd disagree with that.

I disagree with labeling the working class inside imperialist states as exploiters. You also seem to share some confusion that the LLCO also has in regards to the difference between a nation and a state/country/whatever. While workers may be a member of a nation, they do not truly have a country that is theirs, and as such, all workers are exploited no matter what borders they happen to be living within. To imply that workers in the first world are receiving wages that are higher than the value of their labour, as the LLCO would gladly claim, is demonstrably false.

The rest is just whining and crying about how they're all filthy rich and don't understand the real poor, and on that you're welcome to rage all you want.

Amusingly, this is exactly what Third-Worldists do when talking about workers in the First World. The difference is that they're wrong and I'm right. (Two statements that are always true.)