I think the ideological leanings of the western left are concurrently irrelevant on the whole, and considering that Mamdani and his breed are getting more alike , they would be more hurtful to the international working class than helpful.
If revolution in the global south happens first, then the revenues of both the proles and the capitalists in the west would be relatively decreased, since the goods made in the global south would be more expensive due to wage increases in case of intensified class struggle and even victory of the proletariat in the global south. Only once the west has been immiserated in terms of it’s revenues for both classes, will the proles blame the bourgeoisie and revolt against them, enabling them to fight against them without hurting the global south.
It would be quite the contrary if the “revolutions” would happen in the west first, especially of variety of Mamdani and the rest. They would be hard-pressed, simply by their material interests, to actually help the global south, since their consumption funds would be depreciated. Socialism for me but not for thee. No doubt that maybe you and the other comrades of Hexbear would be opposed to this, but you would ultimately represent oscillations in a movement where the interests of the workers of the west are paramount. I just think revolutionary defeatism is the ultimate tool of a true western communist, whereas the upheaval ultimately ending in some kind of social democracy for america, which in Mamdani’s own words denounces the liberatory movements of the global south, would simply continue the fundamental contradiction of imperialism in our world.
Do you think people will leapfrog from imperialist liberalism to revolutionary communism without a path of political development? Did you do that?
I think the ideological leanings of the western left are concurrently irrelevant on the whole, and considering that Mamdani and his breed are getting more alike
, they would be more hurtful to the international working class than helpful.
If revolution in the global south happens first, then the revenues of both the proles and the capitalists in the west would be relatively decreased, since the goods made in the global south would be more expensive due to wage increases in case of intensified class struggle and even victory of the proletariat in the global south. Only once the west has been immiserated in terms of it’s revenues for both classes, will the proles blame the bourgeoisie and revolt against them, enabling them to fight against them without hurting the global south.
It would be quite the contrary if the “revolutions” would happen in the west first, especially of variety of Mamdani and the rest. They would be hard-pressed, simply by their material interests, to actually help the global south, since their consumption funds would be depreciated. Socialism for me but not for thee. No doubt that maybe you and the other comrades of Hexbear would be opposed to this, but you would ultimately represent oscillations in a movement where the interests of the workers of the west are paramount. I just think revolutionary defeatism is the ultimate tool of a true western communist, whereas the upheaval ultimately ending in some kind of social democracy for america, which in Mamdani’s own words denounces the liberatory movements of the global south, would simply continue the fundamental contradiction of imperialism in our world.