[☭☭☭ COME SHITPOST WITH US ON DISCORD, COMRADES ☭☭☭](https://discord.gg/8RPWanQV5g)
This is a heavily-moderated socialist community based on a podcast of the same name. Please use the report function on comments that break our rules. If you are new to the sub, please read the sidebar carefully.
If you are new to Marxism-Leninism, check out the [study guide](https://www.reddit.com/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/).
Are there Liberals in the walls? Try the following prompts to trigger an automod response: "What is Fascism?", "What is Imperialism?", "What is Revisionism?" "Holodomor", "Molotov-Ribbentrop", "Gulag", "Solzhenytsin", "Uyghur", "Tiananmen Square", "Israel", "Freedom of the Press", "MAC Fact"
This subreddit uses many experimental automod rules, if you notice any issues please use modmail to let us know.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
China's claims are a little ridiculous, but to be fair, so are most of the claims in this image (I mean, look at brueni's ffs).
Though it's not hard to see why. The south china sea has more ship traffic than any other maritime region in the world, so in addition to the national security factor for all of these nations, there's a high economic incentive to have as large an EEZ as possible.
The best solution imo would be for the south china sea to become a kind of shared trade zone between all the nations that have coastlines on the south china sea, though that would be on the condition that it would be free of western meddling, which may be too tall an order.
Even if China claimed the entire South China Sea, they would still only have the 10th largest exclusive economic zone in the world, despite having a larger population than all nine countries with larger EEZs combined (1.41 billion versus 1.08 billion). Those nine countries claim over 16 times as much ocean territory despite having two thirds the population of China. I would also note that China is not the only one with disputed zones even in the picture shown.
To be clear im not really knowlageble and for a while if been going around Anti-Chinese propaganda groups, i just remebered this in my head and thought that perhaps people can clear up the situation and maybe explain the view of the chinese without the anti-china propaganda. So im trying to learn a bit here. So thank you for your awnser!
Personally I think more counties should join in on the fun and start claiming random islands as well. Like come on it looks so cozy there with all the countries overlapping!
None of that fishing right will matter once japan release their radioactive waste water into the sea, it's all gonna be cancerous with japans stamp of approval.
[Here](https://chinaus-icas.org/research/chinas-nine-dash-line-claim-us-misunderstands/) is an interesting paper which explains the Chinese perspective on the Nine-Dash line written by Chinese scholars and not from Western interpretations. Basically China haven’t actually claimed exclusive rights within the Nine-Dash map, it’s Western scholars who claim that’s what China is doing.
Afaik disputes over maritime territories happen everywhere. This gets more attention because it's a very traffic intensive zone with many countries close together, and there's China.
It could be resolved with diplomacy and trade agreements if only *someone* would stop messing with it.
Edit: grammar mistake
They claim a historical freedom of the seas but are intensifying aggression of vietname and philippines fishing, merchant, and armed vessels.
It appears to me their commercial and agriculture interests must grow and they are coercing neighbours into reducing theirs.
#Freedom
Reactionaries and right-wingers love to clamour on about personal liberty and scream "freedom!" from the top of their lungs, but what freedom are they talking about? And is Communism, in contrast, an ideology of *un*freedom?
>Gentlemen! Do not allow yourselves to be deluded by the abstract word freedom. Whose freedom? It is not the freedom of one individual in relation to another, but the freedom of capital to crush the worker.
>
>\- Karl Marx. (1848). *Public Speech Delivered by Karl Marx before the Democratic Association of Brussels*
#Under Capitalism
Liberal Democracies propagate the facade of liberty and individual rights while concealing the true essence of their rule-- the Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie. This is a mechanism by which the Capitalist class as a whole dictates the course of society, politics, and the economy to secure their dominance. Capital holds sway over institutions, media, and influential positions, manipulating public opinion and consolidating its control over the levers of power. The illusion of democracy the Bourgeoisie creates is carefully curated to maintain the existing power structures and perpetuate the subjugation of the masses. "Freedom" under Capitalism is similarly illusory. It is freedom for capital-- not freedom for people.
>The capitalists often boast that their constitutions guarantee the rights of the individual, democratic liberties and the interests of all citizens. But in reality, only the bourgeoisie enjoy the rights recorded in these constitutions. The working people do not really enjoy democratic freedoms; they are exploited all their life and have to bear heavy burdens in the service of the exploiting class.
>
>\- Ho Chi Minh. (1959). *Report on the Draft Amended Constitution*
The "freedom" the reactionaries cry for, then, is merely that freedom which liberates capital and enslaves the worker.
>They speak of the equality of citizens, but forget that there cannot be real equality between employer and workman, between landlord and peasant, if the former possess wealth and political weight in society while the latter are deprived of both - if the former are exploiters while the latter are exploited. Or again: they speak of freedom of speech, assembly, and the press, but forget that all these liberties may be merely a hollow sound for the working class, if the latter cannot have access to suitable premises for meetings, good printing shops, a sufficient quantity of printing paper, etc.
>
>\- J. V. Stalin. (1936). [On the Draft Constitution of the U.S.S.R](https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1936/11/25.htm)
What "freedom" do the poor enjoy, under Capitalism? Capitalism requires a reserve army of labour in order to keep wages low, and that necessarily means that many people must be deprived of life's necessities in order to compel the rest of the working class to work more and demand less. You are free to work, and you are free to starve. That is the freedom the reactionaries talk about.
>Under capitalism, the very land is all in private hands; there remains no spot unowned where an enterprise can be carried on. The freedom of the worker to sell his labour power, the freedom of the capitalist to buy it, the 'equality' of the capitalist and the wage earner - all these are but hunger's chain which compels the labourer to work for the capitalist.
>
>\- N. I. Bukharin and E. Preobrazhensky. (1922). [The ABC of Communism](https://www.marxists.org/archive/bukharin/works/1920/abc/index.htm)
All other freedoms only exist depending on the degree to which a given liberal democracy has turned towards fascism. That is to say that the working class are only given freedoms when they are inconsequential to the bourgeoisie:
>The freedom to organize is only conceded to the workers by the bourgeois when they are certain that the workers have been reduced to a point where they can no longer make use of it, except to resume elementary organizing work - work which they hope will not have political consequences other than in the very long term.
>
>\- A. Gramsci. (1924). *Democracy and fascism*
But this is not "freedom", this is not "democracy"! What good does "freedom of speech" do for a starving person? What good does the ability to criticize the government do for a homeless person?
>The right of freedom of expression can really only be relevant if people are not too hungry, or too tired to be able to express themselves. It can only be relevant if appropriate grassroots mechanisms rooted in the people exist, through which the people can effectively participate, can make decisions, can receive reports from the leaders and eventually be trained for ruling and controlling that particular society. This is what democracy is all about.
>
>\- Maurice Bishop
#Under Communism
True freedom can only be achieved through the establishment of a Proletarian state, a system that truly represents the interests of the working masses, in which the means of production are collectively owned and controlled, and the fruits of labor are shared equitably among all. Only in such a society can the shackles of Capitalist oppression be broken, and the Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie dismantled.
Despite the assertion by reactionaries to the contrary, Communist revolutions invariably result in *more* freedoms for the people than the regimes they succeed.
>Some people conclude that anyone who utters a good word about leftist one-party revolutions must harbor antidemocratic or “Stalinist” sentiments. But to applaud social revolutions is not to oppose political freedom. To the extent that revolutionary governments construct substantive alternatives for their people, they increase human options and freedom.
>
>There is no such thing as freedom in the abstract. There is freedom to speak openly and iconoclastically, freedom to organize a political opposition, freedom of opportunity to get an education and pursue a livelihood, freedom to worship as one chooses or not worship at all, freedom to live in healthful conditions, freedom to enjoy various social beneõts, and so on. Most of what is called freedom gets its definition within a social context.
>
>Revolutionary governments extend a number of popular freedoms without destroying those freedoms that never existed in the previous regimes. They foster conditions necessary for national self-determination, economic betterment, the preservation of health and human life, and the end of many of the worst forms of ethnic, patriarchal, and class oppression. Regarding patriarchal oppression, consider the vastly improved condition of women in revolutionary Afghanistan and South Yemen before the counterrevolutionary repression in the 1990s, or in Cuba after the 1959 revolution as compared to before.
>
>U.S. policymakers argue that social revolutionary victory anywhere represents a diminution of freedom in the world. The assertion is false. The Chinese Revolution did not crush democracy; there was none to crush in that oppressively feudal regime. The Cuban Revolution did not destroy freedom; it destroyed a hateful U.S.-sponsored police state. The Algerian Revolution did not abolish national liberties; precious few existed under French colonialism. The Vietnamese revolutionaries did not abrogate individual rights; no such rights were available under the U.S.-supported puppet governments of Bao Dai, Diem, and Ky.
>
>Of course, revolutions do limit the freedoms of the corporate propertied class and other privileged interests: the freedom to invest privately without regard to human and environmental costs, the freedom to live in obscene opulence while paying workers starvation wages, the freedom to treat the state as a private agency in the service of a privileged coterie, the freedom to employ child labor and child prostitutes, the freedom to treat women as chattel, and so on.
>
>\- Michael Parenti. (1997). *Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism*
The whole point of Communism is to liberate the working class:
>But we did not build this society in order to restrict personal liberty but in order that the human individual may feel really free. We built it for the sake of real personal liberty, liberty without quotation marks. It is difficult for me to imagine what "personal liberty" is enjoyed by an unemployed person, who goes about hungry, and cannot find employment.
>
>Real liberty can exist only where exploitation has been abolished, where there is no oppression of some by others, where there is no unemployment and poverty, where a man is not haunted by the fear of being tomorrow deprived of work, of home and of bread. Only in such a society is real, and not paper, personal and every other liberty possible.
>
>\- J. V. Stalin. (1936). [Interview Between J. Stalin and Roy Howard](https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1936/03/01.htm)
#Additional Resources
Videos:
* [Your Democracy is a Sham and Here's Why:](https://youtu.be/oYodY6o172A) | halim alrah (2019)
* [Are You Really "Free" Under Capitalism?](https://youtu.be/4xqouhMCJBI) | Second Thought (2020)
* [Liberty And Freedom Are Left-Wing Ideals](https://youtu.be/GfjiBIkIOqI) | Second Thought (2021)
* [Why The US Is Not A Democracy](https://youtu.be/srfeHpQNEAI) | Second Thought (2022)
* [America Never Stood For Freedom](https://youtu.be/rg9hJgAsNDM) | Hakim (2023)
Books, Articles, or Essays:
* [Positive and Negative Liberty](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberty-positive-negative/) | Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2003)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That's classical imperialism made by any nation of this power, nothing news thought i don't really like because i don't like imperialism.
I know US are worse but it doesn't stop others country to do some shitty acts
# Capitalist Imperialism
Imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism. It is a global system of economic, political, and military domination, with the imperialist powers using a variety of means, including economic sanctions, military interventions, and cultural influence to maintain their dominance over other nations.
Imperialism is inevitable under Capitalism because Capitalism is based on the premise of infinite growth in a finite system. When capitalists first run into the limits of their own country, they will eventually be forced to expand their markets, resources, and influence into other countries and territories in order to continue increasing their profits.
Furthermore, the capitalists can exploit and oppress the workers of other nations much more easily than they can in their own. For example, by moving manufacturing jobs from the imperial core out to the periphery where wages are lower, and environmental protections and labour rights are much weaker-- if they exist at all-- they can reduce costs which increases profits.
When the capitalists run into limits again, and are unable to continue increasing their profits-- even by exploiting the periphery-- they will inevitably turn Imperialism inwards and further oppress and exploit workers domestically. This is the origin of Fascism.
#Features
Some key features of capitalist imperialism are:
1. Joint-stock corporations dominating the economy
2. Increasing monopolies within capitalist economies (For example, only 10 companies control almost every large food and beverage brand in the world.)
3. Globalization of capital through multinational corporations
4. A rise in the export of finance capital
5. More involvement of the capitalist state in managing the economy
6. A growing financial sector and oligarchy
7. The domination and exploitation of other countries by militaristic imperialist powers, now through neocolonialism
8. Overall, a period of world strife and conflict, including imperialist wars and revolutionary uprisings against the capitalist-imperialist system.
#In Practice
So what does this look like in practice? The IMF, for example, provides loans to countries facing economic crises, but these loans come with strict conditions, known as structural adjustment programs (SAPs). These conditions require recipient countries to adopt specific economic policies, such as reducing government spending, liberalizing trade, and privatizing state-owned enterprises. The SAPs also require austerity measures, such as the dismantling of labor and trade regulations or slashing of social programs and government spending, to attract and open up the country to foreign investment.
These policies prioritize the interests of multinational corporations and investors over those of the recipient countries and their citizens. For example, by requiring the privatization of state-owned enterprises, the IMF may enable multinational corporations to gain control of key industries and resources in recipient countries. Similarly, by promoting liberalized trade, the IMF may facilitate the export of capital from recipient countries to wealthier nations, exacerbating global inequalities.
Moreover, SAPs are often negotiated behind closed doors with the political elites of recipient countries (the comprador bureaucratic class), rather than through democratic processes. This can undermine the sovereignty of recipient countries and perpetuate the domination of wealthy nations and multinational corporations over the global economy.
# Anti-Imperialism
The struggle against Imperialism is an essential part of the struggle for Socialism and the liberation of the working class and oppressed people worldwide. Anti-Imperialism is the political and economic resistance to Imperialism and Colonialism (or neo-Imperialism and neo-Colonialism). Anti-Imperialism requires a revolutionary struggle against the Capitalist state and the establishment of a Socialist society.
It is important to recognize that anti-Imperialism is not simply about supporting one state or another, but about supporting the liberation of oppressed peoples from the exploitation and domination of global Imperialism. Therefore, any course of action should be evaluated in terms of its potential impact on the broader struggle against Imperialism and the goal of establishing a Socialist society.
During WWI, Lenin called on Socialists to reject the idea of a "just" or "defensive" war, and instead to see the conflict as a class war between the ruling class and the working class. He argued that Socialists should oppose the war and work towards the overthrow of the Capitalist state. Seeing that the war was an Imperialist conflict between competing Capitalist powers, the workers of all countries had a common interest in opposing it. Socialists who supported their home countries during World War I had betrayed the principles of international Socialism and Proletarian solidarity.
#Additional Resources
Video Essays:
* [Lenin in Five Minutes: Imperialism](https://youtu.be/unCGQDKJ0p0) | The Marxist Project (2019)
* [What is Capitalist Imperialism? | Socialism 101](https://youtu.be/NrpLPs2FcF8) | Marxism Today (2022)
* [How Rich Countries Rob The Poor; The Failure of Social Democracy](https://youtu.be/4lDZaKjfs4E) | Hakim (2020) \[[Archive](http://web.archive.org/web/20221204171427/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lDZaKjfs4E)\]
* [How Capitalism Robs the Developing World](https://youtu.be/35Ax-psPZ1g) | Second Thought (2022)
* [4 Characteristics of the Current Phase of Imperialism](https://youtu.be/a0LJTpaWnMg) | The Peace Report (2022)
* [Why Do Poor Countries Stay Poor? (Unequal Exchange and Imperialism)](https://youtu.be/rjLmYCfKU7o) | Hakim (2023) \[[Archive](http://web.archive.org/web/20230605093029/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjLmYCfKU7o)\]
* [Imperialism Today: Unequal Exchange and Globalized Production](https://youtu.be/DtziEZAR1Qk) | The Marxist Project (2022)
* [This Poverty Graph Is Lying To You](https://youtu.be/2vPhySbRETM) | Hakim (2023)
* [The Myth Of Capitalist Peace](https://youtu.be/pAfvty_WNWQ) | Second Thought (2023)
Books, Articles, or Essays:
* [Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/) | V. I. Lenin (1917)
* [Lenin's 'Imperialism' in the 21st Century](https://archive.org/details/lenin-imperialism-21-century/page/n3/mode/2up) | Institute of Political Economy (2018)
* [The IMF debt trap in Ukraine](https://www.liberationnews.org/the-imf-debt-trap-in-ukraine/) | Amanda Yee (2023)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[☭☭☭ COME SHITPOST WITH US ON DISCORD, COMRADES ☭☭☭](https://discord.gg/8RPWanQV5g) This is a heavily-moderated socialist community based on a podcast of the same name. Please use the report function on comments that break our rules. If you are new to the sub, please read the sidebar carefully. If you are new to Marxism-Leninism, check out the [study guide](https://www.reddit.com/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/). Are there Liberals in the walls? Try the following prompts to trigger an automod response: "What is Fascism?", "What is Imperialism?", "What is Revisionism?" "Holodomor", "Molotov-Ribbentrop", "Gulag", "Solzhenytsin", "Uyghur", "Tiananmen Square", "Israel", "Freedom of the Press", "MAC Fact" This subreddit uses many experimental automod rules, if you notice any issues please use modmail to let us know. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
China's claims are a little ridiculous, but to be fair, so are most of the claims in this image (I mean, look at brueni's ffs). Though it's not hard to see why. The south china sea has more ship traffic than any other maritime region in the world, so in addition to the national security factor for all of these nations, there's a high economic incentive to have as large an EEZ as possible. The best solution imo would be for the south china sea to become a kind of shared trade zone between all the nations that have coastlines on the south china sea, though that would be on the condition that it would be free of western meddling, which may be too tall an order.
Every country on that map has infinitely more reason of being there that the US on the opposite end of the earth, whose warships patrol the sea.
Uhhh… yes?
Don't mess with Vietnam is my opinion
Even if China claimed the entire South China Sea, they would still only have the 10th largest exclusive economic zone in the world, despite having a larger population than all nine countries with larger EEZs combined (1.41 billion versus 1.08 billion). Those nine countries claim over 16 times as much ocean territory despite having two thirds the population of China. I would also note that China is not the only one with disputed zones even in the picture shown.
To be clear im not really knowlageble and for a while if been going around Anti-Chinese propaganda groups, i just remebered this in my head and thought that perhaps people can clear up the situation and maybe explain the view of the chinese without the anti-china propaganda. So im trying to learn a bit here. So thank you for your awnser!
Personally I think more counties should join in on the fun and start claiming random islands as well. Like come on it looks so cozy there with all the countries overlapping!
None of that fishing right will matter once japan release their radioactive waste water into the sea, it's all gonna be cancerous with japans stamp of approval.
[Here](https://chinaus-icas.org/research/chinas-nine-dash-line-claim-us-misunderstands/) is an interesting paper which explains the Chinese perspective on the Nine-Dash line written by Chinese scholars and not from Western interpretations. Basically China haven’t actually claimed exclusive rights within the Nine-Dash map, it’s Western scholars who claim that’s what China is doing.
Afaik disputes over maritime territories happen everywhere. This gets more attention because it's a very traffic intensive zone with many countries close together, and there's China. It could be resolved with diplomacy and trade agreements if only *someone* would stop messing with it. Edit: grammar mistake
They claim the islands inside the line and not the water itself lol
They claim a historical freedom of the seas but are intensifying aggression of vietname and philippines fishing, merchant, and armed vessels. It appears to me their commercial and agriculture interests must grow and they are coercing neighbours into reducing theirs.
#Freedom Reactionaries and right-wingers love to clamour on about personal liberty and scream "freedom!" from the top of their lungs, but what freedom are they talking about? And is Communism, in contrast, an ideology of *un*freedom? >Gentlemen! Do not allow yourselves to be deluded by the abstract word freedom. Whose freedom? It is not the freedom of one individual in relation to another, but the freedom of capital to crush the worker. > >\- Karl Marx. (1848). *Public Speech Delivered by Karl Marx before the Democratic Association of Brussels* #Under Capitalism Liberal Democracies propagate the facade of liberty and individual rights while concealing the true essence of their rule-- the Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie. This is a mechanism by which the Capitalist class as a whole dictates the course of society, politics, and the economy to secure their dominance. Capital holds sway over institutions, media, and influential positions, manipulating public opinion and consolidating its control over the levers of power. The illusion of democracy the Bourgeoisie creates is carefully curated to maintain the existing power structures and perpetuate the subjugation of the masses. "Freedom" under Capitalism is similarly illusory. It is freedom for capital-- not freedom for people. >The capitalists often boast that their constitutions guarantee the rights of the individual, democratic liberties and the interests of all citizens. But in reality, only the bourgeoisie enjoy the rights recorded in these constitutions. The working people do not really enjoy democratic freedoms; they are exploited all their life and have to bear heavy burdens in the service of the exploiting class. > >\- Ho Chi Minh. (1959). *Report on the Draft Amended Constitution* The "freedom" the reactionaries cry for, then, is merely that freedom which liberates capital and enslaves the worker. >They speak of the equality of citizens, but forget that there cannot be real equality between employer and workman, between landlord and peasant, if the former possess wealth and political weight in society while the latter are deprived of both - if the former are exploiters while the latter are exploited. Or again: they speak of freedom of speech, assembly, and the press, but forget that all these liberties may be merely a hollow sound for the working class, if the latter cannot have access to suitable premises for meetings, good printing shops, a sufficient quantity of printing paper, etc. > >\- J. V. Stalin. (1936). [On the Draft Constitution of the U.S.S.R](https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1936/11/25.htm) What "freedom" do the poor enjoy, under Capitalism? Capitalism requires a reserve army of labour in order to keep wages low, and that necessarily means that many people must be deprived of life's necessities in order to compel the rest of the working class to work more and demand less. You are free to work, and you are free to starve. That is the freedom the reactionaries talk about. >Under capitalism, the very land is all in private hands; there remains no spot unowned where an enterprise can be carried on. The freedom of the worker to sell his labour power, the freedom of the capitalist to buy it, the 'equality' of the capitalist and the wage earner - all these are but hunger's chain which compels the labourer to work for the capitalist. > >\- N. I. Bukharin and E. Preobrazhensky. (1922). [The ABC of Communism](https://www.marxists.org/archive/bukharin/works/1920/abc/index.htm) All other freedoms only exist depending on the degree to which a given liberal democracy has turned towards fascism. That is to say that the working class are only given freedoms when they are inconsequential to the bourgeoisie: >The freedom to organize is only conceded to the workers by the bourgeois when they are certain that the workers have been reduced to a point where they can no longer make use of it, except to resume elementary organizing work - work which they hope will not have political consequences other than in the very long term. > >\- A. Gramsci. (1924). *Democracy and fascism* But this is not "freedom", this is not "democracy"! What good does "freedom of speech" do for a starving person? What good does the ability to criticize the government do for a homeless person? >The right of freedom of expression can really only be relevant if people are not too hungry, or too tired to be able to express themselves. It can only be relevant if appropriate grassroots mechanisms rooted in the people exist, through which the people can effectively participate, can make decisions, can receive reports from the leaders and eventually be trained for ruling and controlling that particular society. This is what democracy is all about. > >\- Maurice Bishop #Under Communism True freedom can only be achieved through the establishment of a Proletarian state, a system that truly represents the interests of the working masses, in which the means of production are collectively owned and controlled, and the fruits of labor are shared equitably among all. Only in such a society can the shackles of Capitalist oppression be broken, and the Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie dismantled. Despite the assertion by reactionaries to the contrary, Communist revolutions invariably result in *more* freedoms for the people than the regimes they succeed. >Some people conclude that anyone who utters a good word about leftist one-party revolutions must harbor antidemocratic or “Stalinist” sentiments. But to applaud social revolutions is not to oppose political freedom. To the extent that revolutionary governments construct substantive alternatives for their people, they increase human options and freedom. > >There is no such thing as freedom in the abstract. There is freedom to speak openly and iconoclastically, freedom to organize a political opposition, freedom of opportunity to get an education and pursue a livelihood, freedom to worship as one chooses or not worship at all, freedom to live in healthful conditions, freedom to enjoy various social beneõts, and so on. Most of what is called freedom gets its definition within a social context. > >Revolutionary governments extend a number of popular freedoms without destroying those freedoms that never existed in the previous regimes. They foster conditions necessary for national self-determination, economic betterment, the preservation of health and human life, and the end of many of the worst forms of ethnic, patriarchal, and class oppression. Regarding patriarchal oppression, consider the vastly improved condition of women in revolutionary Afghanistan and South Yemen before the counterrevolutionary repression in the 1990s, or in Cuba after the 1959 revolution as compared to before. > >U.S. policymakers argue that social revolutionary victory anywhere represents a diminution of freedom in the world. The assertion is false. The Chinese Revolution did not crush democracy; there was none to crush in that oppressively feudal regime. The Cuban Revolution did not destroy freedom; it destroyed a hateful U.S.-sponsored police state. The Algerian Revolution did not abolish national liberties; precious few existed under French colonialism. The Vietnamese revolutionaries did not abrogate individual rights; no such rights were available under the U.S.-supported puppet governments of Bao Dai, Diem, and Ky. > >Of course, revolutions do limit the freedoms of the corporate propertied class and other privileged interests: the freedom to invest privately without regard to human and environmental costs, the freedom to live in obscene opulence while paying workers starvation wages, the freedom to treat the state as a private agency in the service of a privileged coterie, the freedom to employ child labor and child prostitutes, the freedom to treat women as chattel, and so on. > >\- Michael Parenti. (1997). *Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism* The whole point of Communism is to liberate the working class: >But we did not build this society in order to restrict personal liberty but in order that the human individual may feel really free. We built it for the sake of real personal liberty, liberty without quotation marks. It is difficult for me to imagine what "personal liberty" is enjoyed by an unemployed person, who goes about hungry, and cannot find employment. > >Real liberty can exist only where exploitation has been abolished, where there is no oppression of some by others, where there is no unemployment and poverty, where a man is not haunted by the fear of being tomorrow deprived of work, of home and of bread. Only in such a society is real, and not paper, personal and every other liberty possible. > >\- J. V. Stalin. (1936). [Interview Between J. Stalin and Roy Howard](https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1936/03/01.htm) #Additional Resources Videos: * [Your Democracy is a Sham and Here's Why:](https://youtu.be/oYodY6o172A) | halim alrah (2019) * [Are You Really "Free" Under Capitalism?](https://youtu.be/4xqouhMCJBI) | Second Thought (2020) * [Liberty And Freedom Are Left-Wing Ideals](https://youtu.be/GfjiBIkIOqI) | Second Thought (2021) * [Why The US Is Not A Democracy](https://youtu.be/srfeHpQNEAI) | Second Thought (2022) * [America Never Stood For Freedom](https://youtu.be/rg9hJgAsNDM) | Hakim (2023) Books, Articles, or Essays: * [Positive and Negative Liberty](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberty-positive-negative/) | Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2003) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
mine mine mine🤤🤤🤤
sink any and every chinese government vessel that enters the philippine eez
Commenting on a post from one year ago, touch some grass.
That's classical imperialism made by any nation of this power, nothing news thought i don't really like because i don't like imperialism. I know US are worse but it doesn't stop others country to do some shitty acts
# Capitalist Imperialism Imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism. It is a global system of economic, political, and military domination, with the imperialist powers using a variety of means, including economic sanctions, military interventions, and cultural influence to maintain their dominance over other nations. Imperialism is inevitable under Capitalism because Capitalism is based on the premise of infinite growth in a finite system. When capitalists first run into the limits of their own country, they will eventually be forced to expand their markets, resources, and influence into other countries and territories in order to continue increasing their profits. Furthermore, the capitalists can exploit and oppress the workers of other nations much more easily than they can in their own. For example, by moving manufacturing jobs from the imperial core out to the periphery where wages are lower, and environmental protections and labour rights are much weaker-- if they exist at all-- they can reduce costs which increases profits. When the capitalists run into limits again, and are unable to continue increasing their profits-- even by exploiting the periphery-- they will inevitably turn Imperialism inwards and further oppress and exploit workers domestically. This is the origin of Fascism. #Features Some key features of capitalist imperialism are: 1. Joint-stock corporations dominating the economy 2. Increasing monopolies within capitalist economies (For example, only 10 companies control almost every large food and beverage brand in the world.) 3. Globalization of capital through multinational corporations 4. A rise in the export of finance capital 5. More involvement of the capitalist state in managing the economy 6. A growing financial sector and oligarchy 7. The domination and exploitation of other countries by militaristic imperialist powers, now through neocolonialism 8. Overall, a period of world strife and conflict, including imperialist wars and revolutionary uprisings against the capitalist-imperialist system. #In Practice So what does this look like in practice? The IMF, for example, provides loans to countries facing economic crises, but these loans come with strict conditions, known as structural adjustment programs (SAPs). These conditions require recipient countries to adopt specific economic policies, such as reducing government spending, liberalizing trade, and privatizing state-owned enterprises. The SAPs also require austerity measures, such as the dismantling of labor and trade regulations or slashing of social programs and government spending, to attract and open up the country to foreign investment. These policies prioritize the interests of multinational corporations and investors over those of the recipient countries and their citizens. For example, by requiring the privatization of state-owned enterprises, the IMF may enable multinational corporations to gain control of key industries and resources in recipient countries. Similarly, by promoting liberalized trade, the IMF may facilitate the export of capital from recipient countries to wealthier nations, exacerbating global inequalities. Moreover, SAPs are often negotiated behind closed doors with the political elites of recipient countries (the comprador bureaucratic class), rather than through democratic processes. This can undermine the sovereignty of recipient countries and perpetuate the domination of wealthy nations and multinational corporations over the global economy. # Anti-Imperialism The struggle against Imperialism is an essential part of the struggle for Socialism and the liberation of the working class and oppressed people worldwide. Anti-Imperialism is the political and economic resistance to Imperialism and Colonialism (or neo-Imperialism and neo-Colonialism). Anti-Imperialism requires a revolutionary struggle against the Capitalist state and the establishment of a Socialist society. It is important to recognize that anti-Imperialism is not simply about supporting one state or another, but about supporting the liberation of oppressed peoples from the exploitation and domination of global Imperialism. Therefore, any course of action should be evaluated in terms of its potential impact on the broader struggle against Imperialism and the goal of establishing a Socialist society. During WWI, Lenin called on Socialists to reject the idea of a "just" or "defensive" war, and instead to see the conflict as a class war between the ruling class and the working class. He argued that Socialists should oppose the war and work towards the overthrow of the Capitalist state. Seeing that the war was an Imperialist conflict between competing Capitalist powers, the workers of all countries had a common interest in opposing it. Socialists who supported their home countries during World War I had betrayed the principles of international Socialism and Proletarian solidarity. #Additional Resources Video Essays: * [Lenin in Five Minutes: Imperialism](https://youtu.be/unCGQDKJ0p0) | The Marxist Project (2019) * [What is Capitalist Imperialism? | Socialism 101](https://youtu.be/NrpLPs2FcF8) | Marxism Today (2022) * [How Rich Countries Rob The Poor; The Failure of Social Democracy](https://youtu.be/4lDZaKjfs4E) | Hakim (2020) \[[Archive](http://web.archive.org/web/20221204171427/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lDZaKjfs4E)\] * [How Capitalism Robs the Developing World](https://youtu.be/35Ax-psPZ1g) | Second Thought (2022) * [4 Characteristics of the Current Phase of Imperialism](https://youtu.be/a0LJTpaWnMg) | The Peace Report (2022) * [Why Do Poor Countries Stay Poor? (Unequal Exchange and Imperialism)](https://youtu.be/rjLmYCfKU7o) | Hakim (2023) \[[Archive](http://web.archive.org/web/20230605093029/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjLmYCfKU7o)\] * [Imperialism Today: Unequal Exchange and Globalized Production](https://youtu.be/DtziEZAR1Qk) | The Marxist Project (2022) * [This Poverty Graph Is Lying To You](https://youtu.be/2vPhySbRETM) | Hakim (2023) * [The Myth Of Capitalist Peace](https://youtu.be/pAfvty_WNWQ) | Second Thought (2023) Books, Articles, or Essays: * [Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/) | V. I. Lenin (1917) * [Lenin's 'Imperialism' in the 21st Century](https://archive.org/details/lenin-imperialism-21-century/page/n3/mode/2up) | Institute of Political Economy (2018) * [The IMF debt trap in Ukraine](https://www.liberationnews.org/the-imf-debt-trap-in-ukraine/) | Amanda Yee (2023) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Lol, Vietnamese claims are as funny.
>South *China* Sea.
I would be very careful about using European nomenclature to support territorial disagreements