Leftist Infighting: A community dedicated to allowing leftists to vent their frustrations

1417 readers

2 users here now

The purpose of this community is sort of a "work out your frustrations by letting it all out" where different leftist tendencies can vent their frustrations with one another and more assertively and directly challenge one another. Hostility is allowed, but any racist, fascist, or reactionary crap wont be tolerated, nor will explicit threats.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

I don't understand the appeal of "multipolarity" (lemmygrad.ml)

submitted 3 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

73 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Personally, I fail to see why many Marxist-Leninists support multipolarity. The primary goal of the Leninist movements has always been "workers of the world unite!" and not "non-US-aligned countries unite!".

To be clear, in saying this, I am not endorsing US-led unipolarity. I am just saying that multipolarity is not inherently good as some MLs suggest. For example, the world in 1914 and 1939 were without a doubt multipolar, and those both resulted in brutal world wars which killed millions.

Could somebody explain why people support multipolarity so much?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Are you seriously expecting BRICS to come out and say "fuck America, we're de-dollarizing!" That would be fucking ridiculous, as much as I wish sometimes that would happen.

BRICS was also first theorized as primarily a trade/development bloc, but China is steering it into a vehicle for a new vision of the world, which is fervently anti-imperialist, and BRICS has allowed dozens of countries to dodge sanctions and get resources they would otherwise be locked out of.

BRICS collectively increases the GDP of all participating countries by multiple billions of dollars, and allows trade and exchange to occur faster and more effectively than anything the imperialists would allow.

To question if it's progressing at all, is fucking nuts.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 22 hours ago

Your comment doesn't really address most things I said and appears agitated. Please consider whether that comment is fair and comradely.

Are you seriously expecting BRICS to come out and say "fuck America, we're de-dollarizing!" That would be fucking ridiculous, as much as I wish sometimes that would happen.

No and I didn't say or imply that. You are exaggerating, really straw manning, what I sais. Though in BRICS' founding statements, they absolutely did prioritize holding each others' reserve currencies, which is of course the beginning of dedollarization. And most of their founding statements are a direct response to US / OECD domination of finance, trade, and international relations in general, calling for instead following international law and using the UN democratically.

BRICS was also first theorized as primarily a trade/development bloc

By some crackers that didn't actually found BRICS, sure. As actually envisioned via summits and documents it is not only economic, it also extends to cooperation on law enforcement, climate change, multipolar diplomacy, respect for sovereignty, etc etc. The economic is of course the driving force behind any of those things.

but China is steering it into a vehicle for a new vision of the world

How so? What has BRICS done in the last 4-5 years, as I asked and received no answer?

which is fervently anti-imperialist

BRICS is not fervently anti-imperialist by a long shot. It could become functionally anti-imperialist by way of forwarding multipolarity, but only with discipline.

and BRICS has allowed dozens of countries to dodge sanctions and get resources they would otherwise be locked out of.

BRICS itself, as an organization or strategy, can't take much credit for that. Causation here is reversed. BRICS and multipolarity and fueled by imperialist sanctions regimes and dollar hegemony. Direct trade in each others' currencies, for example, is a consequence of their own previous economic development and the sanctions regime itself, not the institution of BRICS.

BRICS collectively increases the GDP of all participating countries by multiple billions of dollars

GDP is a magical quantity that tends to mean different things for different countries. China's real estate bubble drove up GDP but was actually an economic drag, for example. Actual mutual development would be something to look for, and one would need to tie it to BRICS. I am not sure what you are referring to when you say BRICS itself increases GDP, anyways.

BRICS operates more like a parallel G20. It is a diplomatic vehicle and pulls on the same types of levers as international capitalism, but from the perspective of global majority states. Think tanks, lending bodies, friendly vision statement versions of cooperation agreements. The language is like you'll find from World Bank ghouls but from the (correct) perspective that it is unfair to the global south.

allows trade and exchange to occur faster and more effectively than anything the imperialists would allow.

I am not sure what you mean by this. Are you using BRICS as a stand-in for all direct trade agreements made between its members / other global south countries? That is of course a good development but again I think causation here is reversed.

To question if it's progressing at all, is fucking nuts.

I didn't do that. And please do your best to avoid ableist language.