â„–3758520[Quote]
I'll start with the unknown father of the far-left and what people know call "third-worldism"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirsaid_Sultan-Galiev
>Mirsaid Khaydargalievich Sultan-Galiev…, also known as Mirza Sultan-Galiev, was a Tatar Bolshevik revolutionary who rose to prominence in the Russian Communist Party in the early 1920s. He was the architect of Muslim "national communism". His views were seen as a direct threat to the policies of the Comintern; he was imprisoned briefly in 1923 and expelled from the Communist Party. He was rearrested in 1928 and imprisoned for six years. He was then arrested again in 1937 and executed in 1940 during the Stalin period.
>Sultan-Galiev was a proponent of what is today seen as part of the economic and political school revolving around dependency theory. His view that the proletariat of the imperialist core, together with its bourgeoisie, would continue oppressing the "toilers of the East" after a socialist revolution in the core would have been carried out can be seen in a speech of his during the ninth conference of the Tatar Oblast party committee:
<If a revolution succeeds in England, the proletariat will continue oppressing the colonies and pursuing the policy of the existing bourgeois government; for it is interested in the exploitation of these colonies. In order to prevent the oppression of the toiler of the East we must unite the Muslim masses in a communist movement that will be our own and autonomous.<- Mirsaid Sultan-Galiev, 1923[12]
>The above "quotation" is an excerpt of the speech attributed to Sultan-Galiev. This was voiced at a conference in which Sultan-Galiev himself (already expelled from the party) did not participate.
>Sultan-Galiev further believed that within an empire, those regions which have been conquered or colonised ought to be prioritised or worked alongside during a revolution, instead of there merely being a revolution restricted to core countries. The reason for this was that if a revolution was to occur in an isolated manner, an imperialist country could easily exploit the resources of its colonies to defeat any revolutionary movement. However, if such a movement is co-ordinated with movements in colonies or conquered provinces, the chances of a revolution succeeding are increased, since the capabilities of the defending party to exploit and draw upon the resources of its colonial holdings are greatly weakened, if not vanquished entirely. Sultan-Galiev gave the examples of the failure of the Spartacist Uprising and the Hungarian Soviet Republic. â„–3758572[Quote]
Harold Armstead Covington. I don't see alot of people talking about him
â„–3758647[Quote]
I cant name influential political thinkers who HAVE BEEN FORGOTTEN for obvious reasons,but a intresting thread regardless
â„–3758680[Quote]
>>3758647The title of the thread is a bit of an oxymoron, I think I was thinking more of people whose ideas were ahead of their time
â„–3758732[Quote]
>>3758610You got socialism, why are you mad?
â„–3758735[Quote]
You not you island monkey got socialism, why are you mad?
â„–3758768[Quote]
>>3758732>>3758735Calla Walsh says Zohran is in imperialist because his socialism benefits White Americans who are le bad for being descendants of colonial settlers (even though she's literally white)
â„–3758784[Quote]
>>3758768>whites hating other whitesmany such cases
â„–3758792[Quote]
>>3758784Big noses brainwashing women into hating their own men*
â„–3758883[Quote]
>>3758792Calla Walsh hates Israel
â„–3758895[Quote]
>>3758883idk who she is, but i assume she only hates them for killing wholesome plastelinians
â„–3758929[Quote]
>>3758883What does that have to do with what I said?
â„–3758935[Quote]
>>3758929She views jooz as evil wypipo
â„–3758952[Quote]
>>3758935Is calla a woman?
â„–3758981[Quote]
>>3758952Yes, and not trans as far as I'm aware
â„–3758998[Quote]
>>3758981>not transGeg
A woman's role, duty and design is far from politics and economy, do listening to their opinion on said topics is pointless