No.393272
>>393222
>He omitted the key information about leftists and neolibs war against police being what caused them to embrace Neo-Nazism.
neolibs aren't warring on the pigs, that's hilarious. liberal parties are forced to feign leftward when their voter base (which is usually to the left of the party) gets mad, but the funding for liberal parties doesn't come from the voter base, it comes from cop-adoring porkies who want to keep their investments safe from the poors and the proles. liberal politicians are therefore willing to pass "police reform" laws as long as those laws are either toothless, easily revocable, or both.
>>393222
>agitation groups like BLM and Antifa.
BLM is both a slogan and a liberal organization. the slogan is older, and a "BLM protest" may or may not have any connection to the organization called BLM. the purpose of the organization is to help corral rage into safe channels of liberal reform, not to give rise to that rage. in fact it has been the cops who helped feed people's rage the most.
antifa is the name of a very old, very broad movement, as well as the adopted name of a whole bunch of mostly local organizations (some grassroots, others astroturf). once again, "antifa" could refer to all kinds of protests and protestors. where are these centralized, well-funded, well-organized groups which drive the entirety of leftist protest in the US that you seem to think exist?
>The bolsheviks thought the proletariats would take up arms and fight for their revolution, but too many of them were cowards. The tsarists were ultimately defeated by the peasantry, who were fighting for bread and not ideology.
this indicates to me just how diligently you have studied the subject: not at all, because you sound like you are repeating an anecdote you heard from one of your kameraden. the leading class of the russian revolution was the proletariat, though the peasants numbered more. the first places seized in 1917 were major cities and the rail and telegraph lines connecting them. the red guard was formed from workers, and only after the creation of the red army were peasants fighting for the bolsheviks in any significant measure. and,
>fighting for bread and not ideology.
you've accidentally stumbled on a golden nugget of marxism. classes are driven by material class interest and not by abstract ideologies. that's why the party only consisted of a small leading core, and why most revolutionary fighters were not party members but merely workers and peasants with a shallow understanding of politics.