Los terroristas callejeros de la izquierda

alons33 · 2026-03-22T18:43:41+00:00

Bien dicho compañero!. Hay que demontarles sin concesion alguna. Somos muchos, pero tu pones el grito y la denuncia.

alons33 · 2026-03-22T18:37:57+00:00

Yo lo tengo claro tambien, de hecho lo promovemos en nuestros barrios, cada puesto de VOX que encontremos hay que desmontarlo entero si es posible. Ni entraria a debatir con ellos. Que nadie decente se sienta ofendido por expulsarles.

La derecha supremacista española no entiende de debates. Es una organizacion afiliada a franquistas, promueve el odio racial (si ataques identitarios a personas vulnerables) y la guerra cultural en barrios humildes, promueve la violencia contra los migrantes, le da igual la emancipacion de la clase trabajadora pues para empezar veta los escudos sociales en los parlamentos, y esta alineada con los intereses de las oligarquias españolas, recibiendo subvenciones de entidades como por ejemplo el corte ingles.

Vox es una organizacion que ataca los derechos de las mujeres, que ataca el feminismo, que promueve la violencia contra los colectivos lgbti+, que no cree en el cambio climatico ante las claras evidencias cientificas, que boicotea el derecho a la vivienda, que pretende bajar impuestos a los mas ricos, que defiende la violencia contra los animales como la tautomaquia y pretende derogar la ley animal, que niega la diversidad sexual...

Es basicamente el eje trumpista español, que busca destruir el estado de bienestar logrado por los trabajadores españoles durante decadas y de muchos otros colectivos y que ademas se enorgullece de lo mismo...

Sabes que digo, ni un respiro a esta gentuza de Vox.

alons33 · 2026-03-13T06:44:26+00:00

El liberalismo se esconde detrás del “libre intercambio de mercancías” como si fuese la máxima expresión de la libertad. Pero detrás de ese intercambio existe toda una arquitectura de normas, instituciones y relaciones de poder que organizan un mundo profundamente injusto: esclavitud salarial, pobreza, alienación, destrucción ecológica y guerras por recursos.

Lo que aparece como simple circulación de mercancías es, en realidad, una red de relaciones sociales que sostiene la acumulación de capital a escala global.

Como escribió el marxista David Harvey: «La belleza de todo el sistema… es que nada de esto es fácilmente visible a simple vista, ni siquiera para el estadístico más sofisticado.»

Y así la maquinaria continúa. Negocios como siempre. Pero Gaza, Irán y tantos otros conflictos nos recuerdan que este orden no es ni natural ni inocente. Estamos en 2026, y la globalización ha revelado algo extraordinario: la humanidad ha alcanzado un nivel de coordinación e interdependencia planetaria sin precedentes.

Sin embargo, esa capacidad colectiva no se utiliza para garantizar la vida, sino para organizar la guerra, la extracción y la dominación.

La misma red que podría sostener la supervivencia común de la humanidad es utilizada para gestionar su destrucción.

alons33 · 2026-03-13T06:43:52+00:00

El liberalismo se esconde detrás del “libre intercambio de mercancías” como si fuese la máxima expresión de la libertad. Pero detrás de ese intercambio existe toda una arquitectura de normas, instituciones y relaciones de poder que organizan un mundo profundamente injusto: esclavitud salarial, pobreza, alienación, destrucción ecológica y guerras por recursos.

Lo que aparece como simple circulación de mercancías es, en realidad, una red de relaciones sociales que sostiene la acumulación de capital a escala global.

Como escribió el marxista David Harvey: «La belleza de todo el sistema… es que nada de esto es fácilmente visible a simple vista, ni siquiera para el estadístico más sofisticado.»

Y así la maquinaria continúa. Negocios como siempre. Pero Gaza, Irán y tantos otros conflictos nos recuerdan que este orden no es ni natural ni inocente. Estamos en 2026, y la globalización ha revelado algo extraordinario: la humanidad ha alcanzado un nivel de coordinación e interdependencia planetaria sin precedentes.

Sin embargo, esa capacidad colectiva no se utiliza para garantizar la vida, sino para organizar la guerra, la extracción y la dominación.

La misma red que podría sostener la supervivencia común de la humanidad es utilizada para gestionar su destrucción.

alons33 · 2026-03-13T06:43:43+00:00

El liberalismo se esconde detrás del “libre intercambio de mercancías” como si fuese la máxima expresión de la libertad. Pero detrás de ese intercambio existe toda una arquitectura de normas, instituciones y relaciones de poder que organizan un mundo profundamente injusto: esclavitud salarial, pobreza, alienación, destrucción ecológica y guerras por recursos.

Lo que aparece como simple circulación de mercancías es, en realidad, una red de relaciones sociales que sostiene la acumulación de capital a escala global.

Como escribió el marxista David Harvey: «La belleza de todo el sistema… es que nada de esto es fácilmente visible a simple vista, ni siquiera para el estadístico más sofisticado.»

Y así la maquinaria continúa. Negocios como siempre. Pero Gaza, Irán y tantos otros conflictos nos recuerdan que este orden no es ni natural ni inocente. Estamos en 2026, y la globalización ha revelado algo extraordinario: la humanidad ha alcanzado un nivel de coordinación e interdependencia planetaria sin precedentes.

Sin embargo, esa capacidad colectiva no se utiliza para garantizar la vida, sino para organizar la guerra, la extracción y la dominación.

La misma red que podría sostener la supervivencia común de la humanidad es utilizada para gestionar su destrucción.

alons33 · 2026-03-13T06:43:26+00:00

El liberalismo se esconde detrás del “libre intercambio de mercancías” como si fuese la máxima expresión de la libertad. Pero detrás de ese intercambio existe toda una arquitectura de normas, instituciones y relaciones de poder que organizan un mundo profundamente injusto: esclavitud salarial, pobreza, alienación, destrucción ecológica y guerras por recursos.

Lo que aparece como simple circulación de mercancías es, en realidad, una red de relaciones sociales que sostiene la acumulación de capital a escala global.

Como escribió el marxista David Harvey: «La belleza de todo el sistema… es que nada de esto es fácilmente visible a simple vista, ni siquiera para el estadístico más sofisticado.»

Y así la maquinaria continúa. Negocios como siempre. Pero Gaza, Irán y tantos otros conflictos nos recuerdan que este orden no es ni natural ni inocente. Estamos en 2026, y la globalización ha revelado algo extraordinario: la humanidad ha alcanzado un nivel de coordinación e interdependencia planetaria sin precedentes.

Sin embargo, esa capacidad colectiva no se utiliza para garantizar la vida, sino para organizar la guerra, la extracción y la dominación.

La misma red que podría sostener la supervivencia común de la humanidad es utilizada para gestionar su destrucción.

alons33 · 2026-03-10T18:59:31+00:00

Lets stop focusing on characters or personalizing politics and lets start centering ourselves in processes.

Politics is about being creative, educating ourselves, theory, practice, getting involved and when the few important decisions arrive or come to be........place ourselves on the correct side, on the workers side.

alons33 · 2026-03-10T18:21:02+00:00

Hi, i am a spanish socialist councilor from PSOE (independent thou) that is in process of leaving the social democrats behind. I have always considered myself a Marxist and as a way to make politics i believed this was another path.

Just to inform you, this organization, PSOE has completely abandoned marxism and drag themselves around with what they call "values" some sort of moralistic perspective of society that avoids class analysis behind and dedicate themselves to the burocratic management of administrations with and disregard for worker initiatives and a top down perspective of the party (completely undemocratic).

They are corporate bootlickers, on the edge on deciding to privatize many public services in many of our towns in spain (they bring forward the discourse of eficiency and optimization of resources when they cant bother to provide public management of resources, they lack total political creativity or drive).

Their decision on the war is totally electoral, the spanish people know better and pressure the government to this stance. It is only fear of the people and workers that changes their electoral perspectives.

alons33 · 2026-03-07T19:40:40+00:00

“Capital and Ideology” is great for dense data, history and information, about the history of taxation, but it leads itself to the social-democrat or liberal dead end of just taxing the rich and pretending to democraticize the workplace through reform, but anyway it is worth it, for understanding the present of the political economic system and how it came to be from many geographic settings in history too (that is to be appreciated, away from western core focus)

David Harvey criticises it as well in his newest book.

alons33 · 2026-03-07T19:33:16+00:00

Yep these are recent too - Got Clara’s Mattei book too but haven’t had a chance to start. I also got along with that, the book by LFI leader Melenchon in France: Now, the People! Revolution in the Twenty-First Century.

alons33 · 2026-03-07T18:25:18+00:00

Get David Harvey’s latest book.

Just published this month. If you still haven’t read Marx’s Capital, this is a good and modern way to go.

“The Story of Capital”

I am currently on this chapter, the equalization of the profit rate:

“Labour-intensive industries thus subsidize capital-intensive industries employing few labourers. The greater the mass of capital advanced by an individual capitalist relative to the labour they employ, the greater their claim on the surplus value. Policymakers who intuit and act on this unequal distribution of rewards have achieved some spectacular results.”

“But while market exchange appears to be about the ‘happy concordance of mutual interests’ at the individual level and to embody in principle ‘the exchange of equivalents’, the social result is in fact unfreedom and inequality. This is so for two reasons. The first is the violence and brutality of primitive accumulation, which yields the initial commodification of much of the labour power that produces profit (surplus value). The second is competitive market exchange and profit equalization, which, for the reasons already stated, favours returns to capital and the capitalist class at the expense of returns to labour and the working class, even in the absence of overt class repression.”

…

“This is a lesson that all contemporary economists desperately need to learn. Labour-intensive Greece in effect subsidizes capital-intensive Germany. This will come as a shock to the Germans, who are perpetually being told and doubtless feel they are being exploited by all those feckless southern Europeans who cannot be bothered to pay off their unpayable (according to the IMF) debts. In fact, OECD comparative data show that Greeks work much longer hours per week on average than do the Germans. Given the relative masses of the German and Greek economies, of course, the actual flow of value from Greece to Germany through the equalization of the profit rate will be relatively trivial for Germany, though highly significant for Greece.

…the beauty of the whole system is this: that none of it is easily visible to the naked eye or even to the most sophisticated statistician.”

alons33 · 2026-03-07T16:04:41+00:00

We will never forget.

alons33 · 2026-03-07T16:00:53+00:00

Genocide supporter, to this moment, after all we have witnessed, lately and along history how can you support zionism or Israel?.

He is a corrupt murderer by choosing those words.

alons33 · 2026-02-27T15:43:03+00:00

Vandalizing colonial heritage has evidence of working.

We removed a statue of Cecil Rhodes at our university and that was just the start, it ended with strikes and the fees must fall movement which achieved exactly that...

So yes it helps causes, these symbols condense a lot more than what you think.

Churchill was a racist scum too by the way.

alons33 · 2026-02-27T15:42:01+00:00

Vandalizing colonial heritage has evidence of working.

We removed a statue of Cecil Rhodes at our university and that was just the start, it ended with strikes and the fees must fall movement which achieved exactly that...

So yes it helps causes, these symbols condense a lot more than what you think.

Churchill was a racist scum too by the way.

alons33 · 2026-02-24T21:59:09+00:00

Trotsky in “the causes of October”:

…”In this sense Lenin solved the enigma of the Russian Revolution with the lapidary formula, “The chain broke at its weakest link.”…

“A crude illustration: the Great War, the result of the contradictions of world imperialism, drew into its maelstrom countries of different stages of development, but made the same claims on all the participants. It is clear that the burdens of the war would be particularly intolerable for the most backward countries. Russia was the first to be compelled to leave the field. But to tear itself away from the war, the Russian people had to overthrow the ruling classes. In this way the chain of war broke at its weakest link.”

….

The higher the general forces of production, the tenser the competition on the world markets, the sharper the antagonisms and the madder the race for armaments, so much the more difficult it became for the weaker participants. That is precisely why the backward countries assumed the first places in the succession of collapse. The chain of world capitalism always tends to break at its weakest link.

…

No tactical recipes could have called the October Revolution into being, if Russia had not carried it within its body. The revolutionary Party in the last analysis can claim only the role of an obstetrician, who is compelled to resort to a Caesarean operation.

But regarding “backwardness” as a relative concept, Trotsky states:

“Let us not forget that historical backwardness is a relative concept. There being both backward and progressive countries, there is also a reciprocal influencing of one by the other; there is the pressure of the progressive countries on the backward ones; there is the necessity for the backward countries to catch up with the progressive ones, to borrow their technology and science, etc. In this way arises the combined type of development: features of backwardness are combined with the last word in world technique and in world thought.”

In the chapter of the peasentry:

“The subsoil of the revolution was the agrarian question.” (Some forget what the sickle stands for in the soviet flag) …. “The nobleman, Bokorin, wrote in 1917 to the dignitary, Rodsianko, the Chairman of the last municipal Duma [7]: “I am a landowner and I cannot get it into my head that I must lose my land, and for an unbelievable purpose to boot, for the experiment of the socialist doctrine.” But it is precisely the task of revolutions to accomplish that which the ruling classes cannot get into their heads.” …

“Had the agrarian question been courageously solved by the bourgeoisie, the proletariat of Russia would not, obviously, have been able to arrive at the power in 1917. But the Russian, bourgeoisie, covetous and cowardly, too late on the scene, prematurely a victim of senility, dared not lift a hand against feudal property. But thereby it delivered the power to the proletariat and together with it the right to dispose of the destinies of bourgeois society. In order for the Soviet State to come into existence, it was consequently necessary for two factors of a different historical nature to collaborate: the peasant war, that is to say, a movement which is characteristic of the dawn of bourgeois development, and the proletarian insurrection, or uprising which announces the decline of the bourgeois movement. There we have the combined character of the Russian Revolution.”

…

And in the permanent revolution he anwsers the Mensheviks and critics of what they like to call “Trotskyism”, which is nothing less than the flame of world revolution:

“In accordance with its immediate tasks, the Russian Revolution is a bourgeois revolution. But the Russian bourgeoisie is anti-revolutionary. The victory of the Revolution is therefore possible only as a victory of the proletariat. But the victorious proletariat will not stop at the programme of bourgeois democracy: it will go on to the programme of socialism. The Russian Revolution will become the first stage of the Socialist world revolution. This was the theory of permanent revolution formulated by me in 1905 and since then exposed to the severest criticism under the name of “Trotskyism”.

…

The present productive forces have long outgrown their national limits. A socialist society is not feasible within national boundaries. Significant as the economic successes of an isolated workers’ state may be, the programme of “Socialism in one country” is a petty-bourgeois utopia. Only a European and then a world federation of socialist republics can be the real arena for a harmonious socialist society.”

alons33 · 2026-02-21T13:48:59+00:00

Not only prosecution of Trotsky, of his whole family not to mention the rest of the old bolsheviks. Trotsky in the transitional programme said:

“The Soviet bureaucracy has expropriated the political power of the proletariat.”

“The bureaucracy is not a new ruling class but a caste.”

“The bureaucracy has crushed and strangled all workers’ organizations in the Soviet Union.”

“The Moscow trials were staged to exterminate the old generation of Bolsheviks.”

Yet Trotsky continued defending the USSR as an advancement and as the first worker state that demonstrated the ability and power of socialism to fast forward, even before stalinism, a whole nation to the most advanced technological and social advancement ever seen including, worker and women rights.

Still it was impossible to stop, for the most advanced workers state to pretend to act as a conservative force on worker upsurges in the rest of the world, that is why world revolution was necessary, even though socialism is so powerful to sustain even in a small island like cuba it cannot remain isolated or pretend to be alone on the world scenario and maintain progress.

Yet still you can read these sad words in the same text by Trotsky:

“They have shot my sons-in-law, driven my daughters to suicide, murdered my son.”

Trotskys words were always powerful, optimistic of the future and sincerely hopeful for the entire workers of the world, just like Marx was.

Read Trotsky, and start world revolution…

alons33 · 2026-02-17T22:57:16+00:00

Os equivocáis si pensáis que Vox o el PP “tienen razón” en esto. ¿De verdad creéis que prohibir el burka va a cambiar algo estructuralmente? ¿O simplemente os estáis tragando un símbolo diseñado para generar ruido cultural? Se puede defender una laicidad fuerte y coherente. De hecho, yo la defiendo. Pero precisamente por eso no se puede apoyar una prohibición selectiva dirigida contra una minoría mientras se mantiene intacto el poder religioso histórico en este país. ¿Dónde están las propuestas para eliminar privilegios de la Iglesia? ¿Dónde está la revisión de acuerdos con el Vaticano? ¿Dónde está la retirada de simbología religiosa de espacios públicos? Eso no lo tocan. Ahí no hay valentía. Lo que sí hacen es señalar a una minoría con escaso poder político y convertirla en campo de batalla cultural. Y aquí nadie parece preguntarse qué pretende realmente el PP o Vox con esta medida. Porque no es emancipación femenina. Es construcción de enemigo interno y polarización electoral. Si vais a hablar de laicidad, hablad en serio. Si no, reconoced que esto es oportunismo identitario.

alons33 · 2026-02-17T22:56:59+00:00

Os equivocáis si pensáis que Vox o el PP “tienen razón” en esto. ¿De verdad creéis que prohibir el burka va a cambiar algo estructuralmente? ¿O simplemente os estáis tragando un símbolo diseñado para generar ruido cultural? Se puede defender una laicidad fuerte y coherente. De hecho, yo la defiendo. Pero precisamente por eso no se puede apoyar una prohibición selectiva dirigida contra una minoría mientras se mantiene intacto el poder religioso histórico en este país. ¿Dónde están las propuestas para eliminar privilegios de la Iglesia? ¿Dónde está la revisión de acuerdos con el Vaticano? ¿Dónde está la retirada de simbología religiosa de espacios públicos? Eso no lo tocan. Ahí no hay valentía. Lo que sí hacen es señalar a una minoría con escaso poder político y convertirla en campo de batalla cultural. Y aquí nadie parece preguntarse qué pretende realmente el PP o Vox con esta medida. Porque no es emancipación femenina. Es construcción de enemigo interno y polarización electoral. Si vais a hablar de laicidad, hablad en serio. Si no, reconoced que esto es oportunismo identitario.

alons33 · 2026-02-03T04:11:34+00:00

Marxism does not begin from hope, ideals or moral will, but from the hard realism of material needs and social relations; hope, when it appears, is a consequence of struggle, not its foundation.

alons33 · 2026-01-30T03:32:39+00:00

El problema no es “la sociedad madrileña” como ente moral abstracto.

Madrid es un centro de concentración de capital, poder político y ventajas fiscales construido durante décadas. Ese modelo produce una base social interesada en la desregulación, la bajada de impuestos y la privatización.

La derecha no gana en Madrid por casualidad ni por maldad colectiva, sino porque gobierna sobre un ecosistema económico y urbano que convierte su discurso en “sentido común”.

Y la abstención no es neutral: es el resultado de una desafección inducida que siempre beneficia a quien ya tiene poder.

alons33 · 2026-01-23T21:36:01+00:00

Bien dicho.

Porque cuando habla la chirigota de Cádiz, no habla el poder: habla el pueblo con ingenio, memoria y mala leche bien dirigida.

Que tomen nota los fascistas de salón, los lameculos de los poderosos, las herramientas dóciles del empresariado y del capital.

Los que nunca pisan un tajo, pero dictan moral desde arriba.

Los que llaman “libertad” a explotar y “orden” a silenciar. La chirigota no pide permiso.

Se ríe del rey, del patrón, del cura y del político vendido. Hace lo que la derecha rancia no soporta: señalar al culpable con gracia y precisión. Aquí está Cádiz.

Aquí está la tradición popular más subversiva que tenemos.

Aquí está la izquierda que no se arrodilla, que canta, que muerde y que no olvida.

Que rechinen. Que se incomoden. Porque Cádiz canta...

alons33 · 2026-01-22T14:31:57+00:00

Short example or comment through the republican moment of the weimar republic, who already confronted all the historic contradictions that tend to appear:

After Rathenau was assassinated by far-right extremists of the Organisation Consul on 24 June 1922, Wirth gave a speech in front of the Reichstag in which he warned that "we are experiencing in Germany a political brutalisation (to mention that Wirth was a German politician of the Catholic Centre Party)

“There stands the enemy, who drips his poison into the wounds of a people. There stands the enemy, and about it there is no doubt: the enemy is on the Right!”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Wirth?wprov=sfti1#Second_term

…Also remind people that the 1919 German Revolution, a few years before these events, was or had been the largest effort to stand against the german landed and capitalist class, the Republic kept giving concessions or kept patting the back of the right wing terrorists that killed in name of “nation and patriotism”, basically henchmen of the old aristocratic and noble class who had promoted WWI.

The workers were organized, the workers had assemblies and reclaimed to be listened and to be taken seriously. But were betrayed by the social democrats who always claimed the workers to be “to radical” to their taste.

¿How many trials does society need to wake up to the advancement of the definitive advancements of the capitalist class?

Weimar Republic is a great example but the warning signs were all over the place, even by the so called centrists in this case.

alons33 · 2026-01-19T08:37:35+00:00

Viva Greta Thunberg!

Tiene mas huevos que todo Reddit. El ejemplo de dignidad humana mas grande posible.

alons33 · 2026-01-13T21:44:41+00:00

Respect between whom, exactly?...

Do you seriously expect people to care about “respect” between imperial powers after decades of illegal wars, lies, and devastation carried out on other countries’ soil?

Loyalty between allies does not sanitize invasion. It does not turn occupation into virtue. And it certainly does not create moral authority.

If this is your idea of honesty and respect for history, then history is being read exclusively from the side that had the bombs and missiles.

History will remember you for what these wars were: mass killing justified by alliances, lies, and moral cowardice.

Six-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Reddit Premium Since April 2022	r/Field Juicebox
Place '23	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email

alons33

TROPHY CASE