Охват к подписчикам
26,9%
ERR
Реакции к просмотрам
0,69%
158 на 48 постов
Пересылки к просмотрам
0,27%
62
Постов в день
0,0
всего 296
Где отзываются чаще
доля реакций к просмотрам- 10 авг. 2024 г.06/08/2024 Middlesbrough 🏴 When reality hit … Fascists run. #Antifa #Squads3,57%
- 13 июл.Sobre los cambios en el canal Algunos habéis visto el cambio. El nombre, el logo, el contenido. No ha habido un cambio de chaqueta. Ha habido un proceso de pensamiento crítico. En 1956 la clase obrera internacional se quedó descabezada. Lo que vino después fue folclore — partidos con vocabulario de izquierda que habían abandonado al trabajador. Mayo del 68, el 15M, Podemos, etc. El mismo ciclo repetido: energía real de la gente canalizada hacia formaciones que terminaron gestionando el sistema que decían combatir. En 2015 se hizo imposible seguir mirando hacia otro lado. SYRIZA firmó el memorándum. Podemos entró al gobierno. El ciclo se completó en tiempo récord. La izquierda y la derecha llevan décadas peleándose por el mismo churro mientras el trabajador sigue descabezado, alienado en luchas que no le corresponden. Y mientras tanto, somos incapaces de decir las cosas claras. Somos incapaces de hablar a la cara por miedo a ofender. Aceptamos todo de manera anarquizante, compramos todo lo que nos dicen que tenemos que ser, sin cuestionar nada. Eso no es libertad. Es otra forma de control. ¿Cómo vamos a organizar un cambio, una revolución, si no somos capaces ni de llamar a las cosas por su nombre? Este canal no es de derechas. La derecha es la otra pata de la misma mesa. Este canal existe porque esa dicotomía ESTÁ MUERTA y el movimiento obrero necesita análisis real, pensamiento crítico sin concesiones y ruptura con los marcos que llevan setenta años manteniéndolo inmóvil. AfterTheLeft. Más allá de la izquierda. Porque la izquierda nos dejó a nosotros hace mucho tiempo.2,87%
- 13 июл.English: About the changes in the channel Some of you have seen the change. The name, the logo, the content. There has been no change of jacket. There has been a critical thinking process. In 1956 the international working class was left headless. What came next was folklore - parties with left-wing vocabulary that had abandoned the worker. May '68, the 15M, Podemos, etc. The same cycle repeated: real energy of the people channeled into formations that ended up managing the system they claimed to fight. In 2015 it became impossible to keep looking the other way. Syriza signed the memorandum. We can enter the government. The cycle was completed in record time. The left and the right have been fighting for the same churro for decades while the worker continues to be headless, alienated in struggles that do not correspond to him. And in the meantime, we are unable to say things clearly. We are unable to speak to the face for fear of offending. We accept everything in an anarchic way, we buy everything they tell us we have to be, without questioning anything. That's not freedom. It is another form of control. How are we going to organize a change, a revolution, if we are not even able to call a spade a spade? This channel is not right-wing. The right is the other leg of the same table. This channel exists because that dichotomy IS DEAD and the labor movement needs real analysis, uncompromising critical thinking and a break with the frameworks that have been keeping it immobile for seventy years. AfterTheLeft. Beyond the left. Because the left left us a long time ago.2,23%
- 13 июл.[SP] Hay un truco político que desde la izquierda llevan décadas ejecutando y que nadie quiere nombrar: el nacionalismo con lenguaje progresista y presentarlo como lucha de clases. No lo es. Nunca lo fue y nunca lo será. Cataluña lo demostró con claridad. El nacionalismo — cualquier tipo de nacionalismo — organiza la sociedad en torno a una identidad cultural o territorial que atraviesa las líneas de clase. Le pide al obrero catalán y al empresario catalán que se unan contra Madrid o España. Sustituye la contradicción fundamental de la lucha de clases — quién es explotador y quién es explotado — por una contradicción territorial que la burguesía gestiona cómodamente desde la retaguardia. ¿Quién estaba detrás del procés? No era la clase obrera catalana organizada. Lo que impulsó el proceso fue un sector concreto de la burguesía catalana: pequeños y medianos empresarios organizados en Pimec y Cecot, con apoyo a la independencia por encima del 50%, junto a redes como el Cercle Català de Negocis y la fundación Femcat, que vinculaban explícitamente el independentismo a un modelo catalán de hacer negocios. Por otro lado, la gran burguesía — CaixaBank, Banco Sabadell, Foment del Treball — fue más cautelosa, no por solidaridad con los trabajadores españoles, sino porque sus negocios operaban en toda España y la independencia les perturbaba el mercado. Y mientras tanto, el gobierno catalán que impulsó el procés aplicaba los recortes de austeridad más duros de España en sanidad, educación y servicios sociales. Las banderas subían. Las condiciones materiales de la clase trabajadora bajaban. Aquí está el argumento que nadie quiere escuchar: el obrero catalán que salió a la calle, que se enfrentó a las cargas policiales, que creyó que aquello era su lucha — era el animalillo que la burguesía catalana azuzaba contra los cuerpos del Estado para sus propios intereses. No el sujeto político del proceso. Era el instrumento. La carne de cañón de un proyecto que no era suyo. ¿Significa esto que el nacionalismo español está bien? Por supuesto que no. El nacionalismo español es exactamente el mismo mecanismo desde el otro lado: la utilización de la bandera, como elemento político, por parte de un sector reaccionario, pidiendo al obrero de Vallecas, que defienda los intereses del capital español contra el capital catalán. Los dos nacionalismos se necesitan mutuamente, se alimentan el uno al otro y los dos le roban al obrero lo mismo — la conciencia de clase, el único instrumento que le sirve de algo. El nacionalismo vestido de rojo sigue siendo nacionalismo. La clase obrera no tiene ninguna nación que liberar. Tiene una clase que organizar.2,19%
- 9 авг. 2024 г.06/08/2024 Middlesbrough 🏴 When reality hit … Fascists run. #Antifa #Squads1,68%
- 19 сент. 2024 г.09/2024 São Paulo 🇧🇷 161% (São-Paulo Antifa crew) showing banner « Nazis Life Don’t Matter » #FckNzs #SaoPauloAntifa #Antifa #Squads1,65%
- 19 авг. 2024 г.07/2024 Corsica Entraînement aux sports de combats des jeunes antifas de Haute-Corse Fight training for the north-Corsica antifa youth #CorsicaAntifa #Antifa #Squads1,56%
- 7 сент. 2024 г.Summer 2024 Wien 🇦🇹 Connexion Köln Antifa X AFA Kobenhagen X Antifa Jugend Wien X Paris Antifa #AntifaInternational #Antifa #Squads1,46%
- 8 июл.In May 2011 something real happened in Spain. Not a political party, not an electoral campaign — people. Hundreds of thousands of them, occupying squares in every city in the country. The anger was genuine: half a million home repossessions, 25% unemployment, a two-party system that had managed the financial crisis by making the working class pay for what the banks had destroyed. The squares were full. The question is: who was actually in them? Not the worker from the industrial estate in Vallecas. Not the miner from Asturias. Not the agricultural labourer from Almería. The 15M was overwhelmingly a movement of urban middle-class youth — university students, precarious graduates, the children of a class that had been promised upward mobility and found themselves downwardly mobile. Their anger was real. Their class position was not working class. That is not an insult. It is a material analysis. And it explains everything that came after. A movement without a class base cannot have a class programme. The 15M demanded "real democracy" — a moral category, not a material one. It attacked corruption, the two-party system, financial elites. All legitimate targets. But it never named the fundamental contradiction: who owns the means of production and who doesn't. It never touched private property. It never built union structures. It never organised in workplaces. It occupied squares and went home. What came out of it was Podemos. And Podemos is the perfect demonstration of what happens when a middle-class movement institutionalises itself: it enters parliament to "storm the heavens" and ends up managing budgets under Brussels supervision in coalition with the Socialist Party. The cycle from the squares of 2011 to the Council of Ministers of 2020 took less than a decade. The material conditions of the working class did not change. The faces in government did. The worker who loses their job in a factory closure does not need a party that speaks about "the people" in the abstract. They need organisation rooted in the workplace, in the neighbourhood, in the concrete conditions of exploitation. The 15M offered neither. It offered moral indignation without class analysis — which is exactly the kind of protest the system can absorb, channel and neutralise. That is what it did. The spirit of 2011 was not betrayed by its leaders. It was limited by its class composition from the beginning. A middle-class rebellion against the effects of capitalism that never questioned capitalism itself. Loud, visible, and ultimately harmless to the structures that produced the crisis it was protesting against. The working class was not in those squares. It was working, or looking for work. And nobody was building anything for them.1,38%
- 2 окт. 2024 г.без подписи1,23%
- 4 июн.Lenin was clear in 1920: "We are obliged to wage the struggle in Parliament in order to destroy Parliament." This is not a contradiction. It is a tactic. The bourgeois Parliament is not destroyed by ignoring it. It is destroyed by turning it against itself — exposing to the masses what it actually is: the place where capital administers its class interests in the language of universal democracy. The seat as a megaphone, not as a destination. The party as an instrument of class, not as a manager of the system. The moment a movement enters parliament to govern within the bourgeois framework it ceases to be a threat and becomes just another leg of the same table. The real constituent process — not the reform negotiated with financial powers — means rupture. That the accumulation of forces in the electoral, union and territorial terrain reaches the point where the bourgeois legal framework can no longer contain the pressure of class. The workers' movement does not launch electoralist proclamations. It uses elections for what they are: a tool that can be turned against the system when there is real organisation and a class programme behind it. Whoever enters to manage the system loses their sense of class, collective roots, the political culture that makes any real transformation possible. They become a voter. And the voter delegates. And whoever delegates builds nothing.1,21%
- 1 июл.There is a question the system never asks out loud: if capital had a real interest in ending drugs, why have they spent decades in the same neighbourhoods? The answer is uncomfortable but material: because it needs them there. The Spanish case of the 1980s is the most documented laboratory in Europe. The Transition — negotiated between the institutional left and the Francoist hierarchy reconverted into democrats — needed to pacify the streets. And the streets were not easy to pacify. Asturias, the Basque Country, Vallecas, the industrial neighbourhoods of Barcelona had decades of working-class culture, real conflict and a youth that came from the anti-Franco movement ready to fight. Direct repression was not enough. Heroin appeared. Not spontaneously. With a geographical precision that admits no coincidence: the areas with the most working-class conflict were the first to be flooded. Heroin circulated most heavily in working-class neighbourhoods and areas with a combative labour tradition — Asturias, Vallecas, the Basque Country. While the Socialist Party executed the industrial reconversion that left thousands of workers on the street, heroin anaesthetised those who could have resisted. When you followed the origin of heroin from the neighbourhoods, you always arrived at the same point of no return: the barracks. Documented by Carmen Díaz, president of the Association of Mothers United Against Drugs — working-class mothers who without institutional training but with class instinct understood before anyone else what was happening. The mechanism is brutal in its simplicity: deliberate deindustrialisation, mass unemployment, uprooting, loss of community fabric, loss of collective meaning. And into that void, drugs. Not as an accidental consequence but as a functional product. Heroin flowed with suspicious ease in the most conflictive areas, with shameful police complicity. An entire generation of young workers who could have fought back was neutralised. Neighbourhoods destroyed, families broken, working-class political culture erased in a decade. Capital did not need tanks. It needed smack. Today the mechanism has been refined. Heroin remains in the same neighbourhoods but layers have been added: sports betting targeted specifically at working-class youth, cheap alcohol, high-potency cannabis, normalised cocaine. And on top of everything, a culture that presents consumption as rebellion, as transgression, as countercultural identity. The same move as in the 80s when the heroin aesthetic was glamourised — shooting up was seen as being rebellious. Nothing further from the truth. Drug consumption is not a revolutionary act. It is not transgression. It is exactly what capital needs: a sedated, atomised worker, incapable of collective organisation, spending what little they have on the product that destroys them. Addiction does not liberate. It chains. And it does so in the same neighbourhoods, with the same class profiles, with the same precision as always. The working-class family destroyed by addiction is not collateral damage. It is the objective.1,18%