Most likely not my own.
Algeria, Key ECOWAS countries, Tanzania.
Definitely Burkina Faso and Niger, maybe Mali too
I think it will be in the Sahel region, if the AES alliance (lol) keep being successful the people from the plethora of small and poor neighboring countries will inevitably demand their governments for improvement and we might see something.
If this causes an anti-imperialist coup in a country with a coast, it would probably be a game changer.
I like Mexico’s general trajectory, though it would be tough with Great Satan as their neighbor.
I mean, Cuba managed it.
It also almost lead to WW3.
I mean we keep steadily growing in Belgium so I won’t count us out in Europe. Though it would be a massively hard thing to achieve and we’d probably face violent resistance at some point.
Most based answer. Hope you succeed!
With the recent reforms, Nicaragua will join the AES list soon.
what kind of reforms are going on over there?
Here is a post about it -> https://lemmygrad.ml/post/6363963
TLDR It is the dissolution of the bourgeois state and the introduction of the exercise of popular power through direct democracy(similar to China). It is so good that even the USA reacted to this -> https://ni.usembassy.gov/press-release-on-the-continuation-of-the-national-emergency-with-respect-to-the-situation-in-nicaragua/
“National emergency” lmao
Hoping western leftists break off a chunk of America and make it a AES actually. Won’t happen because they are always eyeing our countries in the global south for breaking apart. Not directed at you OP.
I always keep hoping for an independent socialist Alaska or Hawaii, or even better socialist Texas
Yeah, I’d love to see that happen, but I really don’t think it’s gonna happen any time soon — at least not on a scale larger than one neighborhood for a period of longer than one month. Maybe we’ll be proven wrong, though! God willing!
Sent from Mdewakanton Dakota lands / Sept. 29 1837
Treaty with the Sioux of September 29th, 1837
“We Will Talk of Nothing Else”: Dakota Interpretations of the Treaty of 1837
I think state identity must be taken advantage of and use it to bolster independence movements
Would you like to expand on that thought?
Sent from Mdewakanton Dakota lands / Sept. 29 1837
Treaty with the Sioux of September 29th, 1837
“We Will Talk of Nothing Else”: Dakota Interpretations of the Treaty of 1837
Like make sure people will start identifying with their own state identity more to the point that they don’t care that much about the national American identity and even think that the American identity undermines their state identity. When that happens, more people will want to secede
I doubt this would be effective, given that state identities and US national identity are both settler constructs. These identities were constructed alongside each other to work with each other to further colonization, so I frankly strongly doubt you could “reform” state identities in a productive or progressive direction, except maybe Alaska and Hawaii.
Sent from Mdewakanton Dakota lands / Sept. 29 1837
Treaty with the Sioux of September 29th, 1837
“We Will Talk of Nothing Else”: Dakota Interpretations of the Treaty of 1837
Yep. Exactly what America does to everyone else. I think they maintain a database of up to date tensions, contradictions, and conflicts that are ethnic, religious, and otherwise.
Nah we’re indeed working on it!
Probably Mexico, Venezuela, Honduras or Nicaragua
Somewhat agree with you on Honduras. There’s some real class consciousness going on there but they’re also reactionary as hell so it can go either way.
The US fucked so much with Honduras recently, and all because the Zelayas (who were pretty much neoliberals and very rich people) became socdems and were making deals with Venezuela, after the 2009 military coup they developed their own Democratic Socialism ideology but they are still socially conservative on some stuff.
The Northern Triangle has always been very socially conservative. Castro herself isn’t as much but moreso than I think you would find in Costa Rica or even Mexico.
Sahel or somewhere in latin america. i also think this is where we’ll start seeing new practical applications of modern socialism from that will be a departure from the early 20th.
not wildly so but enough to be a new “era”
Idk about exact country, but i feel like itll be somewhere in latin america or the middle east.
My thought too. But I see anti-imperialist sentiment growing in Africa, so I wondered if that was a likely scenario too.
I think so.
Sent from Mdewakanton Dakota lands / Sept. 29 1837
Treaty with the Sioux of September 29th, 1837
“We Will Talk of Nothing Else”: Dakota Interpretations of the Treaty of 1837
Probably some North African country
Edit: if I think harder about it, Paraguay
What makes you say that?
Honestly, a wild guess but I edited my comment with a more thoughtful answer
Would be great to see another piece of the puzzle put on the jigsaw in that part of the world. I’m hoping that when it happens, a few states participate so they can protect each other against the US.
In my future fiction project I think it might’ve actually been Ryukyu: when war broke out in Korea and Taiwan, the massive expansion of the American military presence in the Ryukyu Islands created intense conflict between locals and the government, and this conflict only worsened as opposition was suppressed. This led to a revitalization of the Ryukyu independence movement and a widespread embrace of revolutionary socialism among locals.
This is certainly not the most “realistic” prediction — the more obvious predictions would be “somewhere in Latin America or the Middle East” as the other commenter said — but the thing about predictions is that so much can change unpredictably in a short time-span, things can butterfly, so it is difficult to say anything with any amount of certainty.
Sent from Mdewakanton Dakota lands / Sept. 29 1837
Treaty with the Sioux of September 29th, 1837
“We Will Talk of Nothing Else”: Dakota Interpretations of the Treaty of 1837
That’d be an interesting timeline to live in. I can definitely see that story happening irl in many places as the downfall of the empire goes on.
india (with fascist possibility as well).
While I agree with the sentiments about Northern Africa and the Sahel countries as most likely, India is my “dark horse” choice. Yes, BJP and fascism is a big problem. But I think along other metrics, it appears that the conditions seem to be matching up. Recently there were those farmer protests that seemed to have a heavy communist influence that were like the largest protests in human history (I recall something like 200 million people participated in the protest). There’s quite a ways to go but I would not be surprised to see India go communist in this century.
Rojava/DAANES is AES in the Middle East. They are the only socialist project in the Middle East, actually.
They are the only socialist project in the Middle East, actually.
RIP to the Democratic People’s Republic of Yemen 😭
deleted by creator
You mean the US puppets that were used for strategic purposes for helping the US do imperialism and counter regional counterweights to the west such as Iran and its allies?
The same ones who helped whether they like it or not the current Islamist extremists overthrow Syria and have thus been a part of turning it into Libya 2.0?
You mean the US puppets that were used for strategic purposes for helping the US do imperialism and counter regional counterweights to the west such as Iran and its allies?
Well, I happen to think that non-“white” people have agency. Why couldn’t it have been that Rojava used the US to achieve its goals? I am not denying that some US goals and SDF/Rojava goals aligned, but why should we strip SDF of agency and say they are mindless puppets controlled by the US?
Because this is a US dominated Anglophone website, and imperial citizens generally think of Syrians as chess pieces in an abstract geopolitical game that they’re spectating as a detached fandom. They think “the pawns caused their team to lose by failing to protect their king”, and so they all deserve to get wiped out as punishment for making “the wrong strategic decision”. You could see it in some indignant comments recently about the Syrian army “giving up” and “not fighting hard enough” to “earn” Russia or Iran’s intervention after Assad fled the country. It keeps reminding me of the American liberals who gleefully talk about how they hope Trump kills more Latinos, women, and Arabs because they “deserve it” for failing to back Harris, or how people who voted Green were “Russian puppets whether they like it or not”.
The overthrow of the Syrian government, imperfect as it was, is a tragedy that will result in materially worse conditions for most people in Syria and the rest of West Asia. Having said that, it happened. While being a fragile cornerstone in what limited regional peace and stability there was, Assad’s government failed to protect large parts of the country from foreign aggression for years. People that the former Syrian government failed to protect from ISIS shouldn’t be expected by foreigners to owe some duty of loyalty to that government now that it’s surrendered, or to Assad personally now that he’s fled. The SDF’s past and present collaboration with the empire is absolutely worthy of scrutiny and criticism. Beyond that, I don’t pretend to be educated enough about them to have an opinion on whether they’re “good” or “bad” in an abstract sense. I definitely wouldn’t claim to think they’re on the verge of becoming a functioning internationally recognized state, much less an actually existing proletarian state.
That being said, Assad surrendered the Syrian government to what’s basically rebranded Al Qaeda, who currently appears to be the de facto ruler of the remaining Syrian state authority. Every remaining faction I’m aware of has collaborated with the empire to some extent. Whatever valid criticisms there are of the SDF: they’re not Al Qaeda, they’re not ISIS, and they’re not Turkey, all of whom have a history of imperial backing and all of whom would seem intent to bring about worse material conditions for the people actually living in Syria. I understand most of us are sad about the collapse of the former Syrian government and what it means for regional stability and anti-imperialist resistance, but it feels needlessly cruel and dehumanizing for imperial citizens on this site to let that sadness manifest in nihilistic positions that amount to: “I hope they all kill each other down to the last Syrian while America loots the graveyard; they’re getting what they deserve for failing the Assad family!” As someone who hopes to see a government in Syria strong and stable enough to protect the indigenous population from both foreign exploitation and enslavement by Wahabists, I don’t feel like I’m in a position to be ruling out what few indigenous potential sources of relative regional stability actually exist.
Man this reddit-tier comment structure fucking sucks. It’s not even worth paying attention to because you wrote it like that. Just talk like you’re talking to a human please.
And I’m the rude one? Of course I’m talking to humans, do you see me personally insulting the person I replied to? No. Yet you go for that with that dig. Offer an actual objection to the substance of what I’m saying instead of trying to play tone policing games, we’re talking global geo-politics here not some intimate and sensitive personal matter.
Fact is Rojava have been to my knowledge in matter of deed an aid not a hindrance to the global primary contradiction, to the US empire and must be analyzed in light of that. Not what they want to do, not what they claim they will do but what they have done materially.
They’re too small to matter, the US can brush them aside if they ever cause trouble or cease to be useful and their situation I think given all the rest that’s happening is not great. They’re not China where they’re such a size that the US helping them gain strength can result in an entity that is capable of then resisting them and bringing about damage to them or even threatening their entire order. They are quite honestly not a power even regionally outside the territories they operate in and IMO never will be.
Maybe I shouldn’t blame them, I’m not some expert on the situation there but I can say I don’t think they should be praised given what they’ve done. Maybe they felt they had to make some deals with the devil but I don’t think they deserve being lionized given what those deals entailed and how they worked out with regards to the larger strategic landscape and the power balance that impacts the lives of tens of millions of humans in the region beyond the borders of Syria.
The situation in Syria seems complex. I never thought Assad was a great leader but the alternatives continue to be worse and we must remember this whole situation including the misery of the Syrian people started because of the US trying to do regime-change and toppling to do engineering of the middle east for their grand chessboard strategy to retain their global hegemony by preventing land power unity between Africa, Russia, Europe, Asia via sabotaging the cross-roads. In light of that working with the people responsible for all of this because they promise you maybe they’ll help give you power or a piece of the pie isn’t a great look. Sure if it had worked and they’d won instead of the jihadists the conversation might be different but I’m not sure they were ever desired to win as the US prefers corrupt puppets or destablized regions via extremist proxies.
