The state of politics in the US is so bad that many progressives will immediately cling to and champion anyone who says progressive things, but talk is cheap. It’s fair to evaluate and judge politicians not just by their rhetoric, but whether they actually follow through with their promises.
This take is so stupid. It’s clear online lefties have absolutely no idea about i/p except what they see from twitter and instagram. Yea, the state of us politics is so bad, I agree, that lefties are incapable of dealing with any reality outside of slop soundbites
Like, take your outlandish headlines for example. The claims sound really damming at face value. But when you actually read up on it, reality starts to make more sense than these slop sound bytes. But, here we are
I’m not sure what you mean. One if the orgs national co-chairs is from the Red Star caucus, which is explicitly Marxist-Leninist.
While the other national co-chair is from Groundwork Caucus, which is more reformist and ecologically oriented, having grown out of the Green New Deal movement.
We all know how much they hate libs, it’s their most-used pejorative. To be fair though, establishment liberals (eg Schumer) are part of the reason we’re in this mess… I can’t say I hold them in high regard either.
Yes but most tankies seem to hate centrist neoliberal Dems worse than they hate maga republicans. And they consider DSA to be centrist neolibs like the rest if the democratic party.
They’d rather see a trump third term than a Dem or even DSA president.
They don’t really, it’s just that’s what you see in leftist spaces. Really they are just state-sponsered shit-stirrers interested in driving as many wedges between Americans (not exclusively, but America is a big target for geopolitical reasons) as they can. They are worse than zealots; they are unprincipled opportunistic FUD machines.
MAGA is a mix of true believers and grifters. I think that’s true of all cults, MAGA’s just the one I have the most firsthand experience with. Sometimes it’s hard to tell which is which. Generally, the true believers are the ones losing money and the grifters are the ones gaining, but occasionally a true believer makes it to the top. I think Marjorie Taylor Greene is one example, though IDK I don’t know her personally so she might just be a competent grifter.
No there aren’t. there’s a difference between Marxist-Leninist thinkers and trolls like u/antifa_ceo. The former are communists and generally cool folk, the latter are generally Anti-american (not exclusively, but largely) state-sponsered shit-stirrers whose only purpose on the fediverse is to stoke hatred within the left and keep them divided while Trump and co. burn their countries down.
You can either be a communist, or you can support the actions of Putin’s and Xi’s governments. You can’t do both.
Liberation condemns Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s continued retreat from socialist politics and rejects any effort to present her as the future presidential standard-bearer for DSA, or for the broader socialist movement.
AOC hasn’t “retreated” from socialist politics. She’s had to adapt and be pragmatic since getting elected to serve in federal office, unlike anyone in that so-called “liberation caucus”. They sound like a bunch of backseat drivers to me.
One person can’t just show up in congress and suddenly make socialist policies happen. That’s gonna require a majority in both chambers to pass. Expecting AOC to do all that by herself and accusing her of selling out when it doesn’t happen immediately, is asinine.
This is the problem on the left. We spend more time cannibalizing ourselves than we do actually working to get more socialists elected. The recent successes in the DSA have been in spite of the naysayers, not because of them.
So, for the record, the passage I quoted is not necessarily representative of my personal opinion. The person I responded to wrongly asserted that no one in DSA holds the position that AOC’s political engagement has, to one extent or another, been opportunistic.
I simply set about showing how that is not true, and that there are people in the org who very much do feel that way.
AOC hasn’t “retreated” from socialist politics. She’s had to adapt and be pragmatic since getting elected to serve in federal office, unlike anyone in that so-called “liberation caucus”. They sound like a bunch of backseat drivers to me
DSA has an internal system of caucuses, which are largely ideologically based, and act as political parties within the organization.
There’s Socialist Majority which is the big reformist caucus. Reform and Revolution is the Trotskyist caucus. Red Star is Marxist-Leninist, Libertarian Socialist Caucus is Anarchist, etc.
Liberation are the Maoist caucus, and so they largely reject electoral engagements with politics, preferring to organize the internally colonized sections of the American working class through labor and tenant organizing, and the like. They don’t think taking congressional seats, even if DSA were to win all of them, would make socialism happen.
But the reason I chose to quote them in particular, is because they represent what is probably the left-most position in DSA, regarding AOC. While much of the “DSA left” (left here being relative. Even the rightmost caucuses are to the left of mainstream American politics) holds a similar position, opposing an AOC presidential run, or otherwise being skeptical of her, they would likely frame it differently.
Reed Star, for instance, would frame their AOC criticism, less as overt opportunism, and more as being strategically flawed, as the org tailing an individual for her popularity, rather than putting forward a candidate with the intent to lead and educate/radicalize the masses.
Liberation are the Maoist caucus, and so they largely reject electoral engagements with politics
Then how are they considered to be democratic at all? I thought that was a requirement for DSA…
more as being strategically flawed, as the org tailing an individual for her popularity, rather than putting forward a candidate with the intent to lead and educate/radicalize the masses.
First of all, how is running a political candidate based on popularity strategically flawed? That’s literally the definition of being politically strategic.
Secondly, AOC is perfectly capable of leading and educating the masses; moreso than any delusional MLs lurking in the DSA without participating beyond complaining about every single candidate who actually runs…
Then how are they considered to be democratic at all? I thought that was a requirement for DSA…
Of you asked the vast majority of DSA members today, they would say that the “Democratic” part of the name refers to the internal processes of debate and mass democracy that the orh practices internally, rather than, say, a commitment to a reformist path to Socialism.
First of all, how is running a political candidate based on popularity strategically flawed? That’s literally the definition of being politically strategic.
Popularity can be important, but the key criticism here is tailing an individual. AOC’s relationship with DSA is complicated, and for many in the organization, that communicated relationship means that going all in on an AOC presidential bid would be putting the cart before the horse as it were.
If she were to win, there is neither the movement infrastructure, nor a significant or coherent enough Socialist bloc in Congress yet, for her to get much of anything done.
Further, given her previous votes for selling “Defensive weapons” to Israel, many on the DSA left believe, and I think rightfully, that when the institutional inertial of the military industrial complex inevitably drags the US into a conflict in some far flung corner of the world, that she won’t have the backing, nor the personal fortitude to stand up to something like that. I think such a thing would tear the whole Socialist project in this country apart, frankly.
Secondly, AOC is perfectly capable of leading and educating the masses;
I think a failed AOC run could be instructive, in ways similar to Bernie’s two runs. The Bernie campaigns failed, but they were successes insomuch as they brought back Socialism into the American political consciences, brought people into DSA in droves, and radicalized those new DSA members away from their former liberalism.
Perhaps a failed AOC presidential bid could do something similar at a larger scale. But I think that’s the extent of such a thing’s utility. I think those in the org who are diehards for an AOC presidency (namely Groundwork caucus) aren’t thinking as far ahead as they ought to.
moreso than any delusional MLs lurking in the DSA without participating beyond complaining about every single candidate who actually runs…
Red Star, the ML caucus, has 3 seats on the org’s National Political Committee, and occupies one of the national co-chair seats. Far from “Lurking” and “Complaining” in lieu of participating, they’re a very active and influential wing of the organization.
I could have been clearer. I am sure there are members of the DSA who oppose AOC for ideological reasons, but they have little in common with u/antifa_ceo, an account that exists, near as I can tell, solely to sow discord, dysfunction, and despair in leftist spaces. There are many such accounts on lemmy.ml, a site whose admin and mod team have a long history of claiming to be leftist while legitimizing dictators and censoring criticism of the same.
I realize you also have a .ml account, so I’ll clarify that not everyone on the site is this way. Most .ml accounts are just regular folks, and .ml was heavily promoted on reddit so it became one of the larger fediverse instances. But it is a haven for pro-Imperialist astroturfers and I think you would be well served to find a different server.
They could have worded it better but there is plenty to criticize. The left should always push the overton window and stop accepting sorta kinda left just because it’s not fascism.
But that’s how you push the overton window. Accept every slight improvement. If you only accept big improvement, and wait for everyone to be happy, you will never move the window at all.
That’s how the right is pushing it for years. They accept every single slightly more right position, and then go from there.
How is not accepting “sorta kinda left” not an improvement if the alternative is fascism? A leftist utopia will never materialize if we don’t accept steps inbetween. Just like fascism didn’t materialize overnight.
The fuck?
She’s progressive. DSA is progressive. The fuck is your problem?
She voted to give weapons to Israel, to redefine antisemitism to include antizionism, and to break a rail strike. Each of those is a significant red flag that, regardless of progressive posturing, she will submit to the wishes of the establishment when push comes to shove.
The state of politics in the US is so bad that many progressives will immediately cling to and champion anyone who says progressive things, but talk is cheap. It’s fair to evaluate and judge politicians not just by their rhetoric, but whether they actually follow through with their promises.
This take is so stupid. It’s clear online lefties have absolutely no idea about i/p except what they see from twitter and instagram. Yea, the state of us politics is so bad, I agree, that lefties are incapable of dealing with any reality outside of slop soundbites
Cool.
Like, take your outlandish headlines for example. The claims sound really damming at face value. But when you actually read up on it, reality starts to make more sense than these slop sound bytes. But, here we are
Cool.
AOC isn’t left enough for many MLs and neither is the DSA, sadly.
There are MLs in DSA. One of the orgs co-chairs is one
Two actuallyI misreadI’m not sure what you mean. One if the orgs national co-chairs is from the Red Star caucus, which is explicitly Marxist-Leninist.
While the other national co-chair is from Groundwork Caucus, which is more reformist and ecologically oriented, having grown out of the Green New Deal movement.
I’m sorry I misread as NPC before my coffee, you’re correct
Thanks for the info
Hence why we call them tankies.
You’re forgetting how tankies hate liberals.
which is why idiot liberals now call anyone not subscribed to continuing their decades of failure a tankie
We all know how much they hate libs, it’s their most-used pejorative. To be fair though, establishment liberals (eg Schumer) are part of the reason we’re in this mess… I can’t say I hold them in high regard either.
Yes but most tankies seem to hate centrist neoliberal Dems worse than they hate maga republicans. And they consider DSA to be centrist neolibs like the rest if the democratic party.
They’d rather see a trump third term than a Dem or even DSA president.
Trump is collapsing American hegemony around the globe, making him an accidental great man of history.
I mean… Sometimes, it’s easier to hate those who lie about being progressive, than those who tell the truth about being reactionaries.
Okay but lumping DSA in with th centrist establishment Dems is counterproductive
They don’t really, it’s just that’s what you see in leftist spaces. Really they are just state-sponsered shit-stirrers interested in driving as many wedges between Americans (not exclusively, but America is a big target for geopolitical reasons) as they can. They are worse than zealots; they are unprincipled opportunistic FUD machines.
Yeah, that’s the only explanation that makes sense. No one could be as irrational as tankies.
Oh wait, maga fascists are that irrational and it seems genuine.
I’m tired, boss…
MAGA is a mix of true believers and grifters. I think that’s true of all cults, MAGA’s just the one I have the most firsthand experience with. Sometimes it’s hard to tell which is which. Generally, the true believers are the ones losing money and the grifters are the ones gaining, but occasionally a true believer makes it to the top. I think Marjorie Taylor Greene is one example, though IDK I don’t know her personally so she might just be a competent grifter.
Truth. It’s a religion.
There are no liberals, only neoliberals.
He’s an .ml user, that’s his problem
There are people in DSA with that person’s opinion.
No there aren’t. there’s a difference between Marxist-Leninist thinkers and trolls like u/antifa_ceo. The former are communists and generally cool folk, the latter are generally Anti-american (not exclusively, but largely) state-sponsered shit-stirrers whose only purpose on the fediverse is to stoke hatred within the left and keep them divided while Trump and co. burn their countries down.
You can either be a communist, or you can support the actions of Putin’s and Xi’s governments. You can’t do both.
Yes there are.
-Liberation Caucus
AOC hasn’t “retreated” from socialist politics. She’s had to adapt and be pragmatic since getting elected to serve in federal office, unlike anyone in that so-called “liberation caucus”. They sound like a bunch of backseat drivers to me.
One person can’t just show up in congress and suddenly make socialist policies happen. That’s gonna require a majority in both chambers to pass. Expecting AOC to do all that by herself and accusing her of selling out when it doesn’t happen immediately, is asinine.
This is the problem on the left. We spend more time cannibalizing ourselves than we do actually working to get more socialists elected. The recent successes in the DSA have been in spite of the naysayers, not because of them.
So, for the record, the passage I quoted is not necessarily representative of my personal opinion. The person I responded to wrongly asserted that no one in DSA holds the position that AOC’s political engagement has, to one extent or another, been opportunistic.
I simply set about showing how that is not true, and that there are people in the org who very much do feel that way.
DSA has an internal system of caucuses, which are largely ideologically based, and act as political parties within the organization.
There’s Socialist Majority which is the big reformist caucus. Reform and Revolution is the Trotskyist caucus. Red Star is Marxist-Leninist, Libertarian Socialist Caucus is Anarchist, etc.
Liberation are the Maoist caucus, and so they largely reject electoral engagements with politics, preferring to organize the internally colonized sections of the American working class through labor and tenant organizing, and the like. They don’t think taking congressional seats, even if DSA were to win all of them, would make socialism happen.
But the reason I chose to quote them in particular, is because they represent what is probably the left-most position in DSA, regarding AOC. While much of the “DSA left” (left here being relative. Even the rightmost caucuses are to the left of mainstream American politics) holds a similar position, opposing an AOC presidential run, or otherwise being skeptical of her, they would likely frame it differently.
Reed Star, for instance, would frame their AOC criticism, less as overt opportunism, and more as being strategically flawed, as the org tailing an individual for her popularity, rather than putting forward a candidate with the intent to lead and educate/radicalize the masses.
Then how are they considered to be democratic at all? I thought that was a requirement for DSA…
First of all, how is running a political candidate based on popularity strategically flawed? That’s literally the definition of being politically strategic.
Secondly, AOC is perfectly capable of leading and educating the masses; moreso than any delusional MLs lurking in the DSA without participating beyond complaining about every single candidate who actually runs…
Of you asked the vast majority of DSA members today, they would say that the “Democratic” part of the name refers to the internal processes of debate and mass democracy that the orh practices internally, rather than, say, a commitment to a reformist path to Socialism.
Popularity can be important, but the key criticism here is tailing an individual. AOC’s relationship with DSA is complicated, and for many in the organization, that communicated relationship means that going all in on an AOC presidential bid would be putting the cart before the horse as it were.
If she were to win, there is neither the movement infrastructure, nor a significant or coherent enough Socialist bloc in Congress yet, for her to get much of anything done.
Further, given her previous votes for selling “Defensive weapons” to Israel, many on the DSA left believe, and I think rightfully, that when the institutional inertial of the military industrial complex inevitably drags the US into a conflict in some far flung corner of the world, that she won’t have the backing, nor the personal fortitude to stand up to something like that. I think such a thing would tear the whole Socialist project in this country apart, frankly.
I think a failed AOC run could be instructive, in ways similar to Bernie’s two runs. The Bernie campaigns failed, but they were successes insomuch as they brought back Socialism into the American political consciences, brought people into DSA in droves, and radicalized those new DSA members away from their former liberalism.
Perhaps a failed AOC presidential bid could do something similar at a larger scale. But I think that’s the extent of such a thing’s utility. I think those in the org who are diehards for an AOC presidency (namely Groundwork caucus) aren’t thinking as far ahead as they ought to.
Red Star, the ML caucus, has 3 seats on the org’s National Political Committee, and occupies one of the national co-chair seats. Far from “Lurking” and “Complaining” in lieu of participating, they’re a very active and influential wing of the organization.
I could have been clearer. I am sure there are members of the DSA who oppose AOC for ideological reasons, but they have little in common with u/antifa_ceo, an account that exists, near as I can tell, solely to sow discord, dysfunction, and despair in leftist spaces. There are many such accounts on lemmy.ml, a site whose admin and mod team have a long history of claiming to be leftist while legitimizing dictators and censoring criticism of the same.
I realize you also have a .ml account, so I’ll clarify that not everyone on the site is this way. Most .ml accounts are just regular folks, and .ml was heavily promoted on reddit so it became one of the larger fediverse instances. But it is a haven for pro-Imperialist astroturfers and I think you would be well served to find a different server.
Just take the L. We don’t need a paragraph.
Also wrong.
AOC been a sell out for a bit. Cozying up with Schumer and shit
You guys really really love fascists winning, don’t you?
They could have worded it better but there is plenty to criticize. The left should always push the overton window and stop accepting sorta kinda left just because it’s not fascism.
I like her btw
But that’s how you push the overton window. Accept every slight improvement. If you only accept big improvement, and wait for everyone to be happy, you will never move the window at all.
That’s how the right is pushing it for years. They accept every single slightly more right position, and then go from there.
How is not accepting “sorta kinda left” not an improvement if the alternative is fascism? A leftist utopia will never materialize if we don’t accept steps inbetween. Just like fascism didn’t materialize overnight.
They should have worded it completely differently if so.
A lot of them apparently think that China is doing all the right things so, yeah.
Where are the Epstein files?