It's right because I think there is a legitimate issue of socialists (including/primarily democratic socialists) winning power, but not having the skills to govern. Liberals campaign and sometimes win on "having experience". It's true that they know what they need to do to keep the government functioning, but they are nonetheless very experienced at running the government under liberal principles.

It is good, actually to run for and win municipal and local seats because you learn a lot. Ideally you aren't the only socialist in the building though, so you can build out some footholds and mentor incoming comrades. It doesn't make a revolution, but it means that "after the revolution" there will be somebody who knows the basics of what's what.

[–] ZWQbpkzl@hexbear.net 8 points 5 days ago (10 children)

If we're going to take lessons from the failures of AOC this is it. Most of us would be doing the same thing if we got yeeted from bartender to congress at age 29 if there wasn't socialist think tanks and institutions for us to lean on. This isn't to forgive her; she could've risen to meet the challenge but didn't. But the lesson isn't her personal moral failing.

[–] Leegh@hexbear.net 6 points 4 days ago (2 children)

The bartending stint is not only a narrative perpetuated by AOC's own campaign/ PR managers, but also designed to cover up what she actually did during her post-grad/ pre-congress period: working for a venture capitalist firm called GAGEis (or Gage Strategies) run by 2 Israeli-Americans.

She also founded her own enterprise (yes), called Brook Avenue Press, which is "a social enterprise dedicated to providing relevant educational products to children and parents in urban areas.”, according to her Boston University biography that is still publicly viewable.

AOC's official biography on the US House of Reps website does NOT list any of this.

Here's a Times of Israel article that openly talks about all this written back in 2020

You all fell for the grift.

[–] combat_brandonism@hexbear.net 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

calling aoc a socialist is an insult lmao, much less using her record to say actually elected socialists would behave no differently. I thought we settled this struggle session here years ago

[–] Leegh@hexbear.net 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

It's less to do with struggle sessions on Hexbear and more to do with the "Democratic Socialist" label that she and her supporters still use to this day.

Like I'm sure we all know she isn't a Marxist or Anarchist, but many people IRL who aren't terminally online will see the label and go "oh, she's a socialist? So she wants America to become China/ Cuba/ North Korea" or even worse will think "Oh so she wants us to be socialist like Scandinavia", both of which are wrong for reasons I don't need to explain here.

It's a major gripe I've had for a while now with Western liberals co-opting terms with the phrase "Socialism" in them and then doing things that no actual socialist advocates for. And like, I get the argument that having "socialists" in power helps de-stigmatize the term and encourage people to look to more left-wing ideas, but I usually counter this reasoning by saying it de-radicalizes far more people instead by making them think Social Democracy (a term I VASTLY prefer to describe people like AOC and Bernie) is Socialism and keeps them from moving further left by offering just enough welfare policies to not agitate the ruling class anymore. I personally KNOW people who think this way. It's the same strategy Western Europe and Anglo colonies like Canada and Australia pulled last century, and it worked to great effect. Hell, America tried it before with FDR to incredible results. And while there are some nominally better "Democratic Socialists" in the Global South, particularly in Latin American countries, they still largely play by the rules set by international capital and neoliberal institutions.

Sorry, I'm just venting my frustration at the lack of any revolutionary socialist movements almost anywhere in the world even after 30+ years of unopposed neoliberal fuckery. I guess my point is we still have a long, long way to go before we reach the former heights that the Bolsheviks did.

load more comments (7 replies)