this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2026
79 points (98.8% liked)
Slop.
819 readers
454 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I’m going to assume you’re American or European; please correct me if I’m wrong. The lack of ideological and practical gatekeeping is a large part of why you have no successful movements. You just allow wreckers, 白左, and radlibs to identify themselves with your organizations, diluting your purpose and misdirecting your energy.
Every successful revolutionary movement, from Lenin’s Bolsheviks to the Vietnamese revolutionaries, had to rigorously distinguish between genuine comrades and opportunists. Gatekeeping is about preserving the unity of purpose necessary to advance the material interests of the proletariat. Without it, the contradictions within the movement overshadow the struggle against the real enemy.
The contradiction between global-souths aims(anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist, materially grounded) and the reformist or liberal tendencies of the western left is fundamental. Solidarity cannot exist where the goals are diametrically opposed. Understanding who is genuinely on the side of the people is a prerequisite for any meaningful cooperation.
The very first bit, "You shouldn't." still is not a great or practical message compared to "people need to be individually vetted" or something like that.
Well, that’s because these are two separate but connected points. From the perspective of the global south, the idea of solidarity with the western left in the abstract(or with western leftist organizations in general) doesn’t really make sense until they start taking themselves seriously, e.g., practicing proper gatekeeping. My wording was slightly hyperbolic, but the general point still stands. Obviously, occasional cooperation is possible when goals align, but that is different from genuine solidarity.
My point is that, since the question is phrased in terms of individuals ("western leftists," rather than "western leftist organizations"), the correct answer is that it depends on the person because there are clearly many real leftists out there, even if overall the organizations are bad. I think hyperbole here is unhelpful, especially on this topic, because it undermines being able to usefully analyze our circumstances in a way that gives us actionable information (i.e. it's effectively anti-organization because it is such a blanket condemnation of people here).
I understand your point, and I agree that solidarity at the individual level depends on the person, there are certainly genuine leftists in the West. My comment was deliberately hyperbolic to emphasize the structural problem: as long as the broader organizations/movement fail to take themselves seriously and allow opportunists to dominate, abstract solidarity with individuals is largely ineffective and irrelevant. The hyperbole isn’t meant to condemn every individual, but to highlight the material reality that weak structures undermine revolutionary goals and the movement as a whole. Occasional cooperation is possible when interests align, but that is materially different from sustained, principled solidarity.