The NYC mayor's race is the most watched political race in the US right now, by a large margin too (I guess the second most is Prop 50 in CA? Either way that one is way behind). After Tuesday, Zohran's win will probably be the big story that normies IRL will be talking about here. "Socialism" will be a topic on top of everyone's minds.

And I think everyone here - even if you have major issues with Zohran specifically or electoralism in general - should be ready to speak to it among the people in your life.

Opportunities like this don't come around very often. Right now Americans are getting a ton of misinformation about what socialism is due to a demsoc running and very likely winning the job of mayor of the biggest city in the US. On top of that, this misinformation is transparently bad ("Zohran wants to sieze all the grocery stores in New York!") that if you simply point to what's actually being proposed, you will look pretty knowledgeable by comparison. This is all very low hanging fruit.

But you have to be prepared. Like literally, you should practice how you will respond to people who want to talk to you about Mamdani and socialism. The other day, AcidSmiley made a comment that I've been thinking about ever since: she said she had to deradicalize herself a bit from this site because she was having trouble interacting with normal people and not sounding like she was unhinged. I absolutely do this too. Whenever a topic tangential to socialism or imperialism comes up with people IRL, I end up overshooting. I scare people away even if they have a sense that I'm right. What I say sounds totally reasonable to us here, but to people who aren't engaged with stuff it doesn't matter how correct you are; if you can't meet them where you are they will tune you out.

So for me, today and tonight I'm gonna skim through Ha-Joon Chang's "23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism". It's not straight Marxist analysis but it's written for the people I'll be talking to. I'm also going to try and brush up on my knowledge of Zohran's specific policies (like freezes on rent for rent controlled apartments, that seems to be one everyone brings up and I don't feel I know enough about it).

For those of you who are strongly against Zohran or electoralism.... do whatever you want ofc, but I'm just saying if a normie asks you about Zohran and you say "he's just a social fascist" and scoff, then that will be a missed opportunity. People will have no idea what you are talking about and frankly probably won't be interested in hearing more.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Pieplup@hexbear.net 14 points 6 days ago (2 children)

everyone i talk to is already woke (in the original sense of the word) to some degree. Since i'm not really able to shut up about it, as i have severe autism and basically can't. People tend to either agree to some extent or not want to interact with me. Honestly though if you are using a term like social fascism in the prescense of the general public and outside of a theory specific context you are just ignorant of revolutionary theory. Building class consciousness needs to be a gradual process. Though, I guess in general being against electoralism is also ignoring revolutionary theory anyway so.. Electoralism as far as i know has been pretty consistnetly been seen as a good way to build a base of support for a socialist movement to get the ball rolling.

[–] LeninWeave@hexbear.net 12 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Though, I guess in general being against electoralism is also ignoring revolutionary theory anyway so.. Electoralism as far as i know has been pretty consistnetly been seen as a good way to build a base of support for a socialist movement to get the ball rolling.

Participating in elections (as socialist candidates in socialist parties) in order to gain a platform to educate the public and promote revolutionary ideology is what revolutionary theory usually advocates, but it isn't electoralism.

Edit: actually, rather than saying "usually advocates", I would say "advocates in certain political environments". Strategy is dictated by conditions.

Regardless, the steps to take before participating in elections include organizing a disciplined and principled vanguard party to use that electoral platform to educate the masses and agitate for revolution. This is why the parties like the PSL participate in elections.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] SickSemper@hexbear.net 7 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Do you think all use of the term social fascism today indicates “ignoran[ce] of revolutionary theory”? Or just in public? Because social democracy is still an anticommunist ideology designed to pacify the working class, unless I’m out of date on revolutionary theory

https://www.hamptonthink.org/read/the-lies-social-democrats-tell-fdr-the-new-deal-and-social-fascism

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] sewer_rat_420@hexbear.net 12 points 6 days ago (3 children)

My thought is - he identifies himself as a demsoc, and is a member of DSA - a big tent organization that includes many strains of socialism, from anarchists to trots to socdems.

But his policies are definitely not "socialist" - he isn't able to reorganize the economy in that broad sense with the powers of mayor. However, just look at his policies, and consider that if someone offered policies that will explicitly help you out with your most dire issues (your rent, your groceries, perhaps more local issues), don't be afraid because they might call themselves a socialist. It means, at worst, that they just want to improve your life somewhat.

I think people understand very well that mainstream politicians on both sides of the aisle are beholden to the billionaires, and hopefully they begin make the association that socialists are the outsider group that is not.

[–] marxisthayaca@hexbear.net 11 points 6 days ago

You also gotta watch his interviews and take notes of how he communicates things. He doesn't use academic lingo and radical language. He is very focused on his agenda, and explains it in ways Americans can understand. He talks straight and doesn't beat around the bush. It's insane to hear him speak and then look at a video from Hakeem Jeffries, who circles around the question for 3 minutes.

[–] LeninWeave@hexbear.net 9 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

many strains of socialism, from anarchists to trots to socdems.

It's 100 years late for social democrats to be socialists. And even when they were actually socialists they were fascist-enabling liars. I broadly agree with the rest of your comment.

[–] SickSemper@hexbear.net 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Now the nice capitalists are socialists (don’t laugh)

[–] LeninWeave@hexbear.net 4 points 6 days ago

lenin-dont-laugh

[–] LangleyDominos@hexbear.net 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Is he a member? I thought our resident NYC-DSA user said he wasn't a member and didn't specifically enlist the chapter to be part of his campaign?

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] Des@hexbear.net 8 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

i stepped back from here a bit for the same reason as AcidSmiley (really miss seeing you around)

i have had trouble restraining myself when topics come up around imperialism. starting with my parents. my mom it took time and patience just to give her broad overviews of some basic Blowback style topics

i've found the easiest approach for normies (at work, acquaintances, anyone you chat with and they are familiar with you) is just broad economic concepts. through this I've learned that the average American would go hard for market socialism/cooperative economy. nobody defends the bougoise anymore since they have gone mask off and shown their asses. everyone i have engaged with seems to think they are just criminals and corrupt, but often think the capitalists of the past actually "built stuff", which is a tough one to crack

I've also found I have to often have to just sell socialist concepts from a very selfish position. remind people that a secure, well cared for and egalitarian society = you can be chill, unbothered, and unstressed and just grill

selling socialism as stability is a solid one. no more business cycles, lay offs, etc. in real life most people don't think they are one idea away from becoming billionaires. that's been closed off forever. lottery, maybe.

otherwise with more personal relationships I have pretended to be earlier in my ideological development and take them on a journey with me. it's more organic and not deceptive because i just replicate my own previous development and can excitedly explain new concepts that I just "discovered" and work them through it. this has worked best for taking someone who was flirting with fascism to the left and it took a solid year of work

but yeah just be confident and assertive and patient. people are desperate for answers and don't use any red scare trigger words until they are ready to handle it

[–] CleverOleg@hexbear.net 6 points 6 days ago

but often think the capitalists of the past actually "built stuff", which is a tough one to crack

I don’t know if this is a good response for people since you have to get into historical materialism, but I have no problem myself admitting “capitalism” was a progressive force and was tremendously powerful in developing the productive forces (wouldn’t use that term). But just because it may have worked for that in the past, doesn’t mean that it should continue forever. It was useful for ending serfdom but there’s so much more we can accomplish as a species if we commit to that same type of transformation. I think you can link it to climate change as a tangible reason why we need to make a dramatic break from “how things are”. I have noticed a huge change among normal people I know who recognize that capitalism won’t solve climate change.

load more comments