United States | News & Politics

I mean, he's right? A (questionably) socialist dictator is still a dictator. Maduro was given the ability to rule by decree like a decade ago, and, like Trump, basically has control over every major part of the government.

Of course, as he says, that doesn't justify arbitrarily killing people or the long-term embargo on Cuba that has economically crippled the country.

Oh shit, a balanced, nuanced take on a complex issue. Quick, get the Americans out of of here, they won't be able to handle this.

3…2…1…

IDGAF what anyone says, let's see what he does.

Also goes for every other politician.

You mean the democratic socialist, an inherently anti-authoritarian party, is calling out authoritarians?

Is it going to be news when he condems Xixing Ping and Putin and Netanyahu, and the Iranian Shah, and Saudi Royal family, and well you get the picture.

Fuck authority that doesn't earn it.

For decades, many left-leaning writers and speakers in the United States have felt obliged to establish their credibility by indulging in anticommunist and anti-Soviet genuflection, seemingly unable to give a talk or write an article or book review on whatever political subject without injecting some anti-Red sideswipe. The intent was, and still is, to distance themselves from the Marxist-Leninist Left.

Adam Hochschild, a liberal writer and publisher, warned those on the Left who might be lackadaisical about condemning existing communist societies that they "weaken their credibility" (Guardian, 5/23/84). In other words, to be credible opponents of the cold war, we first had to join in cold war condemnations of communist societies. Ronald Radosh urged that the peace movement purge itself of communists so that it not be accused of being communist (Guardian, 3/16/83). If I understand Radosh: To save ourselves from anticommunist witchhunts, we should ourselves become witchhunters.

Purging the Left of communists became a longstanding practice, having injurious effects on various progressive causes. For instance, in 1949 some twelve unions were ousted from the CIO because they had Reds in their leadership. The purge reduced CIO membership by some 1.7 million and seriously weakened its recruitment drives and political clout. In the late 1940s, to avoid being "smeared" as Reds, Americans for Democratic Action (ADA), a supposedly progressive group, became one of the most vocally anticommunist organizations.

The strategy did not work. ADA and others on the Left were still attacked for being communist or soft on communism by those on the Right. Then and now, many on the Left have failed to realize that those who fight for social change on behalf of the less-privileged elements of society will be Red-baited by conservative elites whether they are communists or not. For ruling interests, it makes little difference whether their wealth and power is challenged by "communist subversives" or "loyal American liberals." All are lumped together as more or less equally abhorrent.

Michael Parenti, Blackshirts and Reds, 1997.

The other "but do you condemn Hamas" of leftism, gotta say it or you scare the bitches.

Typical Mamdani W.

Hoping to read more of his thoughts on how to actually solve the problem, instead the authors were just using a Mamdani interview quote to plug their podcast: gonna do 45 episodes per year with whoever we can find to join the debate.

Ugh, do I have to do everything myself? Honey, watch the kids, I'm gonna go build a strong middle class in the 'global south'.