Welcome to c/electoralism! politics isn't just about voting or running for office, but this community is.
Please read the Chapo Code of Conduct and remember...we're all comrades here.
Shitposting in other comms please!
you should have realized libs talking about "we are so powerless" was a complete bullshit right now. like, even I am suprised how much power trump has. I know libs were lying when they said presidents are so powerless but I did not know they were lying this much lmao. I was not immune to lib propaganda either
To be fair, any "elected" officials in capitalist countries don't hold much power to go against capitalists. Most things that Trump is doing benefit at least some major faction of the capitalist class. If he tried to nationalize Boeing or something, the next shooter wouldn't miss.
On the other hand, Mamdani is doing some good stuff here, and is probably annoying billionaires. I guess it's going to be tolerated as long as the damage to them is less than the damage which would be caused by removing him, and thus delegitimizing the remaining perceptions of democracy in the states
I guess it's going to be tolerated as long as the damage to them is less than the damage which would be caused by removing him, and thus delegitimizing the remaining perceptions of democracy in the states
It makes me wonder just where that boundary is and how much he could feasibly do before it was decided, public perception of legitimacy be damned, that he must be taken out. That's not to say I think he'll ever actually even begin to approach that line, being the social democrat that he is. But when positive material gains like this are achieved, small as they may be in the grand scheme, I can't help but wonder how much more might be possible within the given bourgeois framework before the ruling class deemed him or any hypothetical elected socialist too much of a nuisance to be worth maintaining the facade of democracy and just take him out.
Great comment btw.
Bernie wasnt even useless to the empire and look how they did him. In general if you control the media to expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit or otherwise neutralize literally any inconvenience ain't that hard.
TBF, while Bernie wasn't dangerous to the Empire, the movement he jumped out ahead of with his baton could conceivably have been. Especially because it had not yet been made all that certain how well the donkey end of the uni-party would appropriate the renewed use of terms like "socialism". Occupy scared them a little (though it probably needn't have).
The capitalists and their pet donkeys stand on much firmer ground now.
That doesn't really address what I was wondering though. First of all, Bernie wasn't successfully elected, for all the reasons you pointed out. But as an already-elected mayor of one of the largest and most politically and economically significant cities in the US, Mamdani (or a hypothetical actual socialist) has a fair amount of potential power to accomplish good things already despite the media control.
expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit or otherwise neutralize literally any inconvenience ain't that hard.
It's not as though they didn't try to do that with Mamdani already, because they tried to prevent his election using media control and failed. I realize they could ramp all that up, but he's already in there doing some good things with the OP being an example, and I think there could be room for a lot more that bourgeois media control alone wouldn't be able to prevent or squelch. And at some point, more drastic measures would have to be taken. I was just thinking about how far it could go before that happened, again despite media control. Don't get me wrong, I don't and never did think Mamdani would end up doing more than any typical socdem working within the capitalist structure, but I get very curious about where the potential lines are.
ehhhh. The president is very powerful when acting in the interests of empire. If he tried to implement M4A suddenly the rest of the US government would find ways to oppose him.
yeah but he's both touching the money and deliberately rapidly disassembling the empire and they are just letting him
He's still acting in the interests of empire, just badly.
Ehhh it'd be harder but just pull a Trump at that point. They don't do shit because "muh civilities and precedence".
Supreme court also gave the president god mode before biden left office, he could've signed an executive order saying all of congress gets medicare / medicaid like the rest of the peons and they'd probably revamp the entire healthcare industry overnight to keep their privileges.
I think you'll find they would swallow their obsession with "civility" and "precedent" in a real damn hurry if he started doing anything they had a real problem with. It's an excuse to do nothing, not an actual limitation. They'd rather keep the excuse so they'd be reluctant but ultimately they would get over it.
Powerless to help regular people, unlimited power for Israel.
Yeah but don't dismiss a large amount of lower wage workers getting some of their bread back because it isn't exactly what you want comrade.
We shouldn't dismiss it but the "isn't exactly what you want" framing is only good for voteblue apologetics.
and "do communism" only counts as criticism and not shitslinging to ultras. i would actually be surprised if OP meant "now do communism" seriously like that. "isn't exactly what you want" framing is what's in the title though. it's the closest thing to an actual criticism of "the one guy" not doing communism hard enough.
i'm not saying don't criticize mamdani, but also don't tell someone that they're doing voteblue apologetics for saying "now do communism" isn't an argument. it's actually the kind of thing that cynical voteblue liberals weaponize to help kill class consciousness. you have to "yes, and" libs that are really excited about a thing mamdani has done/is doing. you can't "um, actually, he should have done it more/better and is just as bad because he didn't," it doesn't work rhetorically.
"Now do communism" isn't an argument and it's very plainly not being presented as one, just a flippant way of saying "he's still a liberal and I wish he actually pursued socialist policy." You might be unfamiliar with this because people conflate the two, but a statement that you feel some way or that something is simply the case is not what an argument is, so someone saying how they feel or that something is simply the case does not need to be "refuted" as "not an argument".
You have no reason to be bringing up ultras in this conversation unless you think OP is demanding for Mamdani to declare a protracted people's war. It's like how this website's favorite streamer quote-mines Left Communism to deflect from criticisms of his definitely-not-entryism, it's a misappropriation from a completely different type of conversation.
The usefulness of "yes, and" is extremely contingent, because being unwilling to say no will immediately devolve into tailism.
You might be unfamiliar with this because people conflate the two
don't be shitty. i obviously don't think that it's an argument, i'm saying that being dismissive is not worthwhile. i am clearly implying that one should make an argument about what should be done instead of complaining "now do communism" from an armchair. i am clearly saying that i think people should present an argument. don't be patronizing. assume that i'm half capable of thinking and at least somewhat well-read, if you don't mind.
You have no reason to be bringing up ultras in this conversation unless you think OP is demanding for Mamdani to declare a protracted people's war.
it's called a turn of phrase purpleworm. you said "isn't exactly what you want" framing is only good for voteblue apologetics. i'm saying "do communism" only sounds good and not being a pathetic radlib if you're an ultra.
It's like how this website's favorite streamer quote-mines Left Communism to deflect from criticisms of his definitely-not-entryism, it's a misappropriation from a completely different type of conversation.
you're right, the best time to discuss whether a certain form of agitprop is entryism or not is in front of a stadium full of libs. that'll totally not alienate people with a u.s. education and liberal brainworms. or maybe the guy with the career in agitprop has opinions that aren't exactly what you seem to think they are, or that you can disagree on strategy without resorting to calling someone an entryist or a tailist.
because being unwilling to say no will immediately devolve into tailism.
that's not what i'm saying at all. it's like you didn't even try to understand my point, so i'll walk us through it. the person that is excited about mamdani doing this action for low wage fast food workers is a liberal. they say they didn't know government could do good things. do you approach further radicalizing and developing the liberal's class consciousness by saying "yes, this was good, and also this more radical thing would be good too/and also isn't it weird how much the democrats oppose him for just doing this good thing/etc." or do you hit them with "yeah, that's a drop in the bucket compared to what black rock's doing, mamdani is just another shitlib that will repeat democratic party lines and cow at every critical opportunity to strike at the heart of capitalist imperialism that is strangling the globe." ? which one of those do you think is better agitprop?
genuinely, obviously without doxxing yourself in someway or fedposting, what is your organizing? what are you out there doing that you feel so comfortable writing off people that you don't consider sufficiently radical in their practice? if you're like in the vanguard, you're out there at the protests and in the streets recruiting the cadres and raising the class consciousness of the proles and organizing trade unions and then radicalizing the trade unionists, i will genuinely stop responding to you with this kind of critique. it wouldn't be appropriate i think for us to hash out whatever minor differences we have in opinion on the internet like this when we align on what is to be done.
I think your last a paragraph hits at what I think is a core problem with our site culture (but I could be completely incorrect about it).
I don't really want to engage in that lone of questioning in the conversations I have here because it feels personal and mean, but I think the level of negativity around prominent figures on the western left on here makes me wonder how active people are in building a movement IRL. maybe everyone lives in a compund in the mountains with a revolutionary militia, but I live in a liberal city with a mix of socialist and liberal friends that I also organize with (to varying degrees of success).
I get frustrated with the bitterness in encounter on this site. Critiques, criticisms and moderating expectations of socdem and leftward figures and movements operating in a liberal society are great and good. Leveraging them against current and potential comrades is not good.
The most prominent example to me is how quickly I see the "fell for it again award" posted when Mamdani libs out on something. Why demean your own comrades, very few of whom are surprised that he makes certain liberal compromises? Is this how users are toward their friends and colleagues in real life? You actually need a certain amount of support from liberals to have a successful movement, the Overton window is a gradient!
Critiques, criticisms and moderating expectations of socdem and leftward figures and movements operating in a liberal society are great and good.
Good to hear
Leveraging them against current and potential comrades is not good.
What do you mean "leveraging them"? Using an error someone else made as a point of comparison? Why is this "not good"? That seems bizarre to me, especially given that you go on to use what you deem an error (and I agree) made by others on this site as a point of comparison as well. I personally don't like the "fell for it again award" meme for similar reasons.
My phrasing is probably unclear
I personally don't like the "fell for it again award" meme for similar reasons.
but this was my main point so if we agree on that there no point in clarifying I don't think 🤝🏻.
yeah, i agree wholeheartedly.
everyone wants to act like they have the great key to more successful and effectual agitprop than prominent leftists, and then refuse to answer when you ask if they go outside.
i have my criticisms of prominent leftists. but i don't think they're my enemies that are on the verge of betraying the revolution or so wrong as to be causing great harm. that's such a prominent misunderstanding of the current state of things in material terms. there's a pervasive fatalism around that seems to want to act like the errors of a former revolutionary in 1918 mean that they really should have been purged and disregarded as not counting towards the project of revolution in 1900.
don't be shitty . . . don't be patronizing.
Glass houses
i obviously don't think that it's an argument, i'm saying that being dismissive is not worthwhile. i am clearly implying that one should make an argument about what should be done instead of complaining "now do communism" from an armchair. i am clearly saying that i think people should present an argument.
Then don't call it an argument and just say what you mean the first time. Speaking as though it was being presented as an argument just detracts from whatever point you might like to make about how it was actually presented.
assume that i'm half capable of thinking and at least somewhat well-read, if you don't mind.
I assume that everyone is capable of thinking, but sure, I guess I'll also specifically assume you're well-read. It doesn't seem especially relevant to the point but perhaps it will be.
it's called a turn of phrase purpleworm. you said "isn't exactly what you want" framing is only good for voteblue apologetics. i'm saying "do communism" only sounds good and not being a pathetic radlib if you're an ultra.
I genuinely appreciate the radlib-ultra horseshoe theory, but I'd really say this is more in the radlib/baby left rhetorical wheelhouse than specifically ultras because ultras would stereotypically be too busy attacking him for being the mayor in the first place or something like that.
you're right, the best time to discuss whether a certain form of agitprop is entryism or not is in front of a stadium full of libs. that'll totally not alienate people with a u.s. education and liberal brainworms
He literally does do this and I think both of us have sat through hours of him doing that. I mentioned him at all because you sounded like you'd be a fan of his and
or maybe the guy with the career in agitprop has opinions that aren't exactly what you seem to think they are, or that you can disagree on strategy without resorting to calling someone an entryist or a tailist.
There is is. Anyway, I think this line of defense is silly because I can just say the same about Kautsky (who I'm assuming you have read about, per your request) or any other opportunist or similar figure.
that's not what i'm saying at all. it's like you didn't even try to understand my point, so i'll walk us through it . . .
I appreciate the walkthrough, and I mostly agree in the situation you outline, but notice I said "yes and" is useful on a "contingent" basis, not no basis. What Mamdani did here was cool and we should exploit things like that, we agree there. The relevance of my comment to the point that it was responding to is that Mamdani has also done plenty of shitty things, sometimes with pseudo-progressive spin and sometimes not really bothering, and we can't be so caught up in trying to ride waves that we get carried away, if you'll forgive the turn of phrase.
i will genuinely stop responding to you with this kind of critique
I appreciate the offer, but you can keep criticizing me, it's fine.
what is your organizing?
i appreciate the response. we can agree to disagree about one turkish agitpropist, but i'm going to point out that you didn't answer maybe the most important question. are you out there? do you have more effective agitprop tech that i need to know about that the "entryists" are denying me somehow? is the class-consciousness of the people being limited by hasan piker in a manner that has you banging your head into a wall?
because otherwise i have no idea why i should trust your judgment on when agitprop is opportunist a la Kautsky or meeting the people where they are in order to continue raising class consciousness bit by bit, action by action a la Lenin. especially to such a degree that you can conclude now that they are like Kautsky. i would say that the people in the imperial core are much less developed even than those proletarians that were being organized by Lenin and the social democratic party in 1902 at the time of "what is to be done?" and therefore agitprop for internet liberals is still going to be relatively entryist. Kautsky didn't split so much from Lenin that they could not be comrades until after the revolution had commenced over 15 years later.
It's like how this website's favorite streamer quote-mines Left Communism to deflect from criticisms of his definitely-not-entryism, it's a misappropriation from a completely different type of conversation.
If people don’t hold this same energy for Tucker Carlson they shouldn’t be talking about entryism
I don't understand what your point is. Do you think I don't have much worse things to say about the blatant white supremacist Christian nationalist Tucker Carlson? It's funny sometimes when he nails a neocon like with Ted Cruz or that recent interview with the ambassador to Israel, but ultimately when he tells the truth it's just opportunism and he wants a fascist ethnostate like they do, just a slightly different type of one (insofar as the difference isn't just careerist point-scoring).
I don't see what this has to do with entryism, but I hoped I covered your objection.
I wasn’t referring to you. In fact, while I don’t agree with the presentation of your argument here, I know you’re principled because I’ve seen your comments before. So you’re definitely not one of those people. I’m sorry if my comment made it seem that way
My bad, thanks for your patience 
Libs be like "maybe they like this headline because of his beard. I can't quite figure it out..."
Surely it's because someone did a tiktok dance about it, that's the only reason they'd favor this approach over one that gives them nothing.
Workers can have a little bit of class war, as a treat
Why can we never just be happy with how things are working out? This is fantastic news and I’m glad he was able to accomplish it. Let’s keep pushing and stop gatekeeping the path to victory because it isn’t instant.
Justice delayed is justice denied.