#681
UNUSUALY COOL
Post rating: ~

thirdplace posted:

i've never seen red/brown alliance advocacy in the wild tho, is it genuinely a thing?



no

#682
Dont Mess With Sucess
Post rating: +
That Sakai essay has me fired up on this however. They call for nationalizing eg. the railways, but if they are more "entertainers" than activists, then only their audience cares, and their audience has no power or strong material interest in these nationalizations. If it's true that they don't understand their own audience's push from the left against a Sanders 2020 campaign - that's damning! because their actual effect as a podcast is to lead their audience to the right on bourgeois leadership questions, one of the few things their audience has some actual position to affect. Idk I just feel like the entertainment industry has created hundreds of hours of legitimately great TV and film comedy that will sometimes even have good politics, that any emotionally drained leftist can lie back and ponder at a relaxed pace. So if CTH is not your primary news source (something I always felt was an argument in defense of The Daily Show, that nobody wanted to take up), then why do we need it for the sake of its entertainment value? Isn't that itself an incredibly bourgeois qualifier?
#683
UNUSUALY COOL
Post rating: +

cars posted:

thirdplace posted:

they think electing sanders or a sanders-like figure would be worthwhile, which is easy to sneer at

you can bury this lede if you want but this is the exact reason why the rude leftists you're talking about think they suck

all the other stuff you mention + this = the very definition of recuperation. "The Soviet Union is good, death to Israel, defend Syria against imperialism, now donate to this Democrat"



qft on the new page

#684
UNUSUALY COOL
Post rating: ~

swampman posted:

That Sakai essay has me fired up on this however. They call for nationalizing eg. the railways, but if they are more "entertainers" than activists, then only their audience cares, and their audience has no power or strong material interest in these nationalizations. If it's true that they don't understand their own audience's push from the left against a Sanders 2020 campaign - that's damning! because their actual effect as a podcast is to lead their audience to the right on bourgeois leadership questions, one of the few things their audience has some actual position to affect. Idk I just feel like the entertainment industry has created hundreds of hours of legitimately great TV and film comedy that will sometimes even have good politics, that any emotionally drained leftist can lie back and ponder at a relaxed pace. So if CTH is not your primary news source (something I always felt was an argument in defense of The Daily Show, that nobody wanted to take up), then why do we need it for the sake of its entertainment value? Isn't that itself an incredibly bourgeois qualifier?



^this is all correct

#685
Post rating: ~

cars posted:

thirdplace posted:

matt knows his marx better than most (if almost certainly not all) posters here

so do a bunch of do nothing rapist English professors holmes, it doesn't mean people on the left dislike them because of "resentment"

for the record, that wasn't meant to apply to anyone except people who post in a forum named "laissez faire." if a person is a serious communist organizer or has otherwise never developed the taste for laughing at the dark despair of capitalism there is no need to go searching for explanations! but why would you like the forum and not the podcast that rips it off??

(the answer here is probably that i'm living in the past and none of the people this critique would really apply to are still around)

#686
UNUSUALY COOL
Post rating: +
because the podcast thinks "electing sanders or a sanders-like figure would be worthwhile" and tries to turn advocacy of left positions into support for it
#687
Post rating: ~
it's funny i read and agree with almost everything you both post but i just realized i couldn't really describe either of your answers of what's to be done. do you seek revolution in the settler state or should the goal be to throttle it and mitigate its damage and give breathing room to oppressed nations domestic and abroad to progress on their own socialist trajectories? if it's the latter, how is sanders-style soc-demism really all that bad or dangerous? and if it's the former.... really?
#688
UNUSUALY COOL
Post rating: ~
most of the people with the sense of humor the current wave of democ podcasters adopted freely admit they find more common cause with dour serious tryhard Communists than center-right DSA podcasters who just use similar rhetoric, because the group where that rhetoric originated was stirred to use that provocative humor by genuine leftist & socialist politics

so they're always happy to see or hear that rhetoric used to promote left politics, but they think it's gross and dumb to use it to push for Sanders 2020, which shouldn't be a surprise and doesn't require thinking up a secret motive to explain it
#689
UNUSUALY COOL
Post rating: +

thirdplace posted:

it's funny i read and agree with almost everything you both post but i just realized i couldn't really describe either of your answers of what's to be done. do you seek revolution in the settler state or should the goal be to throttle it and mitigate its damage and give breathing room to oppressed nations domestic and abroad to progress on their own socialist trajectories? if it's the latter, how is sanders-style soc-demism really all that bad or dangerous? and if it's the former.... really?



it isn't required of anyone to advance a definitive answer to that question before they reject "elect more Democrats" as a solution, because Democrats act to promote imperialism and suppress revolutionary leftism with violence, Sanders included, and according to his public record as a legislator

#690
Dont Mess With Sucess
Post rating: +++++
At one point one of the CTH guys posted on Twitter (and here we praise the Communist architects who designed the twitter containment thread and the laborers who poured its enormous lead-alloy casket) of their frustration about being exactly what they are accused of in this thread, and basically asked "what is to be done" and I told them to promote Black Agenda Report and get people to help do online work for MIM (Prisons), and although I did not get a response, I'm sure my idea was immediately discussed and adopted by the hosts.
#691
UNUSUALY COOL
Post rating: +
i mean, there's a history here, and material history matters to socialists by definition. people know what "democratic socialism" does to the left (recuperate its politics while working to destroy it) because there's a century or so of experience with that, and also because the current DSA thing works exactly along those lines, with Sanders signing off on bills to bomb the world for the interests of the United States, Sanders mailers calling elected socialist leaders in the global south "dead Communist dictators", etc., pure beigeism cloaked in radical rhetoric

the reason why the fan base for these DSA podcasts is moving out ahead of the politics of the hosts is because their listeners have access to that history or at least eyes to see what's going on at the present moment, and they aren't restrained in how they understand or use their knowledge by financial ties to bourgeois party politics, so when the DSA types draw a line in the sand somewhere on the center-right and make fun of anyone who dares to think hard about what's going on, more and more of their fans are like Yeah no we'll stick to what we know to be true, we don't have "entertainment" careers riding on doing the opposite.

and as always, that has a lot more to do with their day-to-day experience of the material world than with diarrhea jokes on the radio
#692
Post rating: +
yeah obvi no democrat is to be trusted on foreign policy; sanders' fp record is why i never got excited about him or even voted for him when he was actually running. but a progressive dem vs. a neoliberal or a rightist on black america? undocumented people? on the drug war? i can definitely tell you that even just the party that picks the next couple supreme court justices could make a significant and meaningful difference in the sovereignty and, accordingly, the material reality of native peoples

it's a fine line because obviously if it becomes a focus, yes, it just sucks leftists into liberalism. but that shit is still real
#693
Dont Mess With Sucess
Post rating: +

thirdplace posted:

on the drug war?

...

but that shit is still real

Just to be a jerk, I'm going to repost this quote right after a couple CIA dudes whisper to President Sanders that stopping the drug war would immediately collapse the US economy

#694
Post rating: ~
the judges also would have accepted "the drug war is already over, capitalism won, aren't you happy"
#695
Post rating: ~

thirdplace posted:

i can definitely tell you that even just the party that picks the next couple supreme court justices could make a significant and meaningful difference in the sovereignty and, accordingly, the material reality of native peoples


when it comes to the question of whether it matters who is amerikan president, i generally find the 'supreme court appointments' argument the most convincing, because supreme court decisions do have a material impact on people's lives, and there is a substantive difference between liberal and conservative supreme court decisions on many subjects. having said that, i'm not sure why you single out native sovereignty as one of those subjects, because afaik the supreme court does not have a good track record on such matters regardless of who is sitting (for reasons i think are obvious). could you explain?

#696
Dont Mess With Sucess
Post rating: +

thirdplace posted:

the judges also would have accepted "the drug war is already over, capitalism won, aren't you happy"

Internal narcostates for some drugs and lifetime imprisonment for others is not my idea of ending the war...

#697
Post rating: ~

thirdplace posted:

i've never seen red/brown alliance advocacy in the wild tho, is it genuinely a thing? how could anyone be that fuckin stupid?


it's not real, it's just anticommunists taking molotov-ribbentrop as a talking point and time warping it forwards to attribute to tankies with absolutely no relation to anything that actually exists

e: oh there's another page

#698
[account deactivated]
#699
Post rating: +

tears posted:

im accusing them of being tools of the bourgioisie, real pieces of shit, social democracy is the left wing of fascism, send everyone who works in media to the coutryside, death to america, hail satan


#700
Post rating: +
chapo trap house is just harry potter
#701
Post rating: +
Harry Potter and the Insufferable Jokemen of Brooklyn
#702
Dont Mess With Sucess
Post rating: ~
#703
Post rating: ~
Now that twitter forces you to look at their stupid “Moments” by putting them right under the search bar, I’m convinced that they regularly use them for unlabeled native advertising, in violation of various Laws. They always hew closely to a format of “(PRODUCT) is out, and people are here for it”, or what have you. Probably an investigative story to be done there. If you're a journalist reading this you can send me $5 for giving you the idea.
#704
Poronto
Post rating: +

thirdplace posted:

i've never seen red/brown alliance advocacy in the wild tho, is it genuinely a thing? how could anyone be that fuckin stupid?



there are a small clique of self-assured weirdos who use events like "justine tunney went alt right" "julian assange is a libertarian" "prominent PSL guy goes on russia today" "baked alaska shows up at WWP rally" as evidence to support a kind of hyper-TWist theory about how middle class white leftoids have the same material class interests as middle class white nationalists therefore their activities are aesthetic variations on the same phenomenon and must necessarily converge. they are fairly correct about the remnants of Occupy and those cyber-anarchist sorts, so i kinda bought their line abt PSL and WWP till last week when a bit of investigation revealed it was conspiratorial horseshit. sorry cars

#705
Post rating: ~

Petrol posted:

thirdplace posted:

i can definitely tell you that even just the party that picks the next couple supreme court justices could make a significant and meaningful difference in the sovereignty and, accordingly, the material reality of native peoples

when it comes to the question of whether it matters who is amerikan president, i generally find the 'supreme court appointments' argument the most convincing, because supreme court decisions do have a material impact on people's lives, and there is a substantive difference between liberal and conservative supreme court decisions on many subjects. having said that, i'm not sure why you single out native sovereignty as one of those subjects, because afaik the supreme court does not have a good track record on such matters regardless of who is sitting (for reasons i think are obvious). could you explain?


I only single it out because of my personal professional interest and a couple nailbiter decisions lately (dollar general, in particular, which affirmed a decision stating that tribal courts can hear civil cases over non-tribal members who enter close consensual relationships with tribes, which should have been an easy basket under existing case law but only affirmed as a 4-4 decision because scalia's dead-ass hadn't been replaced yet). there are probably far better examples out there, particularly given how untrustworthy gingberg and breyer are on indian law cases

#706
Post rating: ~
and even more than the supreme court shit, i still think medicare for all would be meaningfully good for a lot of people who deserve it
#707
Black Belt
Post rating: ~

thirdplace posted:

it's funny i read and agree with almost everything you both post but i just realized i couldn't really describe either of your answers of what's to be done. do you seek revolution in the settler state or should the goal be to throttle it and mitigate its damage and give breathing room to oppressed nations domestic and abroad to progress on their own socialist trajectories? if it's the latter, how is sanders-style soc-demism really all that bad or dangerous? and if it's the former.... really?



yes. is this a serious question?

#708
Black Belt
Post rating: +

thirdplace posted:

yeah obvi no democrat is to be trusted on foreign policy; sanders' fp record is why i never got excited about him or even voted for him when he was actually running. but a progressive dem vs. a neoliberal or a rightist on black america? undocumented people? on the drug war? i can definitely tell you that even just the party that picks the next couple supreme court justices could make a significant and meaningful difference in the sovereignty and, accordingly, the material reality of native peoples

it's a fine line because obviously if it becomes a focus, yes, it just sucks leftists into liberalism. but that shit is still real



clinton did more material harm to black and indigenous people in the US than any president in the past 50 years and idk why the line 'democrats are less bad' gets any traction here. for more id recommend this

#709
Post rating: +
#710
Post rating: ~
white people are at it again

#711
Post rating: ~

JohnBeige posted:

thirdplace posted:

it's funny i read and agree with almost everything you both post but i just realized i couldn't really describe either of your answers of what's to be done. do you seek revolution in the settler state or should the goal be to throttle it and mitigate its damage and give breathing room to oppressed nations domestic and abroad to progress on their own socialist trajectories? if it's the latter, how is sanders-style soc-demism really all that bad or dangerous? and if it's the former.... really?

yes. is this a serious question?


i think if there was an attempted amerikkkan revolution under anything resembling current conditions the material and ideological power of white settler culture would cause it to be quickly defeated by a fascist counterrevolution which would subsequently implement eliminationist policies to protect itself from future revolutions through methods which would make the brutal domestic liberal containment efforts of the last hundred years look downright humane (instead, following the template of the century prior to that). ergo the goal of socialism should be to change the current conditions via the other option i suggested. that's just me tho

#712
UNUSUALY COOL
Post rating: ~

littlegreenpills posted:

there are a small clique of self-assured weirdos who use events like "justine tunney went alt right" "julian assange is a libertarian" "prominent PSL guy goes on russia today" "baked alaska shows up at WWP rally" as evidence to support a kind of hyper-TWist theory about how middle class white leftoids have the same material class interests as middle class white nationalists therefore their activities are aesthetic variations on the same phenomenon and must necessarily converge. they are fairly correct about the remnants of Occupy and those cyber-anarchist sorts, so i kinda bought their line abt PSL and WWP till last week when a bit of investigation revealed it was conspiratorial horseshit. sorry cars



whatever this was it didn't translate into any action on the ground. people who are just, like, "stalinist capitalist monarchists" on the Internet will never count for anything because they do nothing. put Reds into the same place as fascists ever since fascism emerged, the Reds will fight the fascists, which is both cool and good

#713
UNUSUALY COOL
Post rating: ~
btw, the Democrat Party of United States should be destroyed.
#714
Dont Mess With Sucess
Post rating: ~

swampman posted:
#715
Dont Mess With Sucess
Post rating: ~

swampman posted:

swampman posted:
#716
Post rating: +
have chapo trap house ever denouced amerika as a white settler parasite nation founded on the greatest ever genocide, that must be destroyed ?
#717
Post rating: +

swampman posted:


#718
[account deactivated]
#719
Post rating: +

sovnarkoman posted:

white people are at it again



Why would anyone use twitter? This is some dumb shit and we have to compete for social media "influence" with this person in the most neoliberal way possible

#720
Black Belt
Post rating: ~

thirdplace posted:

JohnBeige posted:
thirdplace posted:
it's funny i read and agree with almost everything you both post but i just realized i couldn't really describe either of your answers of what's to be done. do you seek revolution in the settler state or should the goal be to throttle it and mitigate its damage and give breathing room to oppressed nations domestic and abroad to progress on their own socialist trajectories? if it's the latter, how is sanders-style soc-demism really all that bad or dangerous? and if it's the former.... really?

yes. is this a serious question?


i think if there was an attempted amerikkkan revolution under anything resembling current conditions the material and ideological power of white settler culture would cause it to be quickly defeated by a fascist counterrevolution which would subsequently implement eliminationist policies to protect itself from future revolutions through methods which would make the brutal domestic liberal containment efforts of the last hundred years look downright humane (instead, following the template of the century prior to that). ergo the goal of socialism should be to change the current conditions via the other option i suggested. that's just me tho


living in the future! feeling wonderful!




But culture follows material reality, not the other way around, and we have to fight on both fronts in the course of building revolution. No one argues Rev is tomorrow and thus it'll be in today's world, even you acgnowledged that this is a long term activity. If so, then the world must look different when the rev does occur, unless one believes in the end of history still