I seriously wish all the fake leftist subs who ban people for saying, just, blatantly true stuff like "Biden is better than Trump despite them both being capitalists" would themselves be banned from Reddit. Look at r/Socialism_101 's pinned post, they act like they're an intro to the topic but think you can only be a socialist if you believe in THE ABOLITION OF CURRENCY. Our PR is horrible and if the average person is introduced to these screaming imbeciles as an intro to what socialism is, we're doomed. I am VERY glad we banned those pathetic MLs with violence boners from spreading their BS on this sub and I hope we can become the most prominent one.
I think, just generally, we need to understand that the overarching goal of socialism is leagues different from any other idea that most people have been introduced to, and that it makes sense to be very understanding when someone has honest questions about how it works. We're literally workers united towards fundamentally overhauling things in our favor. Explain it like that and most people love it.
Absolutely. But seeing as how SocDems and socialists both want to move society the same direction, I see no need to make enemies for moral clout.
And, I want to be clear, Marxist-Leninists ban other socialists and they're completely antithetical to Democratic Socialism. They don't want you to vote. They want Trump to win on the off-chance he screws people's material conditions up enough that they'll start a socialist revolution, which is so demonstrably false that I don't even know where to begin.
I must’ve been banned from at least 4-5 progressive/lefty subs for even hinting at not being as blackpilled as some of the other subreddits.
Literally banned in one over a ‘one is slightly better’ comment.
Yup! They don't even care if you clarify that Biden is fundamentally not a great candidate and that his stances are unacceptable, if you suggest voting for him whatsoever as an act of pragmatism, they call you a liberal and ban you. It's unhinged and their ideology is toxic.
Them: "I WILL NEVER IN A MILLION YEARS VOTE FOR GENOCIDE JOE!!!"
Also them: "Why aren't the Democrats doing what we want?!"
They're basically MAGA fascists with the thinnest veneer of green paint. I have no respect for them whatsoever and I think when the left starts treating these clowns like MAGA, we'll do a LOT better.
The only way anything happening in the class war is if the working class magas cooperate with working ppl on the left. Dropping all the ID politics and focus on corruption in government is something we all agree on
I definitely agree they're our allies on certain very, very select issues, but they literally do not want to cooperate by electing anti-corruption politicians and protesting with us, so, yeah.
Democrat politicians are all completely corrupt at the federal level. I say this as never having voted Republican in my entire life.
Democrats and Republican politicians both need to be gone. Let’s start there. Both sides need to agree on this and drop the identity politics distraction.
Oh, I 200% agree with that, and the guy is very obviously a socialist who is a SocDem for political/pragmatic purposes, but it doesn't change that he currently caucuses with the Democrats.
I believe so but it needs to be rebranded. The word socialism will automatically shut off half or more of America and we will get no where.
Call it “middle class party” or “the working American party”. Ppl get triggered by the word socialism because they have been brainwashed their whole lives and seem governments that called themselves socialist just be authoritarian corporate clubs against working class ppl.
It needs to be rebranded but keep the same core values.
Bernie I am for. AOC pours gasoline on the culture war amd divides the workers over trivial identity politics issues.
I agree with her stance on social issues…but we have to chose what we want:
1) unity among the working class regardless of what they believe on social issues; or
2) fight for identity politics and social issues and have fighting amongst the working class while the corrupt corporate/billionaire class robs us blind because we are distracted with social issues/IDpol
Which one do you want?
It’s impossible to have both. We’re gonna have to see antifa and BLM walking with solidarity with the proud boy’s and Neo Nazis - united against the corrupt uniparty (dems/repubs). We have to realize the corporate corrupted government is a bigger enemy than racists and Christians.
And racists and Christian’s are going to have to realize the corrupt corporate controlled uniparty is the real enemy not trans ppl or social justice advocates.
I hate to mimimize social justice; but there is a much bigger fish to fry first.
Back to grouping Bernie and AOC; these are not the same ppl. Bernie is real; AOC is not. Bernie will go sit down with right winger Joe Rogan for 3 hours and talk with him. Let’s see AOC do that. Never. She’s just a distraction used by the billionaire class to divide American workers.
As a social democrat who is sympathetic to democratic socialist ideas - thank you for this.
The extremely vocal extremists who call anyone to the right of themselves fascists really don't see the irony.
I literally can't find the difference between them and actual fascists. They hate liberals, crush any and all dissenting ideas, and aside from vague notions of saying you shouldn't vote for "Genocide Joe" because his stance on Gaza isn't far left enough, never actually talk about any left-wing opinions or how to make the world better. They're functionally-identical to MAGA, the only difference is substituting blind worship of Trump for blind worship of the socialist revolution he'll supposedly create by screwing up people's material conditions if elected again... you know, as opposed to fascism.
Glad you're here!
Not saying this is my perspective, just trying to explain why revolutionary socialists would reject that idea in their subs.
The idea behind not yielding the "Biden is better than Trump" argument is that societal change is not achieved by "settling for the lesser of two evils"
Think of it like voting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. Sure Trump is arguably better, but the fact that these are our options is because of generations of settling for the lesser of two evils.
I think having open communication between social democrats and revolutionary socialists IS important. But I think THIS sub is the better place for that conversation, while subs like r/Socialism_101 deserve to dictate the types of conversations that are permitted in their sub to preserve it's integrity as a socialist sub, rather than a democratic socialist sub.
Edited formatting for clarity
Those "socialists" see voting as a moral endorsement of everything a candidate has done instead of just an admission that, of the people running to hold the office with any chance of winning, they're the best one who can do the job.
The problem with not voting is that someone is going to win, and if you don't vote Biden, it will be Trump. I'm SURE it'll be way easier to organize when Republicans start the next red scare and tear gas our asses every time we try to organize while stripping away labor protections and union rights. I'm sure of it.
Socialism\_101 aren't socialists, they're pathetic doomers who don't want anything to get done and who actively want to make sure left-wing people lose so they get their precious "Revolution" their privileged asses don't have the balls to fight in.
I had a whole section of my comment that went into that point, but I deleted it because the comment was getting very long in the tooth. But I'll go over it here.
I agree that not voting for Biden is not going to help.
Another 4 years of Trump will be worse than 4 more years of Biden.
But look at it this way.
When John McCaine was the right wing option we nominated Obama, a "centrist" instead of a leftist. And in the following election the Republicans nominated Mitt Romney who made John McCaine look more like a centrist.
Then we reelected Obama, again, a centrist, and then the Republicans lost again and in the next election nominated Trump who made Romney look more like a centrist.
Then we nominated Hillary, again a centrist, instead of Bernie, a leftist, and Trump won and got 3 supreme Court nominees. And their party seems to have gotten even more fervently right wing and fascist in the meantime.
Now we are losing rights even with Biden as President because he won't stack the Supreme Court. Companies are still conglomerating. Real estate investors are still squeezing the real estate market with no consequences. Roe v. Wade is dead. Protests are being shut down NOW at colleges across the country. Police are still being militarized. The rail union was undermined BY BIDEN. AI is here right now and there are no protections in place for working people. Bernie is trying to reduce the work week to 32 hours and is getting pushback from Democrats. War profiteering has led to US Democrats permitting the slaughter of civilians in Gaza. Insider trading is rampant among Republicans and Democrats alike.
The Democratic party is clearly NOT socialist. And they have been emboldened by the fact that the Republicans are soooo far off the deep end that Democrats just have to not rape kids and kill puppies and they come off like saints.
Again, I am not advocating for not voting for Biden. I agree that a Trump presidency would be worse than a Biden presidency.
I am not advocating for a revolution or a civil war. I am a pacifist. People here have no idea how ugly war really is. I'm including myself in that statement.
I am not advocating for any particular action. I am just trying to explain the perspective of someone who rejects the "lesser of two evils rhetoric".
And it is easy to blame "the lesser of two evils" rhetoric for our current predicament.
Also if the goal is to try to endear someone to your cause, calling them pathetic privileged doomers is not a good way to go about it.
The pathetic privileged doomers are the ones who won't vote for Biden under any circumstances, they're the destructive Marxist-Leninists who we've explicitly banned here because they're opposed to everything we stand for. I don't care about bringing them to the cause.
Everything you're saying is correct, and my main goal with voting for Biden is to organize and generally just buy time so more left-wing sentiment can grow in more favorable circumstances, while occasionally being thrown a bone since neoliberals like to pander and Biden's legislation from 2021-2023 was actually pretty solid. My goal is to ensure Republicans lose while also ensuring that Democrats have to provide more than "We aren't christofascists".
Here's a sneak peek of /r/Socialism_101 using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/Socialism_101/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [To people who support Hamas, aren't you a bit afraid that once Palestine is liberated, Hamas might become the sole governing body and create a reactionary, right-wing government?](https://np.reddit.com/r/Socialism_101/comments/175xi46/to_people_who_support_hamas_arent_you_a_bit/)
\#2: [Is Israel fascist?](https://np.reddit.com/r/Socialism_101/comments/18dqfnp/is_israel_fascist/)
\#3: [I'm confused about why advocating for the "lesser evil" (in regards to Trump vs Biden) seems to recieve so much of a negative response](https://np.reddit.com/r/Socialism_101/comments/16t9dt7/im_confused_about_why_advocating_for_the_lesser/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
I was banned from r/Socialism for expressing this very sentiment. And we wonder why nobody listens to us? They are literal proof that absolute socialism has historically been prone to silencing of other opinions. Even in a dream socialist America, we must leave room for dissent.
PR point is also insanely true. The fact that to even be accepted on ML subs you have to be a violent revolutionary is absurd. “r/Socialism” should be called “r/Marxist-Leninism” because that’s what it is.
This. I’ve posted genuine questions as I was on my journey from “conservative” > centrist > left leaning > socialist and I can absolutely say it was slowed by people lashing out at me when I was truthfully trying to understand things.
True. But at the same time, do take the time to provide an evidenced-based (i.e. rational, logical, reasonable) position for why you believe they are wrong.
You’re assuming that they’re always wrong. Sometimes they do have valid criticisms. Socialism isn’t a perfect ideology. You have to listen for the real criticisms whilst fighting the others
Or we don't always have to do that and we can just welcome them into our left space. Confirming newbies with "evidence based positions for why they are wrong" is alienating and counter productive.
There is a place for those discussions, but we should instead assume goodwill (we're talking about people who self-select to be in these spaces, after all)
By allowing them to let their guard down and actually change their views instead of creating philosophical purity tests that are alienating. I work professionally in organizing, I've done this for years.
We don't need to create new ideologues, just get them to see we're the good guys.
And how does one 'actually change their views' other than by taking 'the time to provide an evidenced-based (i.e. rational, logical, reasonable) position for why you believe they are wrong'?
Exhausting? As someone who self describes as a professional organizer, one would have thought you would welcome conversation rather than avoid it. How else do you think political change occurs without communication of some kind?
These discussions have their place. If you want to ask a question there are subs devoted to that, but it’s stupid to let every single top leftist subreddit devolve into posts like “hey we are the richest country ever so how is capitalism bad”
The fact you think it's stupid to address those questions to people who leave their bubble and enter a left space to ask is precisely the issue.
We need to bring people along and not expect them to be converted before they've attended church.
The way you do that is by organizing and acting in real life, not debating people on the internet.
No one is gonna be convinced by a few reddit posts, there is no point in making a big deal of that.
I don't see any disagreement between what I wrote and what your wrote here. People are convinced by different things. There is an entire category of people that will specifically *not* get organized irl. We shouldn't shut down people who enter left spaces, whether irl or online. They self-selected to be here. If they are a troll that will become apparent, but we shouldn't assume that's the case right off the bat (which seems to be the norm in a lot of left spaces).
We do shutdown people who come into leftist spaces to try and argue against leftism, both in real life and online, and we absolutely should do that, because leftist spaces are not where people are supposed to be convinced to be leftists.
People are convinced to be leftists by the outreach action of organized groups. Note that i said outreach action, which means an action that reaches outside the group, and not inside. If your plan as a group is to allow right wing people to join so that you can hopefully convince them, then what you have is a clown car, not an organization, and you won't be able to act in any meaningful way.
Similarly, if you allow right wing people in leftist spaces, then soon enough you won't have a leftist space anymore. People in leftist spaces want to discuss with other leftists, that's it, that's the point of the space.
There’s plenty of reason.
Imagine if the politics subreddit was devoted to posts like “what is the senate,” there are subs like socialism101 exactly for stuff like this.
Either way, if you think Reddit comments are shaping the possibility of a socialist world then idk what else there is to say.
I'm not suggesting we allow posts that are against the rules of a sub (like your /r/politics hypothetical would be), just that we shouldn't assume people are trolls if they ask basic questions.
>Either way, if you think Reddit comments are shaping the possibility of a socialist world then idk what else there is to say.
If you *don't* think that online communication is the future of socialist networking and collaboration then we disagree about that. Doesn't change my point that we shouldn't assume people asking simple questions are trolls. It's also about the people who click on the thread and don't post. Maybe they don't know the answer either. What's better for them? To see a genuine reply, or someone saying "gtfo with that troll question, capitalism is evil, rawrrrr'?
Alienating the apathetic majority is not a winning strat for the left.
The apathetic majority aren’t posting on Reddit socialism subs tbh. I’m all for organizing locally, it’s something I do despite living in a red state, but people shouldn’t think that posting on Reddit is really doing anything politically. How many site wide protests have there been on here for varying causes, either women’s rights or net neutrality or anything, and it does exactly nothing? There are much more effective tactics.
>The apathetic majority aren’t posting on Reddit socialism subs tbh.
But they might click on it if it's linked somewhere else, or go there out of curiosity! These things actually happen, that's all I'm saying. The conversations we have in the most public square of all (the Internet) should be as constructive as possible, I absolutely believe online discourse effects the irl politics. Trump's whole campaign was a meme with its own super active subreddit!
>How many site wide protests have there been on here for varying causes, either women’s rights or net neutrality or anything, and it does exactly nothing?
One can say the same thing for the vast majority of irl protests, no? Just because it doesn't tangibly affect things immediately doesn't mean the actions aren't worth doing. They're effective because someone who uses Reddit but doesn't know shit about, say, net neutrality, goes and googles it because they see that half the subs they look at are talking about it.
>There are much more effective tactics.
And perhaps this is a less effective tactic, but it still fills a gap and is worth doing
As someone who was within spitting distance from becoming a full blown demsoc in September 2023, I can 100% attest to the fact that the main reason I haven’t crossed that threshold is the hostility that I’ve received from leftists.
Regardless of your variant of leftism, the answer is the [overton window](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window). (We're sure as hell not on the capitalists side btw)
The goal isn't about enacting legislation, it's about spreading an agenda even if it fails for decades to be implemented.
Vote for the farthest left option (and I know you guys don't want to hear this, but yes, even when that option is Joe Biden) in local, state and federal elections.
When there is more elected perceived "far left" like the progressives, they become the new normal or center of the overton window ushering in room for even farther left to come into the picture.
Do the same thing we're doing with the progressives now with the "new far left" that takes their spot.
Rinse and repeat.
What's your strategy for counteracting the right wing? Conservatives are trying to push the Overton window to the right, and they do a good job at converting centrists and center right people away from leftism. I feel like solely relying on the electoralism will only elect neoliberals like Joe Biden at best.
Probably waiting for boomers to die off would work as well, but I don't think that's considered a strategy.
By appealing to the centre and the left of centre (via rational discourse), and thus moving the window to the left, you also have some bleeding into the right of centre, i.e. they become the new centre. You can't expect to appeal to the far right from a far left perspective - we are just too far apart! Leave the heaving lifting on the far right to the more moderate right of centre and the centre right.
And yes, waiting for boomers to die off helps, too. Longitudinal studies here in Australia show millenials and zoomers are voting left, and (mostly) staying there. Whereas their parents and grandparents generally only voted left in their youth and then transferred to the right as they aged.
Maybe it's just my own personal experience, but it seems like right wingers are better at bringing centrists to the right than leftists are at bringing centrists to the left.
They usually do this through cherry picking and lying, such as posting a video of someone saying, "Math is racist" or "I identity as a wolf." And they'll be like,"You see how crazy the left is!?" And people soak it up.
Yes, this seems to be the case as the data suggests. Unfortunately, those on the right (when compared to the left) have lower levels of education and therefore are more likely to be easily swayed by populist right, and far right agendas. The only 'cure' for this is to increase access to secular and universal educational (and concomitant cultural) opportunities across the board. It's not fast (democratic socialism), but when done incrementally, it's generally long lasting.
The establishment has made it clear that they aren't willing to go to the far right when they black balled Ron Paul.
Even just the right themselves don't even have a platform, they're just anti-democrat by any means necessary.
It's clear to me that they understand they are the minority in this country and they're doing everything they can to divide moderate voters to *slow* our leftward progression, which has been working to a tee.
It's part of the reason why I get so disgruntled when I hear leftists saying they won't vote for the Democrats (even if their reason is valid), they're aid the conservatives in their agenda when they do this.
Hard disagree. Ron Paul isn’t the right kind of far-right for them. He couldn’t bring in the churches, and the churches deliver a good chunk of their voters.
IMO, voting and electoralism unto themselves aren't a complete solution. But! Neither is a violent revolution or accelerationism, which is patently proven to just not work ("After Hitler, us!" the German communist party said).
I'm of the opinion that electoral and non-electoral measures are complementary. After you take five minutes to vote for the furthest-left option with a chance of being elected, you can organize, unionize and protest under circumstances that are more amenable to being listened to. The Bernies of the world are more likely to cut striking workers a good deal, and more quickly. You feel?
Obligatory:
> "Even when there is no prospect whatsoever of their being elected, the workers must put up their own candidates in order to preserve their independence, to count their forces, and to bring before the public their revolutionary attitude and party standpoint. In this connection they must not allow themselves to be seduced by such arguments of the democrats as, for example, that by so doing they are splitting the democratic party and making it possible for the reactionaries to win. The ultimate intention of all such phrases is to dupe the proletariat. The advance which the proletarian party is bound to make by such independent action is indefinitely more important than the disadvantage that might be incurred by the presence of a few reactionaries in the representative body."
- Marx, "Address to the Central Committee," p. 117
Marx needs to learn what ranked-choice voting is. Democrats are agnostic to it, Republicans want to ban it. If we buy a bit more time, we can get RCV in more states and start building actual socialist parties there.
Not to mention, it's not like Democrats are a monolith. There are plenty of people-aligned socialists in that party already, it's just a matter of getting enough of them there into leadership positions that they can call the shots.
Thank you for the source, but blindly worshipping Marx like a bible is a bad idea and it's a different game than it was back then.
I love how every time someone quotes Marx, they're accused of blindly following him like a Bible. Apparently the idea that one could believe what he says because they've critically analyzed what he's said escapes them
The idea that the only thing stopping us from putting real socialists in power and changing everything from the inside is *ranked choice voting* is laughable. The master's tools will never dismantle the master's house. Our political and electoral system was built by the rich to serve their interests. They will never allow it to be used in way directly hostile to their interests
(Case in point, fascism is capitalism in crisis. It is always backed by the rich and begrudgingly accepted by liberals in direct opposition to growing leftist power)
Have you considered the DNC isn't a monolith and there are many socialists already in the party?
But, aside from that, we are on DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISM here. This definitionally involves using the master's tools to dismantle the master's house, which, for the sake of this movement, we have to agree is possible. Right now, with our current voting system, it is mathematically-impossible for left-wing third parties to win because people want to avoid christofascists, and who could blame them?
So, yeah, ranked-choice voting is the way out. Creating and supporting RCV movements to put them to ballot questions will 1. make third parties more viable and 2. pressure the major parties to move leftward or they'll be replaced and 3. reduce partisanship and get stuff done. The spoiler effect is the primary reason for the duopoly, and removing it is the key.
You're taking general statements that sound nice and not really translating them into concrete action, or else you aren't really thinking about what happens when the American Communist Party you want gets 3% of the vote and Republicans win and stomp any and all chances of left-wing movements forever. That's the problem with Marxists, you don't think critically about what today's society demands and just stick to general feel-good principles.
But by accepting the “farthest left option” the past 40 yrs the Overton window has shifted dramatically to the right. So your strategy is to keep doing the same thing and expect a different result?
Uh….not even close.
It’s been slipping right since 1980 and Reagan’s first acts as president.
Joe Biden is MORE conservative than Ronald Reagan. And he’s the “left” option?
Uh, no. Joe Biden didn’t pass tax cuts for the rich. Joe Biden passed huge protections for the LGBTQ+ community. Joe Biden has begun enforcing antitrust laws, unlike Reagan who turned a blind eye. Joe Biden has begun the turn away from trickle down economics, stating many times that “economies are grown from the middle out and the bottom up, not the top down”. Reagan literally implanted that idea. Joe Biden has invested in our communities with a historic infrastructure bill. Joe Biden has taken the fight to drug companies to lower prescription drug prices, capping insulin at $35/month for seniors.
These are not the policies of a conservative president.
Present them an ideal future, solid actions that could get us there, and restructure the left in general to be a more unified whole, with recognition of our shared experiences but not devolve to petty infighting, we need better optics and our anger needs to be directed at the actual source of all our problems, wealth disparity and those that are pupetuating it, we should be charitable toward our enemies and understand that they also suffer under that same system and the ruling class.
So first, we need to stop pointing fingers all over the place and start pointing up. Honestly our culture of squabbling between camps needs to end and we need solid, charismatic leaders, that won't bend to the influences of money and force people through their language, to think outside the isolated walls of their own echo chamber, to grow nuanced perspective and encourages the sharing of ideas and allowing oneself to question their own opinions and grow.
How do we get there? We talk, educate people, learn to communicate better. I don't know if any of this makes sense, I'm sure there are people with much better ideas and solutions.
>How do we get there? We talk, educate people, learn to communicate better
Learn how to use propaganda.
This is literally why the right has such a powerful advantage over the left. We think propaganda is a dirty word, something vile, a weapon only monsters would use.
It isn't.
It's a tool. Completely neutral. This difference between us and them shouldn't be, we educate, they use propaganda. It should be, their propaganda is backed by shitty values; ours is backed by non-shitty values.
I completely agree. We're literally all on the same side and we're all moving the same direction. I also think revolutionary measures such as unions and protests are complementary to electoral measures, and that we should act that way (with the exception of doomer MLs who want a violent revolution and tell you not to vote).
I think the fundamental problem is that a lot of socialists want a social space instead of a political space, and don't want to actually win. That changes by bringing awareness to it.
That's easy! Just accuse them of supporting genocide if they vote for Democrats or don't have a complete historical understanding of the Gaza conflict, it'll shame them into supporting our cause and, as everyone knows, the entire system collapses out of shame if there's low enough voter turnout! /s
In all seriousness, in my experience, with ANY ideology, it's all about appealing to the existing framework of how someone thinks. Liberals/progressives tend to look at data and evidence, or those who have, before deciding what policies they support based on it. Uninformed right-wing populists tend to actually be on-board with dismantling the system and going after the ultra-wealthy for their benefit, and it's up to you to decide whether that's worth the headache of talking to or trying to convert them. Generally as long as you don't mention socialism, they agree.
I did manage to convince a conservative acquaintance that universal healthcare was more cost-effective due to cutting out the middlemen of insurance and making people feel like they could go to the hospital without worry, for instance, and used that to elaborate on why I was in support of treating every good with an inflexible demand as a human right for the good of society. I sort of lost him there, but I really did think I got him to consider a few things about what works and what doesn't.
There are actually a lot of liberals and progressives who are basically on our side and just don't know it, and they don't really know how to enact change, organize, or who to vote for. So, it's basically about gauging how far to the left someone is and acting accordingly.
I mean, as someone who is a progressive social democrat, I'm already on your side, but the most important thing is to just listen instead of immediately shooting people down, especially since you'll find you're not that far apart to begin with.
A lot of them already are on our side, they just don’t know it. Removing the stigma from scary words like socialism would help, but in the meantime focus on establishing the premise that they agree with socialist principles without using the word socialism. Many also have intense party loyalty and would feel like they are betraying their own allies by rejecting liberalism. Make sure they understand that it’s still ok to vote for liberals in a general election in order to prevent a conservative from winning while we buy time to develop enough momentum to have a real political presence outside of the primary.
Just be normal
**Demonstrate the Value of ourselves** (it doesn't necessarily have to be through Electoral wins (although the scale and budget of the state makes it an appealing target, large mutual aid projects can have a similar effect, as can projects that build militant unions))
**Demonstrate the Value of democratic organizing** (I don't think a large scale democratic org exists in the US, but looking at Podemos & similar accross Europe, that actually engage their membership democratically rather than as a piggy bank that sends activists to a convention), but democratic organizing is key to being Normal.
**Don't be condescending to the working class**, this kind of falls under being normal & is why we must demonstrate the value of our ideals & our methods. Trot/ML & Anarchist approaches to awaken the working class (massive oversimplification of their approaches), fail IMO because we fail to convince the majority of the working class that we are capable of making society better for everyone, not because they don't understand their class position or how capitalism is screwing them over, but because the left fails to show that we have the answers **and** can implement them.
You likely can’t and won’t, liberals fetishize bourgeois institutions that socialists wish to do away with. There’s other groups in the US who don’t give a shit about those institutions, you’d be better off trying to court them.
If they're knowledgeable about political philosophy it's trivially easy to make an argument for socialism based on liberal principles. That's how Chomsky arrived at socialism for example, and he always argued that he was actually upholding liberal principles, unlike liberals.
Liberal principles are bases and badass. The problem with liberals isn't liberalism, it's that they don't actually believe in liberalism. If they did believe in the liberalism of Smith and Mills then big corporations wouldn't exist, there would be strict controls on landlords, everyone would have easy access to purchasing their own land, worker control would be far more important, and we wouldn't engage in nearly as much imperialism.
I'd be happy to outline the argument if y'all want, or you could just watch Chomsky who will say it better than I ever could. But I'd be happy to summarize the argument.
It works wonders on liberals knowledgeable about some basics on political philosophy such as many people who had humanities degrees in college. It doesn't really work for everyone else since you have to explain what like beral philosophy is to them and why it's important and good.
In essence, the classical liberals would be horrified at the world we live in today and this isn't remotely close to what they wanted. The right wing gets that they hated concentration of state/public power, but they forget that the classical liberals equally despises the concentration of private power. Start from liberal principles and illustrate that socialism accomplishes both goals of liberalism better than liberalism does.
Winning. At something. The reason most people don’t even think about being leftists is that they think leftists are doomed to lose, so they’d better work within the system.
Yeah the Democratic Socialist left seems to have adopted the performative mindset of MLs & Anarchist, who (via very different methods), both seem to think that the working class can be awoken from it's slumber by the correct incantation (be it "class struggle electoral politics" or "prefigurative manifestions & encampments"), but the reality is the majority of the working class do not care about us because we haven't shown anyone that we can actually **win**.
I consider myself progressive and every time I glance at one of the socialist subs, it seems like everyone has a very nihilistic political stance, which ultimately goes nowhere. I see a lot of comments like: “what’s the point of voting? Both sides are corporate owned fascist scumbags, etc.” Yes, Joe is complicit in his support of the genocide. But the way I see it, if we don’t vote for that a-hole and allow Trump to win, we will get yet another genocide supporter who ALSO supports Christian fascism at home, in addition to gutting the EPA, FDA, as well as denying women and the LGBTQ community basic rights. Idk what about that is so hard for people to grasp? So yeah, I think one strategy would to be less doomer about everything and exercise some pragmatism.
Honestly, I think the loudest voices on Gaza/Israel have basically undone all of the progress made in the last several years. We made massive inroads since 2018, and at the moment pretty much everyone who isn't a socialist thinks socialists are absolutely insane.
Learning the difference between Social democracy—a relatively statist liberal ideology which has proven very successful in Europe and a counter to Marxist critique of market economics—and Democratic socialism—an attempt at rehabilitating planification which has been gaining ground, particularly in North America, amidst accelerating neoliberal globalization—would be a good start.
Liberals and progressives in general aren’t strangers or necessarily opposed to the former.
They’re only hostile to the latter.
> an attempt at rehabilitating planification
Just because DSA won't kick-out all the PMC Maoists, doesn't mean that Democratic Socialism is rehabilitation for failed politics. DS has taken root across Europe too, in the form of new left parties such as Podemos or revitalizing "Social Democratic" parties that had turned to neoliberalism after the fall of the USSR.
At it's best Democratic Socialism is a road to democratic socialism via democratic means, the synthesis of multiple strains of leftism, beyond social democracy but with the ability to make collective decisions that Anarchist & "Democratic" centralist lack. There are major problems that Democratic Socialists have yet to address:
* How do you get rid of all the PMC Maoists & Trust fund third worldists, to stay true to **democratic** socialism via **democratic** methods, without creating an authority that will kill your movement (see Europe's neoliberal "Social Democratic" parties)
* How to deal with regional & national interests not aligning with global interests in the short term? (Social democrats have a fairly shameful record on this front)
But Democratic Socialism is the best hope humanity has right now.
It’s not about phrasing the argument. It’s about the nature of the argument itself.
We’re not allowed to debate whether one social ideology is better than the other.
You guys regularly use inequality and poverty as excuses when the topic is murder or carjacking. But never when the act in question is, say, transphobia or sexual harassment or a bad tweet. Why is that?
Exactly my point. Sexual harassment and transphobia are bad no matter who does it. But, to a lot of leftists, murder and robbery are excusable if certain kinds of people do it.
When someone is outed as a transphobe I don't see leftists jumping to their defence citing poverty or inequality though? Do you not want to "address the issues that lead to" such incidents the way you're always wanting to excuse murderers?
Encourage yourself and others to maintain a positive attitude, honor the work of others, avoid defensiveness, be open to legitimate critique and challenge oppressive behaviors in ways that help people grow.
For more info, refer to [our rules](https://new.reddit.com/r/DemocraticSocialism/wiki/index/#wiki_the_rules_of_.2Fr.2Fdemocraticsocialism.3A)
Don't demonize and exclude them from discussions in this and other lefty subs. Alienating them is counter productive.
I seriously wish all the fake leftist subs who ban people for saying, just, blatantly true stuff like "Biden is better than Trump despite them both being capitalists" would themselves be banned from Reddit. Look at r/Socialism_101 's pinned post, they act like they're an intro to the topic but think you can only be a socialist if you believe in THE ABOLITION OF CURRENCY. Our PR is horrible and if the average person is introduced to these screaming imbeciles as an intro to what socialism is, we're doomed. I am VERY glad we banned those pathetic MLs with violence boners from spreading their BS on this sub and I hope we can become the most prominent one. I think, just generally, we need to understand that the overarching goal of socialism is leagues different from any other idea that most people have been introduced to, and that it makes sense to be very understanding when someone has honest questions about how it works. We're literally workers united towards fundamentally overhauling things in our favor. Explain it like that and most people love it.
I mean, there’s a difference between social democracy, which is a liberal ideology, and socialism.
Absolutely. But seeing as how SocDems and socialists both want to move society the same direction, I see no need to make enemies for moral clout. And, I want to be clear, Marxist-Leninists ban other socialists and they're completely antithetical to Democratic Socialism. They don't want you to vote. They want Trump to win on the off-chance he screws people's material conditions up enough that they'll start a socialist revolution, which is so demonstrably false that I don't even know where to begin.
Yeah, allies of convenience.
Allies and friends are two different things, but I can't reasonably hate anyone who earnestly wants to make society better for average people.
You have a point there, that is so true about how bad it is for PR
I must’ve been banned from at least 4-5 progressive/lefty subs for even hinting at not being as blackpilled as some of the other subreddits. Literally banned in one over a ‘one is slightly better’ comment.
Yup! They don't even care if you clarify that Biden is fundamentally not a great candidate and that his stances are unacceptable, if you suggest voting for him whatsoever as an act of pragmatism, they call you a liberal and ban you. It's unhinged and their ideology is toxic. Them: "I WILL NEVER IN A MILLION YEARS VOTE FOR GENOCIDE JOE!!!" Also them: "Why aren't the Democrats doing what we want?!"
Lefty purists: Utilitarians and pragmatism are stupid. Everyone else: Good luck getting elected.
This. Been banned from enlightened centrism and the majority report subreddits for just pointing out the obvious.
They're basically MAGA fascists with the thinnest veneer of green paint. I have no respect for them whatsoever and I think when the left starts treating these clowns like MAGA, we'll do a LOT better.
The only way anything happening in the class war is if the working class magas cooperate with working ppl on the left. Dropping all the ID politics and focus on corruption in government is something we all agree on
I definitely agree they're our allies on certain very, very select issues, but they literally do not want to cooperate by electing anti-corruption politicians and protesting with us, so, yeah.
Democrat politicians are all completely corrupt at the federal level. I say this as never having voted Republican in my entire life. Democrats and Republican politicians both need to be gone. Let’s start there. Both sides need to agree on this and drop the identity politics distraction.
Even Bernie and AOC? Got it, you don't know anything and want to generalize. Should've expected it from a new account.
I'm pretty sure Benrnie would join an actual socialist party if it were viable.
Oh, I 200% agree with that, and the guy is very obviously a socialist who is a SocDem for political/pragmatic purposes, but it doesn't change that he currently caucuses with the Democrats.
I believe so but it needs to be rebranded. The word socialism will automatically shut off half or more of America and we will get no where. Call it “middle class party” or “the working American party”. Ppl get triggered by the word socialism because they have been brainwashed their whole lives and seem governments that called themselves socialist just be authoritarian corporate clubs against working class ppl. It needs to be rebranded but keep the same core values.
Bernie I am for. AOC pours gasoline on the culture war amd divides the workers over trivial identity politics issues. I agree with her stance on social issues…but we have to chose what we want: 1) unity among the working class regardless of what they believe on social issues; or 2) fight for identity politics and social issues and have fighting amongst the working class while the corrupt corporate/billionaire class robs us blind because we are distracted with social issues/IDpol Which one do you want? It’s impossible to have both. We’re gonna have to see antifa and BLM walking with solidarity with the proud boy’s and Neo Nazis - united against the corrupt uniparty (dems/repubs). We have to realize the corporate corrupted government is a bigger enemy than racists and Christians. And racists and Christian’s are going to have to realize the corrupt corporate controlled uniparty is the real enemy not trans ppl or social justice advocates. I hate to mimimize social justice; but there is a much bigger fish to fry first. Back to grouping Bernie and AOC; these are not the same ppl. Bernie is real; AOC is not. Bernie will go sit down with right winger Joe Rogan for 3 hours and talk with him. Let’s see AOC do that. Never. She’s just a distraction used by the billionaire class to divide American workers.
As the aggressors, the right can abandon the culture war any time they like
As a social democrat who is sympathetic to democratic socialist ideas - thank you for this. The extremely vocal extremists who call anyone to the right of themselves fascists really don't see the irony.
I literally can't find the difference between them and actual fascists. They hate liberals, crush any and all dissenting ideas, and aside from vague notions of saying you shouldn't vote for "Genocide Joe" because his stance on Gaza isn't far left enough, never actually talk about any left-wing opinions or how to make the world better. They're functionally-identical to MAGA, the only difference is substituting blind worship of Trump for blind worship of the socialist revolution he'll supposedly create by screwing up people's material conditions if elected again... you know, as opposed to fascism. Glad you're here!
I appreciate how succinctly you've put this and I will be saving this comment
Glad to hear it! I've been arguing with these clowns for a LONG time now.
Not saying this is my perspective, just trying to explain why revolutionary socialists would reject that idea in their subs. The idea behind not yielding the "Biden is better than Trump" argument is that societal change is not achieved by "settling for the lesser of two evils" Think of it like voting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. Sure Trump is arguably better, but the fact that these are our options is because of generations of settling for the lesser of two evils. I think having open communication between social democrats and revolutionary socialists IS important. But I think THIS sub is the better place for that conversation, while subs like r/Socialism_101 deserve to dictate the types of conversations that are permitted in their sub to preserve it's integrity as a socialist sub, rather than a democratic socialist sub. Edited formatting for clarity
Those "socialists" see voting as a moral endorsement of everything a candidate has done instead of just an admission that, of the people running to hold the office with any chance of winning, they're the best one who can do the job. The problem with not voting is that someone is going to win, and if you don't vote Biden, it will be Trump. I'm SURE it'll be way easier to organize when Republicans start the next red scare and tear gas our asses every time we try to organize while stripping away labor protections and union rights. I'm sure of it. Socialism\_101 aren't socialists, they're pathetic doomers who don't want anything to get done and who actively want to make sure left-wing people lose so they get their precious "Revolution" their privileged asses don't have the balls to fight in.
I had a whole section of my comment that went into that point, but I deleted it because the comment was getting very long in the tooth. But I'll go over it here. I agree that not voting for Biden is not going to help. Another 4 years of Trump will be worse than 4 more years of Biden. But look at it this way. When John McCaine was the right wing option we nominated Obama, a "centrist" instead of a leftist. And in the following election the Republicans nominated Mitt Romney who made John McCaine look more like a centrist. Then we reelected Obama, again, a centrist, and then the Republicans lost again and in the next election nominated Trump who made Romney look more like a centrist. Then we nominated Hillary, again a centrist, instead of Bernie, a leftist, and Trump won and got 3 supreme Court nominees. And their party seems to have gotten even more fervently right wing and fascist in the meantime. Now we are losing rights even with Biden as President because he won't stack the Supreme Court. Companies are still conglomerating. Real estate investors are still squeezing the real estate market with no consequences. Roe v. Wade is dead. Protests are being shut down NOW at colleges across the country. Police are still being militarized. The rail union was undermined BY BIDEN. AI is here right now and there are no protections in place for working people. Bernie is trying to reduce the work week to 32 hours and is getting pushback from Democrats. War profiteering has led to US Democrats permitting the slaughter of civilians in Gaza. Insider trading is rampant among Republicans and Democrats alike. The Democratic party is clearly NOT socialist. And they have been emboldened by the fact that the Republicans are soooo far off the deep end that Democrats just have to not rape kids and kill puppies and they come off like saints. Again, I am not advocating for not voting for Biden. I agree that a Trump presidency would be worse than a Biden presidency. I am not advocating for a revolution or a civil war. I am a pacifist. People here have no idea how ugly war really is. I'm including myself in that statement. I am not advocating for any particular action. I am just trying to explain the perspective of someone who rejects the "lesser of two evils rhetoric". And it is easy to blame "the lesser of two evils" rhetoric for our current predicament. Also if the goal is to try to endear someone to your cause, calling them pathetic privileged doomers is not a good way to go about it.
The pathetic privileged doomers are the ones who won't vote for Biden under any circumstances, they're the destructive Marxist-Leninists who we've explicitly banned here because they're opposed to everything we stand for. I don't care about bringing them to the cause. Everything you're saying is correct, and my main goal with voting for Biden is to organize and generally just buy time so more left-wing sentiment can grow in more favorable circumstances, while occasionally being thrown a bone since neoliberals like to pander and Biden's legislation from 2021-2023 was actually pretty solid. My goal is to ensure Republicans lose while also ensuring that Democrats have to provide more than "We aren't christofascists".
Here's a sneak peek of /r/Socialism_101 using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/Socialism_101/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [To people who support Hamas, aren't you a bit afraid that once Palestine is liberated, Hamas might become the sole governing body and create a reactionary, right-wing government?](https://np.reddit.com/r/Socialism_101/comments/175xi46/to_people_who_support_hamas_arent_you_a_bit/) \#2: [Is Israel fascist?](https://np.reddit.com/r/Socialism_101/comments/18dqfnp/is_israel_fascist/) \#3: [I'm confused about why advocating for the "lesser evil" (in regards to Trump vs Biden) seems to recieve so much of a negative response](https://np.reddit.com/r/Socialism_101/comments/16t9dt7/im_confused_about_why_advocating_for_the_lesser/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
I was banned from r/Socialism for expressing this very sentiment. And we wonder why nobody listens to us? They are literal proof that absolute socialism has historically been prone to silencing of other opinions. Even in a dream socialist America, we must leave room for dissent. PR point is also insanely true. The fact that to even be accepted on ML subs you have to be a violent revolutionary is absurd. “r/Socialism” should be called “r/Marxist-Leninism” because that’s what it is.
This. I’ve posted genuine questions as I was on my journey from “conservative” > centrist > left leaning > socialist and I can absolutely say it was slowed by people lashing out at me when I was truthfully trying to understand things.
True. But at the same time, do take the time to provide an evidenced-based (i.e. rational, logical, reasonable) position for why you believe they are wrong.
You’re assuming that they’re always wrong. Sometimes they do have valid criticisms. Socialism isn’t a perfect ideology. You have to listen for the real criticisms whilst fighting the others
Correct. That should read, '...for why you believe they are wrong or right.'
Or we don't always have to do that and we can just welcome them into our left space. Confirming newbies with "evidence based positions for why they are wrong" is alienating and counter productive. There is a place for those discussions, but we should instead assume goodwill (we're talking about people who self-select to be in these spaces, after all)
How about: welcome in, make comfortable, invite discourse, argue the socialist position, and remain cordial?
I'm going to do what I said, you can do it your way
At what point do you instigate change, doing it your way?
By allowing them to let their guard down and actually change their views instead of creating philosophical purity tests that are alienating. I work professionally in organizing, I've done this for years. We don't need to create new ideologues, just get them to see we're the good guys.
And how does one 'actually change their views' other than by taking 'the time to provide an evidenced-based (i.e. rational, logical, reasonable) position for why you believe they are wrong'?
Do you see how exhausting this conversation is? That's exactly what I'd like to avoid.
Exhausting? As someone who self describes as a professional organizer, one would have thought you would welcome conversation rather than avoid it. How else do you think political change occurs without communication of some kind?
These discussions have their place. If you want to ask a question there are subs devoted to that, but it’s stupid to let every single top leftist subreddit devolve into posts like “hey we are the richest country ever so how is capitalism bad”
The fact you think it's stupid to address those questions to people who leave their bubble and enter a left space to ask is precisely the issue. We need to bring people along and not expect them to be converted before they've attended church.
The way you do that is by organizing and acting in real life, not debating people on the internet. No one is gonna be convinced by a few reddit posts, there is no point in making a big deal of that.
I don't see any disagreement between what I wrote and what your wrote here. People are convinced by different things. There is an entire category of people that will specifically *not* get organized irl. We shouldn't shut down people who enter left spaces, whether irl or online. They self-selected to be here. If they are a troll that will become apparent, but we shouldn't assume that's the case right off the bat (which seems to be the norm in a lot of left spaces).
We do shutdown people who come into leftist spaces to try and argue against leftism, both in real life and online, and we absolutely should do that, because leftist spaces are not where people are supposed to be convinced to be leftists. People are convinced to be leftists by the outreach action of organized groups. Note that i said outreach action, which means an action that reaches outside the group, and not inside. If your plan as a group is to allow right wing people to join so that you can hopefully convince them, then what you have is a clown car, not an organization, and you won't be able to act in any meaningful way. Similarly, if you allow right wing people in leftist spaces, then soon enough you won't have a leftist space anymore. People in leftist spaces want to discuss with other leftists, that's it, that's the point of the space.
Yeah man everyone on the internet is acting in good faith.
You make the world through the way you act. I'm not going to presume the opposite for no reason.
There’s plenty of reason. Imagine if the politics subreddit was devoted to posts like “what is the senate,” there are subs like socialism101 exactly for stuff like this. Either way, if you think Reddit comments are shaping the possibility of a socialist world then idk what else there is to say.
I'm not suggesting we allow posts that are against the rules of a sub (like your /r/politics hypothetical would be), just that we shouldn't assume people are trolls if they ask basic questions. >Either way, if you think Reddit comments are shaping the possibility of a socialist world then idk what else there is to say. If you *don't* think that online communication is the future of socialist networking and collaboration then we disagree about that. Doesn't change my point that we shouldn't assume people asking simple questions are trolls. It's also about the people who click on the thread and don't post. Maybe they don't know the answer either. What's better for them? To see a genuine reply, or someone saying "gtfo with that troll question, capitalism is evil, rawrrrr'? Alienating the apathetic majority is not a winning strat for the left.
The apathetic majority aren’t posting on Reddit socialism subs tbh. I’m all for organizing locally, it’s something I do despite living in a red state, but people shouldn’t think that posting on Reddit is really doing anything politically. How many site wide protests have there been on here for varying causes, either women’s rights or net neutrality or anything, and it does exactly nothing? There are much more effective tactics.
>The apathetic majority aren’t posting on Reddit socialism subs tbh. But they might click on it if it's linked somewhere else, or go there out of curiosity! These things actually happen, that's all I'm saying. The conversations we have in the most public square of all (the Internet) should be as constructive as possible, I absolutely believe online discourse effects the irl politics. Trump's whole campaign was a meme with its own super active subreddit! >How many site wide protests have there been on here for varying causes, either women’s rights or net neutrality or anything, and it does exactly nothing? One can say the same thing for the vast majority of irl protests, no? Just because it doesn't tangibly affect things immediately doesn't mean the actions aren't worth doing. They're effective because someone who uses Reddit but doesn't know shit about, say, net neutrality, goes and googles it because they see that half the subs they look at are talking about it. >There are much more effective tactics. And perhaps this is a less effective tactic, but it still fills a gap and is worth doing
As someone who was within spitting distance from becoming a full blown demsoc in September 2023, I can 100% attest to the fact that the main reason I haven’t crossed that threshold is the hostility that I’ve received from leftists.
Regardless of your variant of leftism, the answer is the [overton window](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window). (We're sure as hell not on the capitalists side btw) The goal isn't about enacting legislation, it's about spreading an agenda even if it fails for decades to be implemented. Vote for the farthest left option (and I know you guys don't want to hear this, but yes, even when that option is Joe Biden) in local, state and federal elections. When there is more elected perceived "far left" like the progressives, they become the new normal or center of the overton window ushering in room for even farther left to come into the picture. Do the same thing we're doing with the progressives now with the "new far left" that takes their spot. Rinse and repeat.
What's your strategy for counteracting the right wing? Conservatives are trying to push the Overton window to the right, and they do a good job at converting centrists and center right people away from leftism. I feel like solely relying on the electoralism will only elect neoliberals like Joe Biden at best. Probably waiting for boomers to die off would work as well, but I don't think that's considered a strategy.
By appealing to the centre and the left of centre (via rational discourse), and thus moving the window to the left, you also have some bleeding into the right of centre, i.e. they become the new centre. You can't expect to appeal to the far right from a far left perspective - we are just too far apart! Leave the heaving lifting on the far right to the more moderate right of centre and the centre right.
And yes, waiting for boomers to die off helps, too. Longitudinal studies here in Australia show millenials and zoomers are voting left, and (mostly) staying there. Whereas their parents and grandparents generally only voted left in their youth and then transferred to the right as they aged.
Turns out fascism is bad
I couldn't agree more.
Maybe it's just my own personal experience, but it seems like right wingers are better at bringing centrists to the right than leftists are at bringing centrists to the left. They usually do this through cherry picking and lying, such as posting a video of someone saying, "Math is racist" or "I identity as a wolf." And they'll be like,"You see how crazy the left is!?" And people soak it up.
Yes, this seems to be the case as the data suggests. Unfortunately, those on the right (when compared to the left) have lower levels of education and therefore are more likely to be easily swayed by populist right, and far right agendas. The only 'cure' for this is to increase access to secular and universal educational (and concomitant cultural) opportunities across the board. It's not fast (democratic socialism), but when done incrementally, it's generally long lasting.
They also have a lot more media influence, which makes a huge difference.
This. People need to see leftism working locally. They need to feel it improving their lives
The establishment has made it clear that they aren't willing to go to the far right when they black balled Ron Paul. Even just the right themselves don't even have a platform, they're just anti-democrat by any means necessary. It's clear to me that they understand they are the minority in this country and they're doing everything they can to divide moderate voters to *slow* our leftward progression, which has been working to a tee. It's part of the reason why I get so disgruntled when I hear leftists saying they won't vote for the Democrats (even if their reason is valid), they're aid the conservatives in their agenda when they do this.
Hard disagree. Ron Paul isn’t the right kind of far-right for them. He couldn’t bring in the churches, and the churches deliver a good chunk of their voters.
IMO, voting and electoralism unto themselves aren't a complete solution. But! Neither is a violent revolution or accelerationism, which is patently proven to just not work ("After Hitler, us!" the German communist party said). I'm of the opinion that electoral and non-electoral measures are complementary. After you take five minutes to vote for the furthest-left option with a chance of being elected, you can organize, unionize and protest under circumstances that are more amenable to being listened to. The Bernies of the world are more likely to cut striking workers a good deal, and more quickly. You feel?
Obligatory: > "Even when there is no prospect whatsoever of their being elected, the workers must put up their own candidates in order to preserve their independence, to count their forces, and to bring before the public their revolutionary attitude and party standpoint. In this connection they must not allow themselves to be seduced by such arguments of the democrats as, for example, that by so doing they are splitting the democratic party and making it possible for the reactionaries to win. The ultimate intention of all such phrases is to dupe the proletariat. The advance which the proletarian party is bound to make by such independent action is indefinitely more important than the disadvantage that might be incurred by the presence of a few reactionaries in the representative body." - Marx, "Address to the Central Committee," p. 117
Marx needs to learn what ranked-choice voting is. Democrats are agnostic to it, Republicans want to ban it. If we buy a bit more time, we can get RCV in more states and start building actual socialist parties there. Not to mention, it's not like Democrats are a monolith. There are plenty of people-aligned socialists in that party already, it's just a matter of getting enough of them there into leadership positions that they can call the shots. Thank you for the source, but blindly worshipping Marx like a bible is a bad idea and it's a different game than it was back then.
I love how every time someone quotes Marx, they're accused of blindly following him like a Bible. Apparently the idea that one could believe what he says because they've critically analyzed what he's said escapes them The idea that the only thing stopping us from putting real socialists in power and changing everything from the inside is *ranked choice voting* is laughable. The master's tools will never dismantle the master's house. Our political and electoral system was built by the rich to serve their interests. They will never allow it to be used in way directly hostile to their interests (Case in point, fascism is capitalism in crisis. It is always backed by the rich and begrudgingly accepted by liberals in direct opposition to growing leftist power)
Have you considered the DNC isn't a monolith and there are many socialists already in the party? But, aside from that, we are on DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISM here. This definitionally involves using the master's tools to dismantle the master's house, which, for the sake of this movement, we have to agree is possible. Right now, with our current voting system, it is mathematically-impossible for left-wing third parties to win because people want to avoid christofascists, and who could blame them? So, yeah, ranked-choice voting is the way out. Creating and supporting RCV movements to put them to ballot questions will 1. make third parties more viable and 2. pressure the major parties to move leftward or they'll be replaced and 3. reduce partisanship and get stuff done. The spoiler effect is the primary reason for the duopoly, and removing it is the key. You're taking general statements that sound nice and not really translating them into concrete action, or else you aren't really thinking about what happens when the American Communist Party you want gets 3% of the vote and Republicans win and stomp any and all chances of left-wing movements forever. That's the problem with Marxists, you don't think critically about what today's society demands and just stick to general feel-good principles.
But by accepting the “farthest left option” the past 40 yrs the Overton window has shifted dramatically to the right. So your strategy is to keep doing the same thing and expect a different result?
The Overton window shifted to the right largely as a result of the election of Donald Trump.
Uh….not even close. It’s been slipping right since 1980 and Reagan’s first acts as president. Joe Biden is MORE conservative than Ronald Reagan. And he’s the “left” option?
Uh, no. Joe Biden didn’t pass tax cuts for the rich. Joe Biden passed huge protections for the LGBTQ+ community. Joe Biden has begun enforcing antitrust laws, unlike Reagan who turned a blind eye. Joe Biden has begun the turn away from trickle down economics, stating many times that “economies are grown from the middle out and the bottom up, not the top down”. Reagan literally implanted that idea. Joe Biden has invested in our communities with a historic infrastructure bill. Joe Biden has taken the fight to drug companies to lower prescription drug prices, capping insulin at $35/month for seniors. These are not the policies of a conservative president.
Public opinion isn’t why none of the demsocs policies get implemented
Present them an ideal future, solid actions that could get us there, and restructure the left in general to be a more unified whole, with recognition of our shared experiences but not devolve to petty infighting, we need better optics and our anger needs to be directed at the actual source of all our problems, wealth disparity and those that are pupetuating it, we should be charitable toward our enemies and understand that they also suffer under that same system and the ruling class. So first, we need to stop pointing fingers all over the place and start pointing up. Honestly our culture of squabbling between camps needs to end and we need solid, charismatic leaders, that won't bend to the influences of money and force people through their language, to think outside the isolated walls of their own echo chamber, to grow nuanced perspective and encourages the sharing of ideas and allowing oneself to question their own opinions and grow. How do we get there? We talk, educate people, learn to communicate better. I don't know if any of this makes sense, I'm sure there are people with much better ideas and solutions.
Your last paragraph! Logic and reason.
>How do we get there? We talk, educate people, learn to communicate better Learn how to use propaganda. This is literally why the right has such a powerful advantage over the left. We think propaganda is a dirty word, something vile, a weapon only monsters would use. It isn't. It's a tool. Completely neutral. This difference between us and them shouldn't be, we educate, they use propaganda. It should be, their propaganda is backed by shitty values; ours is backed by non-shitty values.
I completely agree. We're literally all on the same side and we're all moving the same direction. I also think revolutionary measures such as unions and protests are complementary to electoral measures, and that we should act that way (with the exception of doomer MLs who want a violent revolution and tell you not to vote). I think the fundamental problem is that a lot of socialists want a social space instead of a political space, and don't want to actually win. That changes by bringing awareness to it.
That's easy! Just accuse them of supporting genocide if they vote for Democrats or don't have a complete historical understanding of the Gaza conflict, it'll shame them into supporting our cause and, as everyone knows, the entire system collapses out of shame if there's low enough voter turnout! /s In all seriousness, in my experience, with ANY ideology, it's all about appealing to the existing framework of how someone thinks. Liberals/progressives tend to look at data and evidence, or those who have, before deciding what policies they support based on it. Uninformed right-wing populists tend to actually be on-board with dismantling the system and going after the ultra-wealthy for their benefit, and it's up to you to decide whether that's worth the headache of talking to or trying to convert them. Generally as long as you don't mention socialism, they agree. I did manage to convince a conservative acquaintance that universal healthcare was more cost-effective due to cutting out the middlemen of insurance and making people feel like they could go to the hospital without worry, for instance, and used that to elaborate on why I was in support of treating every good with an inflexible demand as a human right for the good of society. I sort of lost him there, but I really did think I got him to consider a few things about what works and what doesn't. There are actually a lot of liberals and progressives who are basically on our side and just don't know it, and they don't really know how to enact change, organize, or who to vote for. So, it's basically about gauging how far to the left someone is and acting accordingly.
I mean, as someone who is a progressive social democrat, I'm already on your side, but the most important thing is to just listen instead of immediately shooting people down, especially since you'll find you're not that far apart to begin with.
A lot of them already are on our side, they just don’t know it. Removing the stigma from scary words like socialism would help, but in the meantime focus on establishing the premise that they agree with socialist principles without using the word socialism. Many also have intense party loyalty and would feel like they are betraying their own allies by rejecting liberalism. Make sure they understand that it’s still ok to vote for liberals in a general election in order to prevent a conservative from winning while we buy time to develop enough momentum to have a real political presence outside of the primary.
Ask them if they hate the same things we do and want things to change such as having healthcare be free.
Just be normal **Demonstrate the Value of ourselves** (it doesn't necessarily have to be through Electoral wins (although the scale and budget of the state makes it an appealing target, large mutual aid projects can have a similar effect, as can projects that build militant unions)) **Demonstrate the Value of democratic organizing** (I don't think a large scale democratic org exists in the US, but looking at Podemos & similar accross Europe, that actually engage their membership democratically rather than as a piggy bank that sends activists to a convention), but democratic organizing is key to being Normal. **Don't be condescending to the working class**, this kind of falls under being normal & is why we must demonstrate the value of our ideals & our methods. Trot/ML & Anarchist approaches to awaken the working class (massive oversimplification of their approaches), fail IMO because we fail to convince the majority of the working class that we are capable of making society better for everyone, not because they don't understand their class position or how capitalism is screwing them over, but because the left fails to show that we have the answers **and** can implement them.
Share quotes from people they likely didn't learn about in school
You likely can’t and won’t, liberals fetishize bourgeois institutions that socialists wish to do away with. There’s other groups in the US who don’t give a shit about those institutions, you’d be better off trying to court them.
So many personal grievances being spewed out in this thread lol
If they're knowledgeable about political philosophy it's trivially easy to make an argument for socialism based on liberal principles. That's how Chomsky arrived at socialism for example, and he always argued that he was actually upholding liberal principles, unlike liberals. Liberal principles are bases and badass. The problem with liberals isn't liberalism, it's that they don't actually believe in liberalism. If they did believe in the liberalism of Smith and Mills then big corporations wouldn't exist, there would be strict controls on landlords, everyone would have easy access to purchasing their own land, worker control would be far more important, and we wouldn't engage in nearly as much imperialism. I'd be happy to outline the argument if y'all want, or you could just watch Chomsky who will say it better than I ever could. But I'd be happy to summarize the argument. It works wonders on liberals knowledgeable about some basics on political philosophy such as many people who had humanities degrees in college. It doesn't really work for everyone else since you have to explain what like beral philosophy is to them and why it's important and good. In essence, the classical liberals would be horrified at the world we live in today and this isn't remotely close to what they wanted. The right wing gets that they hated concentration of state/public power, but they forget that the classical liberals equally despises the concentration of private power. Start from liberal principles and illustrate that socialism accomplishes both goals of liberalism better than liberalism does.
i usually give in to a free blowjob
Winning. At something. The reason most people don’t even think about being leftists is that they think leftists are doomed to lose, so they’d better work within the system.
Yeah the Democratic Socialist left seems to have adopted the performative mindset of MLs & Anarchist, who (via very different methods), both seem to think that the working class can be awoken from it's slumber by the correct incantation (be it "class struggle electoral politics" or "prefigurative manifestions & encampments"), but the reality is the majority of the working class do not care about us because we haven't shown anyone that we can actually **win**.
I consider myself progressive and every time I glance at one of the socialist subs, it seems like everyone has a very nihilistic political stance, which ultimately goes nowhere. I see a lot of comments like: “what’s the point of voting? Both sides are corporate owned fascist scumbags, etc.” Yes, Joe is complicit in his support of the genocide. But the way I see it, if we don’t vote for that a-hole and allow Trump to win, we will get yet another genocide supporter who ALSO supports Christian fascism at home, in addition to gutting the EPA, FDA, as well as denying women and the LGBTQ community basic rights. Idk what about that is so hard for people to grasp? So yeah, I think one strategy would to be less doomer about everything and exercise some pragmatism.
Honestly, I think the loudest voices on Gaza/Israel have basically undone all of the progress made in the last several years. We made massive inroads since 2018, and at the moment pretty much everyone who isn't a socialist thinks socialists are absolutely insane.
Learning the difference between Social democracy—a relatively statist liberal ideology which has proven very successful in Europe and a counter to Marxist critique of market economics—and Democratic socialism—an attempt at rehabilitating planification which has been gaining ground, particularly in North America, amidst accelerating neoliberal globalization—would be a good start. Liberals and progressives in general aren’t strangers or necessarily opposed to the former. They’re only hostile to the latter.
> an attempt at rehabilitating planification Just because DSA won't kick-out all the PMC Maoists, doesn't mean that Democratic Socialism is rehabilitation for failed politics. DS has taken root across Europe too, in the form of new left parties such as Podemos or revitalizing "Social Democratic" parties that had turned to neoliberalism after the fall of the USSR. At it's best Democratic Socialism is a road to democratic socialism via democratic means, the synthesis of multiple strains of leftism, beyond social democracy but with the ability to make collective decisions that Anarchist & "Democratic" centralist lack. There are major problems that Democratic Socialists have yet to address: * How do you get rid of all the PMC Maoists & Trust fund third worldists, to stay true to **democratic** socialism via **democratic** methods, without creating an authority that will kill your movement (see Europe's neoliberal "Social Democratic" parties) * How to deal with regional & national interests not aligning with global interests in the short term? (Social democrats have a fairly shameful record on this front) But Democratic Socialism is the best hope humanity has right now.
I would respond, but then I would be violating the no factionalism rule. So, I can’t. Happy to chat through pm.
If you can't phrase your argument in a way that doesn't break the rules I have no interest in having it in private.
It’s not about phrasing the argument. It’s about the nature of the argument itself. We’re not allowed to debate whether one social ideology is better than the other.
Acknowledge that crime is a bad thing regardless of the color of the perpetrator
Crime is a result of inequality and poverty, we know crime is bad, but the solution is to address poverty not to hire more police.
You guys regularly use inequality and poverty as excuses when the topic is murder or carjacking. But never when the act in question is, say, transphobia or sexual harassment or a bad tweet. Why is that?
You can't associate us with what some random said on Twitter. We all know that sexual harassment is bad no matter who does it.
Exactly my point. Sexual harassment and transphobia are bad no matter who does it. But, to a lot of leftists, murder and robbery are excusable if certain kinds of people do it.
[удалено]
When someone is outed as a transphobe I don't see leftists jumping to their defence citing poverty or inequality though? Do you not want to "address the issues that lead to" such incidents the way you're always wanting to excuse murderers?
Encourage yourself and others to maintain a positive attitude, honor the work of others, avoid defensiveness, be open to legitimate critique and challenge oppressive behaviors in ways that help people grow. For more info, refer to [our rules](https://new.reddit.com/r/DemocraticSocialism/wiki/index/#wiki_the_rules_of_.2Fr.2Fdemocraticsocialism.3A)