Yeah… I lost whatever respect I had for this lipflapper when he literally told his audience to “show revolutionary bravery” while sitting behind a desk.
I guess these YT “anarchists” just aren’t your “first through the door” types.
Do you happen to have a link to him saying that in context? I recall him saying something similar, but I think the context was to have bravery to join a local mutual aid group, even if it’s outside your comfort zone (could be wrong, that’s just what I can remember).
Nope, don’t have the link and I’m not going to spend the enrgy to find it, either… I don’t bother with online anarchists - I sure as hell hope the offline kind is less cringy.
And no, it had nothing to do with mutual aid groups… he was exhorting people to knock on doors and “organise” - you know, that thing breadtube lipflappers are always talking about but never actually show themselves doing.
I expect this kind of shit from tankies - they are, by design, it seems - “lead from the back” types. But when anarchists do it it simply demonstrates how hopelessly disconnected they are from the working class they supposedly want to “liberate.”
I’d seen him suggest knocking on your neighbors doors to get to know them so you can build community and organize ICE watch groups. Without more context it’s hard to see those suggestions as negative.
“organise” - you know, that thing breadtube lipflappers are always talking about but never actually show themselves doing.
I take it you’re unfamiliar with his involvement in Cooperation Tulsa? He’s been organizing and getting involved with that group and making videos on it for quite a few years now, which is involved in a lot of really solid community organizing.
I take it you’re unfamiliar with his involvement in Cooperation Tulsa?
Okay, I’ll eat your humble pie. I’m wrong about that.
This is better. If anarchists wants to be taken seriously by the working class, they’re going to have to do more doing and a lot less talking - in fact, I’ll advise them to tone down on the talking until they can actually figure out how to actually talk to the working class again. They did know how to do this, once.
can build community and organize ICE watch groups.
The members of the working class that is willing and, more importantly, capable of doing that is already doing so, and they did not need Youtube leftists cajoling them into doing so.
The left has never earned the right to lecture the working class on what to do, and it never will - but the working class has always proven willing to be influenced by those elements of the left that is willing to lead by example.
Anark has mentioned multiple times that he’s barely able to afford rent. Most Anarchists are working class, it is very rare that they are well off.
It’s not about money… it’s about what it is that you’re offering.
It’s easy to join, or get people to join, something that already exists. But if there is nothing to start off with, there might be damn good reasons why there isn’t. And you need to think twice before telling people to “bootstrap” it into existence.
I responded to this:
If anarchists wants to be taken seriously by the working class, they’re going to have to do more doing and a lot less talking
That suggests that Anarchists are not working class, and are somehow talking ‘down’ to working class, but they very much are the working class figuring out how to solve their own problems.
It’s not about money… it’s about what it is that you’re offering.
What are you talking about? What do you think makes someone working class or not? If they work for someone else for a wage to live, they are working class.
never trust any white person wearing the himmler spectacles LOL
edit: i only think this applies to white folks/western leftists. the global south is kind of forced into the “campism” and “nationalism” he views as a regression to a right-wing reactionary form of socialism. e.g. see arabs being pro-iran or west africans being pro-russia/china in recent years. But, yeah, valid take when it comes to the type of people on lemmy as a whole for example.
Also, saying the bolsheviks are similar to mussolini is practically horseshoe theory and kind of a bad take.
Also, saying the bolsheviks are similar to mussolini is practically horseshoe theory and kind of a bad take.
I think it’s more stethoscope theory than horseshoe theory.
An equally dogshit theory
Maybe I’m not well versed enough in this topic to understand, but I’m having trouble following this person’s argument. First they define materialism, then they talk about how change for the better doesn’t come only once the conditions are perfect, it evolves from a confluence of factors. I get that much. Then they talk about opportunism and how stooping to the lowest common denominator to build a movement leads socialists to fascism how Mussolini rose to power, and compromising their own values voting for the lesser evil (e.g. Hillary Clinton) would lead to fascism. I was confused for the rest of it.
Where I stand on what I think is the discussion is this: I feel that everyone ideologically should never lose sight of what they want, but to achieve it, it requires a proper transition path to help counter knee-jerk reactions and talking points. Coming at people with uncompromising and very specific jargon and dismissing attempts to dumb down things won’t get you far… simplifying your plan when explaining it isn’t opportunism.
More of my words on specific cases
Look at Mamdani, his term so far is described as “sewer socialism”, it’s rooted in socialist ideals but at the end of the day, people want to hear stuff like when New York’s potholes will be filled, and as Mayor he is delivering on that. People don’t care as much about the ideology behind the plan, but that’s how you get them on board with socialism.
In contrast, Clinton and centrist Democrats want to co-opt the idealistic language but have little interest in following through for the common person and didn’t bother to describe what good it will mean for them. Calling out billionaire/AIPAC backers reduces their influence and should be done, always. However, given a choice between that and a alt-right candidate, it’s clear the internal reform must be done after choosing the lesser evil, and the building toward a revolution has to be done all the time, not just in the months before a general election.
Another example is Peter Magyar in Hungary. Left parties and voters voted for him, despite still being right-wing, to reverse the corruption and reform the constitution so that a democratic left or socialist party can have a chance in any future Hungarian election, which was virtually impossible before.
Havent watched the video yet but I like Ayman’s video on the topic:
