this post was submitted on 08 May 2025
72 points (87.5% liked)
196
3158 readers
2170 users here now
Community Rules
You must post before you leave
Be nice. Assume others have good intent (within reason).
Block or ignore posts, comments, and users that irritate you in some way rather than engaging. Report if they are actually breaking community rules.
Use content warnings and/or mark as NSFW when appropriate. Most posts with content warnings likely need to be marked NSFW.
Most 196 posts are memes, shitposts, cute images, or even just recent things that happened, etc. There is no real theme, but try to avoid posts that are very inflammatory, offensive, very low quality, or very "off topic".
Bigotry is not allowed, this includes (but is not limited to): Homophobia, Transphobia, Racism, Sexism, Abelism, Classism, or discrimination based on things like Ethnicity, Nationality, Language, or Religion.
Avoid shilling for corporations, posting advertisements, or promoting exploitation of workers.
Proselytization, support, or defense of authoritarianism is not welcome. This includes but is not limited to: imperialism, nationalism, genocide denial, ethnic or racial supremacy, fascism, Nazism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, etc.
Avoid AI generated content.
Avoid misinformation.
Avoid incomprehensible posts.
No threats or personal attacks.
No spam.
Moderator Guidelines
Moderator Guidelines
- Don’t be mean to users. Be gentle or neutral.
- Most moderator actions which have a modlog message should include your username.
- When in doubt about whether or not a user is problematic, send them a DM.
- Don’t waste time debating/arguing with problematic users.
- Assume the best, but don’t tolerate sealioning/just asking questions/concern trolling.
- Ask another mod to take over cases you struggle with, if you get tired, or when things get personal.
- Ask the other mods for advice when things get complicated.
- Share everything you do in the mod matrix, both so several mods aren't unknowingly handling the same issues, but also so you can receive feedback on what you intend to do.
- Don't rush mod actions. If a case doesn't need to be handled right away, consider taking a short break before getting to it. This is to say, cool down and make room for feedback.
- Don’t perform too much moderation in the comments, except if you want a verdict to be public or to ask people to dial a convo down/stop. Single comment warnings are okay.
- Send users concise DMs about verdicts about them, such as bans etc, except in cases where it is clear we don’t want them at all, such as obvious transphobes. No need to notify someone they haven’t been banned of course.
- Explain to a user why their behavior is problematic and how it is distressing others rather than engage with whatever they are saying. Ask them to avoid this in the future and send them packing if they do not comply.
- First warn users, then temp ban them, then finally perma ban them when they break the rules or act inappropriately. Skip steps if necessary.
- Use neutral statements like “this statement can be considered transphobic” rather than “you are being transphobic”.
- No large decisions or actions without community input (polls or meta posts f.ex.).
- Large internal decisions (such as ousting a mod) might require a vote, needing more than 50% of the votes to pass. Also consider asking the community for feedback.
- Remember you are a voluntary moderator. You don’t get paid. Take a break when you need one. Perhaps ask another moderator to step in if necessary.
founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
Wait, you think THAT's the loop?
Nah, what's happening is the edges of neoliberalism are moving right. They are absolutely checking out from the neoliberal agenda, they are just becoming fascists in the process.
The disaffection is there. They are rising up in sufficient numbers.
To vote for Trump and other fascists.
Accelerationism doesn't make sense because the loop is pushing people right. Do that faster, they keep going right faster. There is no steam buildup for left-wing revolution here. If anything the left has been lazy and the longer this goes the more ground they have to make up. There is no socialist revolution coming, there is a fascist dictatorship takeover at the end of that process. Russia is the model, just... different year.
The question is why the left wing is failing to divert that flow of dissatisfaction towards its political side with anywhere near that amount of efficiency. Call it education if you want, I call it weak propaganda. Bad political action either way.
it's because fascism is easy, simple, and feels safer than stepping out of learned helplessness
Right, and if you have a minute I may tell you about the tragedy of Darth Plagueis.
This is not about the dark side being easier and more appealing, this is about them having weaponized social media. It's a material problem, not a moral one.
I'm afraid some ideas really are just easier to accept. In every field I've studied or worked in, people very rarely accept unfortunate truths, instead believing that which is easier to stomach.
For example, you believe that leftists just aren't "trying hard enough," when the reality is that leftism doesn't have access to the same tools that its opposition has. Fascists, tankies, or liberals can use the powerful forces of group identity and hierarchy to win. At the end of the day, they all function as similar machines that seek to gain the most amount of power and control for themselves as possible. They inevitably entangle with national identities, bureaucracy, religion and cultural values in whatever way they need to.
Social media is not the problem; you're just blaming technology because it's easier than thinking leftism is uniquely unsuited to take control in this ecosystem. It has the "authenticity" every system markets, but it can't just allow itself to become a competitive machine without just becoming Marxist-Leninism. It can free people from the machine, but the machines compete better with each other by mechanizing us.
It's not about morals holding leftism back, but morals being incompatible with welding power over your opposition. It's the will to power of societal constructs making everyone's lives hallow and miserable. Our happiness is instrumental in forces larger than ourselves and always has been. Our freedom isn't at war with other people's freedom, but the success of things that aren't individuals.
I call BS. Leftism isn't a minority stance by necessity. There have been plenty of popular and populist left wing movements. Many got to power. Some kept it. Some even did all of that under representative democracy.
There is no reason left wing stances should be harder to communicate over social media than they were through newsletters, often while being outright outlawed.
I refuse to be so self-indulgent to think my elders were able to put out left wing media with an illegal printer while being persecuted but mastering Facebook was beyond us.
You're not wrong, but the game leftism needs to play isn't gonna look the same as right wing ideologies. It can do things the right wing can only maintain off of hype, which is enough for the right to ascend, but not to maintain.
The biggest thing leftism can do is kneecap systems without the systems ever fully getting rid of them. It was heavily co-opted and redirected by liberalism, but with liberalism dying, it can reassert itself.
I'm sure the opportunistic tankies will waste a lot of time and energy, but anarchy is the real way forward. It probably can't serve as a status to be reached, but as an ultimate check on the power of whatever system is in control. It needs to assert people as goal of society, not the means. Organizations cannot be seen as allies ever, only monsters to restrain and keep watch of forever.
Well, the idea is you ascend this way, you maintain by being actually competent at governing using solid policies that improve things for people.
That should be an advantage, you know? Actually having a solid framework for economics and social policy. It should take care of that whole "maintaining" part once the ascendancy is dealt with.
I think a lot of leftists, and particularly terminally online lefitsts, have grown used to not having to deliver that part and are more comfortable feeling like morally superior underdogs. I have no interest in those. Like I was saying elsewhere, the only leftists that are real leftists are the ones that hold some political power.
The problem with "real political power" is how the power itself can do the thinking for you. Your tribe or ingroup as an inhuman entity has no desire for anything but winning. If you're not careful, it convinces you to take the realist path to victory.
We can worry about the dehumanizing nature of political power once we have the political power.
I'd rather have that conversation about the non-fascist guys at our leisure than take solace in the moral harm the fascists are suffering from their abuse of power.
It's not a problem of moral purity, but simply being another standard agent of the system. All efforts by well meaning activists in my country failed to resist being another pawn, or not gain substantial power. Capitalism effectively neutralized left wing threats by keeping the working class unwilling to question power. Bolder action with more urgency was necessary, but team blue held everything back.
Now that the liberal democratic order is dead, the rules are different, and bolder action is necessary for anyone to hold power. The threat level is higher, with state violence escalating faster than even I expected. You need to utilize violence to have any chance of resisting fascism, even if it's the "non-violent" mass movement strategy of MLK Jr (although i doubt we have enough time for that)
Who is talking about well meaning activists? Who is talking about activists at all?
I mean, activists are great, good for them, but the activist label inherently means you are deploying activism as a replacement for institutional power.
I care about left wing politicians, not activists.
You are right that this conversation was for last year, or the election before that or the one before that or the one before that. But yeah, no, I'm not letting the failures of the US left define the playbook. Maybe instead of passing your perception of this stuff as universal you guys could look at the parts of the world actually getting results. Let Lula tag in for a while or something. Flip Mexico inside out like a sock and give Sheinbaum a go. Single most popular prime minister on the planet at the moment.
"You need to utilize violence" my ass. You need structured power, institutional strongholds and a network of activated supporters.
It's my own fault for engaging with US politics at all. I said I'd cut those off after the Trump inauguration and I've been slipping.
I guess you have a point about getting caught up in the American context, where so much imperial power and wealth can be leveraged to keep leftism from ever gaining an institutional foothold. It's probably the major difference between America and elsewhere, as they even work to kill leftist institutional power abroad. Sorry
Man, even the apologies are tinged in exceptionalism. I promise you guys aren't the first (or even best) to persecute dissenters.
Look, I know I come across as just pushing back to be contrarian, but if anything it's a hopeful message. I think the US left and a lot of the worldwide left have been negligent and self-centered in their political action. But I also think American leftists give their ability for action way too little credit.
There's a bit of that exceptionalism. Like if you aren't changing the fundamental fabric of the system at a national scale you are not "making a difference" or whatever, but what I'm saying, for good and bad, is that movement leftward is about institutional networks, unified strategies and long-term groundwork.
Maybe it's too late now, I don't know. But the goal should always be to get the right people to the right places. As a country in the Americas struggling with oligarchy and rising populist fascism in an unstable political landscape I say this now more genuinely than ever: you're not that special.
There are playbooks out there. Problem about playbooks is you need a team to run the plays. It's not going to be a switch flipping from degenerated neoliberalism into socialist utopia.
Definitely. The problem is that America isn't special. It might've been the dominant empire for most of our living memory, but every empire falls, and given the alterations being made to the military, it'll become capable of separating into multiple nations in the long run. That won't happen overnight and won't be caused by leftists, but they have no reason to stop it.
The long term strategy that American leftists failed to use for years was a local one. The local leftist politicians suck at appealing to local issues rather than the bigger picture, and your not wrong about it.
It doesn't read much like she necessarily supports accelerationism. If she does then the post will be removed as it is a harmful ideology.
The left is growing worldwide, especially among the youth (I only included some stuff on the US, but you see similar trends in quite a few countries). Remember most people in the US would vote democrat if they voted, which while not socialism is certainly left of the republicans. They just have a major problem with believing that voting will not matter, with gerrymandering, and with anti voting schemes.
The statistics in my country aren't quite the same in that we don't have a geriatric fascist party, but there is a trend of polarization with people moving away from the center towards the left and the right.
Though I do agree that we really do need to be doing a better job of reaching out to people. Here in norway the left seems to be struggling because our arguments are less emotion based, because unlike the populists we aren't throwing everything behind a small number of emotionally charged topics and we don't have disingenuous gurus or other big social media influencers lying to kids on our behalf. We don't do a good job of telling people the benefits of leftist policies in a way that really hits them and we don't have enough outreach for what we say to reach them. There's a clear bias in the news and in social media against the left which hampers us as well, both within norway but especially on international platforms.
That is a depressing chart, honestly. A few percentage points at best in the same timeframe when the neofascist US right went from a radical wing of the Republican party they were hesitant about tapping into and into running the entire country. Twice.
During Trump's first term the positive view of socialism among Dems actually went down two points before recovering to five points up? That's rookie numbers. Trump went from reviled to actually becoming an outright felon and then to a landslide victory handing him control of every branch of government in the same time period.
And that's even more shameful once you remember that for Americans "socialist" includes "social democrats".
There are left wing parties that have marginally better elsewhere, and some are even in government, largely as junior parties in colaitions within parliamentary regimes. The only exception would be Latin America where there have been bigger swings back and forth, but that wasn't that rare there in the first place.
I don't think it's about "telling people about the benefits" or "outreach". I think traditional powers have what's left of the information gatekeepers, the alt right has dominance of online discourse and the left has no idea how to use the Internet for anything other than arguing amongst themselves and no idea how to pierce the old media in any reliable fashion.
It is genuinely depressing, and threads like these show zero self-awareness and very little self-criticism. Ascendant neofascists come from some mix of hostile propaganda and radical actors prodding at the information weaknesses of liberal regimes very consciously and very aggressively. The left has never been able to keep that sort of decentralized coordination going for any amount of time without decomposing into niche groups all over again.
It could be better yes, but most right wing parties are doing rather well because of old (read dying) people, while young people are overwhelmingly leftist.
I disagree heavily with this. That's mostly a thing pushed by tankies, the ones we argue with. But then arguing with tankies isn't productive either, it is a distraction at best.
What exactly do you propose if not outreach? You seem to criticize the idea of spreading awareness in general. Did you read the parts where I also said the same stuff about what you call information gatekeepers? I should note I am also heavily in favor of direct action and unionization, but doing those things also requires outreach. I think really the best thing to do is irl word of mouth, irl political participation, and establishing good leftist spaces online (without tankies).
It's not just tankies, beyond Lemmie's specific local rift.
It's left leaning liberals with social democrats, social democrats with gramscian leftists, gramscian leftists and classic marxists, all of the above with tankies, or with whatever cosplay anarchists dwell in places like these. And much more, depending on the local political landscape.
Neofascists don't even feel the need to agree with themselves, they'll argue one thing and the opposite as long as they get to stir some stuff up online, "own the libs" and win some arguments. There is nowhere near that level of propaganda discipline and willingness to row in the same direction at any point of the left. They broke feminism in two (three or four, really, but a few of those chickens are still to get home) with the slightest of propaganda pressure. They didn't even need that much to make most left and center-left political coalitions crumble. At this point I assume they're trying to be gentle when making frustrated leftists stay home in elections because there's no challenge in it.
My proposal? Take a page from their book. Prioritize wining arguments and mobilizing over practical policy, get to the policy once you've consolidated power. Complain that you're not allowed to deploy the full policy because of the other guys and the establishment all the way up. Never disagree with anybody willing to agree with you on anything. Never agree with a political rival. Never own the failures of the system. Find a scapegoat that works and push it.
None of those things are ideological. But nobody on the left will suspend their purity tests to play in the playground we've built for ourselves.
I'm all for dismantling that playground. It's toxic and grotesque. But you won't do that with "outreach" and "spreading awareness". You do that with hard, consolidated institutional power. They know. The left doesn't.
Me oh my. Yeah no there are other ways than "consolidating power" and lying to people. You can engage people emotionally without being manipulative and still push good policies.
Also, that all sounds very US centric and honestly a bit wrong. It is usually the libs that deplatform and refuse to cooperate with socialists. That's certainly the case within the democratic party. Same here in norway, with liberals not working with socialists (and rather the populists instead), and with the soc dems only ever reluctantly cooperating with us. It was announced, to my joy, a few days ago that LO (a big union) will finally give some money to the red party (a socialist party) because the reds getting enough votes is the only way the social democrats will win.
Edit: This is also my general understanding of politics everywhere. That centrists and right wingers (libs) have no interest in working with anyone left of them. It's certainly how fascists have won elections all around the world.
I'm not in the US, let's start there. I am in a territory that is generally left-leaning and has a left-leaning government, let's set that next.
And no, there are no other ways than consolidating power because a leftist without a government position is not useful to me at all. A leftist without a seat does not push good policies. They don't push any policies at all. Governments push policies. The only leftists who push good policies are in government.
There is no need to lie to be engaging, but you do need to convince people. You need to present arguments and you need to win those arguments in the eyes of the people. You need to show the alternatives are doing poorly and create an image that they are incompetent and the cause of the current set of issues. Which should be easy, because they are, by and large.
But that's not being done. The perception is that the left is deluded, splintered and naive. Those are all perceptions pushed by the right onto the left that the left sucks at dispelling. The implication in your response that popular, effective campaigning and grassroots political action is inherently immoral or requires immoral behavior is itself part of that problem. Hell, we are doing the thing right now. If we were on the fascist spectrum we wouldn't bother with this nitpicky argument and would just wait for whatever point of contention we can agree on and rally around it. We just suck at this.
Look, it's ultimately a technical problem. The other side saw the communication tools had a flaw and exploited it. Not because they're smart, but because they had a million monkeys on typewriters tucked away online and they randomly figured out they could influence real world events for a laugh. And then the nazis caught wind.
We missed that boat and then bought into their narrative that this was something they own that is evil and only they get to do, and so we're laying out a red carpet for them to own mainstream culture. It's excurciating to watch.
Well yeah. This we agree on, but it really did not sound like this is what you meant by what you wrote earlier.
No? You read me wrong then.
You were pushing this earlier on in the convo
Yeah, no, we suck at this, like I said.
This conversation is not winning the culture wars. This is the exact purity argument that keeps the left from power.
Find me a solution and I'll take it. But the solution can't be to keep doing what we're doing.
This convo isn't infighting, even if it isn't very productive. Neither of us are denouncing any leftist ideologies and we won't be voting against the left if I'm reading you correctly.
You are correct that something needs to change, and that thing is how we communicate with people. Deceit isn't necessary. It's the things you described that I had already described earlier that you for some reason then said was ineffectual before then suddenly supporting it when you were the one saying it?
I'm not sure I follow.
My concern is consistent: the way the left communicates, does propaganda and pushes issues is weak, fails to control the narrative and is further undermined by atomized, nuanced positions and infighting.
The right has learned to push a more cohesive narrative in a social media landscape, largely by allowing themselves to be inconsistent and focusing on winning small arguments at every opportunity until one sticks, at which point they all rally behind it.
The left sucks at that. Nobody will suspend their pet issues, nobody will poke at the mainstream to see what works, nobody will drop their short term goals to focus on the popular narratives for the chance of deploying impactful politics on those goals later.
I find this negligent in the current political landscape, and it's letting the far right run away with converting dissatisfaction into votes, even on issues where the left clearly has the strongest argument.
You really seem to think that the left just needs to win and is skill issue failing by not being strong enough. As an American who is currently living with the consequences of thinking "we just need to get good and vote better," pursuing that strategy is a dead end.
The right wing wins because that is its ONLY goal. You will always be at a disadvantage because of natural human disagreements that you can NEVER get rid of. You can't beat them at their game because they have fully surrendered themselves to WINNING, WINNING, and more WINNING.
It's clear that you'll never accept this fact, because it's much more convenient to think you can just work harder.
Well, as a not-American whose left wing actually secured a government, you are wrong. Winning is the ONLY goal, because when you win you get to do things and when you lose you do not get to do things. And if you're not doing things you're just talking online and I genuinely have less depressing stuff to discuss online if that's the only goal.
I also fail to see how finding that we need to work harder is convenient. From where I stand it's a pain in the butt.
I have taken many things from US cultural imperialism, good and bad. I am not taking cushy leftie defeatism the-system-won't-let us nonsense. Every American I've met is simultaneously convinced that any change or victory is impossible and also that the revolution will be immediate and violent.
Screw all that noise. The left wins when it deploys a winning strategy and engages in politics to secure more power than it loses over time.
Yeah, I get that. A big issue in America that makes leftism seem so impossible is just how tied up anti-leftist sentiment is with American national identity. Capitalism and a hatred of marxism is ancient, with most of the most powerful unions of the progressive era being staunchly anti-communist. It is illusory, as it is innately tied to our imperial identity, which is why dismantling it in the American psyche is so important.
For the record, I was fairly invested in promoting institutional power until recently, holding onto the fleeting hope that liberals would be willing to work at all to save their own system, and leftists would wise up and use what tools they had available. Now that America as a nation is irrevocably toast, I hope to weaken the tribal identity. I only seek to use the tools I have available, and national institutions are not one of them.
However, my real goal is simply survival. I can't get rid of Trump, so I only have to outlive them.
Here's a party doing exactly what you suggest. Notice how the party isn't exactly soaring in the statistics and is disliked by leftists as a result of all the bigotry.
No, see, there's a difference between being good at using communication tools and being a bigot. That is part of the left's issue, too. The goal isn't to scapegoat the same people the right does, that typically does not work. The idea is to scapegoat the same people that are already being targeted (right wing politicians, large corporations, billionaires) effectively.
You keep using the word scapegoat ? I find the way you speak rather iffy in general
Aha. And that's the left putting the aesthetics of progressivism over the ethics and the politics of progressivisim.
Again, I only care about talking like the good guys talk insofar it gets the good guys a position of political power. Not because we say the right things or we feel the right things or we have a consistent, morally homogeneous maximalist approach to improving the world, but because a butt in a chair can make the world marginally better for the rest.
I'd be more lenient and mushy about that if we weren't in the process of the second rise of fascism. We're kind of in panic mode now.
Scapegoating implies being deceitful. It's not about aesthetics.
It is if the scapegoat is a rich guy without much actual influence but a flashy car. It is if it's some rich weirdo's kinks being paraded to make the moneyed class appear unethical or morally deranged.
Think about how bad one has to be at this to have lost the public argument regarding marginalized trans people being a moral risk while Trump and the British royalty were engaged in the whole Epstein fiasco. And that's before the whole "lost in court to his pornstar lover" stuff went down.
And they still won, rallied religious leaders around them, won again and successfully convinced the populace that queer people will attack their kids in school.
It is political negligence of the highest order.
No, they just have more means and control the media. But again, your language use is bad. Scapegoating is inherently a word that describes a form of deceit.
Yeah.
Hey, guess what? Trump isn't bad because he has a mushroom for a penis and had extramarital sex.
And no, they don't have more means or control the media more than antivaxxers did. Or QAnon did. How did the fascists leverage those things into political support through social media and fringe publications but the left can't get actual, legtimate issues to take the spotlight?
It's not "being suppressed". Let's have a modicum of self-criticism. Take some responsibility at all. At some point. Please.
You won't be convincing anyone like this
Well, no, but it's hard to watch it all circle down the drain and not say anything.
Which is, I suppose, the underlying problem.
I'm still right, though.
lol