aski3252

If you care about age verification then steer clear of Red Hat associated distros like Fedora.

Fedora has age verification?

>Same, but I’m leaning towards the idea that us having numbers alone isn’t enough in this situation if we don’t show why numbers matter. It’s why I’m critical of leaders. Our masses are upset, angry, reactive. We need leaders who can channel and guide the strength of numbers and turn it into something useful

That’s what I mean when I say we need organisation. Leaders sure, but an overreliance on leaders is dangerous too. What we mainly need is organisation and discipline.

>Losing faith in their leader is not the same as losing faith in the ideology.

I completely agree, but it’s a potential opening. As long as they still have faith, it’s virtually impossible to reach anyone. When they are losing faith, it provides an opportunity to spread that doubt to not just a leader, but to other aspects of their worldview. It won’t work with everyone, it takes time and won’t work over night and it maybe won’t work in very aspect, but it’s a start.

>Massie and MTG are perfect examples of this.

We have to make a big distinction between leaders/politicans/progapandists and voters. Leaders/politicians/propagandists always have a political and/or financial incentive to hold their line. They might change leaders if it is beneficial to them, they might even switch sides when it is beneficial for them, but one has to assume it's purely opportunistic.

With voters, it CAN be different. But again, getting people to change their ideology/philosophy/core worldview isn’t easy and doesn’t happen automatically, which is why the “Fuck them, it’s not my job to educate them, they have to change their mind by their own, else I won’t have any contact with them“ attitude is a big mistake in my view because that practically guarantees them voting.

>We should be accepting of whatever help we can get, even if it’s some an-cap that only sides with us 10% of the time.

I don’t even think we should just accept them in our rank or work with them necessarily, I’m saying we need to have some kind of exchange with them in order to oppose their view. I don’t think you disagree with me, but so many online leftists seem to have the opinion that we should simply ignore them or tell them to fuck of until they somehow become radical leftists by themselves. That’s pretty much my main point.

>Alligator Alcatraz and El Salvador are not Dachau or Auschwitz. I agree that we’re not at the level of industrialized genocide like the Nazis were, but we’re deeper than should be allowed.

While I do understand the Nazi Germany comparisons to some degree, I’m not sure how useful they are. Conentration Camps were not unique to Nazi Germany or invented by them. And while Trump and the Trump Regime has some things in common with Nazi Germany and fascism, there are important differences. After the nazis seized power, they had near absolute power very soon. Opposition parties and/or opposition groups were outlawed and members imprisoned on a large scale. Very soon, any effective resistence from within was virtually impossible.

That’s not the case in the US and Trump still has a long way to go until they get there. People’s rights and liberties are definitely under attack, but they do still exist in some form and that must be exploited as long as you still can. Trump has no absolute power, he cannot simply arrest every member of the DSA, etc. Again, there is definitely a tendency towards autocracy, but it’s not done in the same way as in Nazi Germany, so tactics are not the same.

My suggestion is that this is not a situation where voting in better candidates

I'm not talking about voting, I'm talking about building organised mass movements who eventually can excercise leverage to achieve goals.

Maybe I'm too old school, but I still believe that the only way to achieve the radical change is by organised mass movements.

And you can forget about that if you are not even willing to get into contact with people who are losing faith in their right wing leader, but who might not have abandoned all their right wing believes. That's the perfect time to engage and further challenge their views, otherwise nothing will change and they will fall for the next right winger.

I think the solution is doing what we did against this kind of bigotry in 1861 and 1941

It's not 1941, it's not even 1933 yet, although very close to it. And until then, you shouldn't have a working class civil war, but organize..

“Fuck ‘em” isn’t a dismissal of their beliefs, it’s a dismissal of their right to exist.

I'm not sure what your point is or rather I think I'm misunderstanding. Are you suggesting leftists should start to assasinate all trump voters? If yes, that's very silly and not something that will happen. And if it would happen, it would be devestating for the left and only benefit the right. Violence is their game, our game is numbers and leverage.

But yeah, I think we are talking past eachother.

basically all cardio machines at the gym are going to be boring as all hell, going outside and doing activities is a lot more fun

Or, alternatively, use the stationary nature of indoor machines to make it less boring. I typically read. Or maybe watch a show or movie.

Outside is great too of course, but bad weather can be hard to overcome depending on where you live.

Until that attitude changes, fuck ‘em.

What I don't understand is how you expect that attitude to change. Bigottry isn't some kind of inate human characteristic, it is a tool/weapon used to divide us and stop us from reaching our goals.

I get that it's nice to imagine people just snapping out of it an realizing all their mistakes, but in the vast majority of cases, this won't happen by sheer magic..

Bigotry is thaught by your environment. And environment won't change without great effort. The right is putting in great effort to change people's environment so they don't get exposed to ideas which are dangerous to them. What is your suggestion, to just let them and give up? You think leftists and organizers of the past did that?

When I say "you", I mean you Americans and online lefties in general, not you personally.. I'm not suggesting you pit yourself in danger, but the only chance of turning around and somehow saving us from global disaster is to build mass movements along class lines.

And I'm not saying bigotry isn't an issue, quite the opposite. But a prerequisite to combat bigottry and organising in general is contact and engagement, and we are so far away from even that. So many people are desperately searching for solution, and the only people giving them some kind of explanation is the right..

There is so much work to do and so little time, and frankly, having likeminded people talking about working class solidarity and rising up against the ruling class while doing jack shit except for ranting online and somehow expect change to happen by sheer magic is very demoralizing..

So if you don't feel you are up to it or feel like you are putting yourself in danger, it does not apply to you. But we as the global left cannot afford to dismiss everyone who might still have bigotted views. And moments of disillusion with their right wing idols are perfect opportunities to work on their bigotry.

It's the only thing combatibg bigotry, it always takes effort and time.

I 100% agree. And no, it shouldn't be our job. But unfortunately, it kinda is.

I mostly grew up in a right wing/conservative environment. The only reason why I'm not a right winger is because I always had a curiosity for different ideas and ways of thinking and wanted to actually understand people's views.

Eventually, as frustrating as it was, I had to come to terms that many people don't share that curiosity. Most people are focused on other things and only seem to kind of adopt concepts they are told, often without really thinking about it.

And more often than not, it's right wingers telling them stuff and it's right wing stuff that sticks, as right wing stuff is quite simple and easily digestable (simple concepts, clear enemy, simple problems and simple solutions). However, oftentimes, it does not stick very hard and the only reason why it sticks is because they are simply never challenged. In a lot of cases, it slowly falls apart if you challenge them, as long as you don't give them an easy excuse to dismiss you.

But unfortunately, this is typically not a fast process. So yeah, it is very frustrating, especially because people have access to all the knowledge they need.

But the hard reality is that chances are they will sooner go down a crazy right wing conspiracy rabit whole. In order for them to move towards the left just by themselves, they would need to throw their entire understanding of virtually everything they know out the window, and by that point, the right is more comfortable because you can just build your world however you want.

It's very likely that they don't learn what they aren't thaught. You don't teach anything if there is no contact, and moments like this are opportunities for contact.

Yesyes, I get it, it's not your job to teach them. The issue is though that nobody else will, except of course propagandists on the right who are happy to teach them.

It is kind of baffling to me that many don't seem to have an analysis/understanding of maga beyond "stupidity and racism".

Of course that's a big part, but by itself, it's only scratching the surface?

And you don't have sympathy for Trump voters turning cloak? Seriously? I hope you can at least pretend because you aren't getting out of this mess without working with people like that. Else you might as well give up now.

This is probably unpopular, but Taiwan is imo not a good example of imperialism. Taiwan is where the old government has fled to and where the government there officially still claims to be the rightful goverment of China. Their official name is republic of China, which obviously leads to tensions with the "people's republic of China".

Imperialism is when a nation excercises significant influence and control over other independent nations. Taiwan is not an independent nation, they are a rival/competitor with similar regional claims.

A better example of Chinese imperialism could be their economic initiatives in Africa.

They say Arthemis landed on EARTH, but it actually landed on WATER (no earth far and wide). If they lie about something so obvious, what else are they lying about??

You are mixing social democrats with democratic socialists.

The origin and core of social democracy is clearly socialist and, in many cases, Marxist. Of course this was more and more deluted over time until today, were many social democratic parties have indeed completely abandoned their socialist roots even in theory.

However, historically, social democracy overall can (and imo should) still be seen as reformist socialism, at least partially. The way I see it, it's that the parties have abandoned social democracy by embracing neo-liberalism. have abandened those goals completely (e.g. modern German SPD, British Labour)

One could also argue that social democratic parties pretty much always had a leftist wing and a liberal wing, this is true today as well for the most part.

Its niceties are financed by imperial rent.

Isn't everything/anything existing under capitalism financed by imperial rent?

How is it different to China, for example, who also participates in the global capitalist economy and benefits from it?

When that flow contracts, the mask comes off.

When has this happened? Do you have a specific example of a social democratic party turning fascist (actually curious)? Turning neo-liberal, sure, but to me at least, equating neo-liberalism with fascism is an oversimplification. Or is the argument that socdem turns into neo-liberalism, neo-liberalism turns into fascism, ergo socdem=fascism?

>I explicitly said “helped,” not “solely responsible.” Multiple factors converged in 1933.

Fair enough.

they preserved the bourgeois state apparatus after 1918.

they kept the reactionary judiciary, the imperial officer corps, and the bureaucratic machinery intact. They unleashed the Freikorps on the KPD.

Whether or not you believe me, it does pain me to defend the SPD, but I guess I will still do it.

They didn't just preserve it, they were essential in building it. And that shouldn’t be surprising since in their view, socialism has to be build through a liberal democratic system instead of going straight from imperialist/monarchist to socialist.

And yes, they did a lot of “ultra-pragmatic” and desperate moves to protect the liberal republic and what was in their view the way towards socialism in the future and avoid a civil war/reversal of their gains. This does include them using Freikorps, which is imo indefensible, but it is at least somewhat explainable given the uncertainity of the situation.

And it's easy to judge in hindsight, but the German situation was quite different from Russia. There were uprisings all over the place, socialist republics were declared, but it was much more chaotic and the working class was much more divided. Chances of right wing and monarchists forces reversing power or even taking back more power seemed plausable.

>They refused every proposal for a united working class front against the Nazis.

This is very critical and one of the biggest issues. But again, this was a mutual thing. The KPD also refused to form any kind of front against the nazis until it was too late. Both factions failed to see nazism/fascism severely underestimated the threat of the fascists.

>Stalin characterized this relationship precisely when he stated that "Social-Democracy is objectively the moderate wing of fascism" and that these organizations "are not antipodes, they are twins."

And this characterization is in part what made it virtually impossible to form any kind of pragmatic alliance/front against the fascists and I honestly don’t understand what the purpose of this characterization is.. Why would they work with the SPD against the fascists when the SPD was, in practice, fascist itself?

social democracy functions as the left wing of counterrevolution.

Social democracy is against revolution and pro reform. If that makes it fascist, literally everything and everyone except for revolutionary socialists are/were fascists. This worldview, imo, is shooting yourself in the foot. And I don’t understand why this view still seems to be held. Many have no issue with critial support of regimes/groups/factions for specific and pragmatic goals. And then we don't live in Weihmar Germany anymore, there is virtually 0 revolutionary potential in the west, so what good does essentially turning virtually everyone into the enemy do?