Let's say that you are in opposition to someone's political project. Imo there are there are four major options available:
To make pleas
To ask or demand that they cease a course of action such as a war or that they release political prisoners like Leonard Peltier or Mumia Abu-Jamal.
To listen to your opponent so as to better critique them or to get better information about what moves they are going to make
This is useful in a Khrushchev-type situation because you can quote them directly, debunk their bullshit, and if you're lucky you might even be able to get ahead of where they have signalled they are taking things to provide pre-emptive critique with which to strengthen the counter-movement.
To grill your opponent
This is more in the style of the dying art of the adversarial journalist. You throw difficult or impossible questions at them and try to trip them up or expose more information than they otherwise would. Unlikely that this would be tolerated from a "friendly" delegation that is being extended the offer of a private audience to much extent.
Conscientious objection
This is where you are completely opposed to them or where they are doing something unconscionable at the moment. For best effect, attend and then when the hot-button issue gets mentioned or you bring it up, walk out at their response.
(Of course there are a million other options depending on the circumstances such as choosing to meet with king Charles so you can keep your hands in your pockets and spit in his face or to talk enthusiastically about the French or October Revolutions.)
These people are supposed to be part of a political vanguard.
The fact that they are playing at politics like it's a fucking highschool popularity contest speaks volumes about how deeply unserious and oblivious they are. I would have a modicum of respect for them if they had chosen to act in a way that advances their political ends to some extent, even if I disagreed with their goals. This, however, is dismal.
I hope the Cuban government rejects those people who didn't meet with Diaz-Canel and instead met with the opposition leaders next time they apply for a visa.
I would have a modicum of respect for them if they had chosen to act in a way that advances their political ends to some extent, even if I disagreed with their goals. This, however, is dismal.
They met up with Cuban dissent groups. That's their political goal: to network with Cuban dissent groups in Cuba and Cuban gusanos in Miami (she mentioned how she focuses her organizing on gusanos in Miami) with the ultimate political goal of toppling the Cuban government.
Without wanting to cause drama, I have a very low bar for my expectations of the DSA (especially the executive end of it) but despite that I'm still surprised to hear about this.
On a personal level the only reason I'd ever get involved with the DSA would be to network with people on a grassroots level, especially where there aren't other options in my region, or to foment a split.
Every time I speak to a self-proclaimed "democratic socialist" or I hear about a DemSoc org invariably I come away from it even more disappointed in them. It's funny how these clowns will chastise people like me for "advocating for bloody and violent revolution" and how reformism is the correct/only way or how I need to change my rhetoric or my approach because I will "lose them"; I always respond to them telling them that they are my ideological opponent and that I neither want their approval nor am I seeking it. This usually upsets them because they tend to have a serious case of political Main Character Syndrome where they presume that everyone agrees with them, where they think that they have a special claim over the term "socialist", and they assume that everyone wants their involvement:
"I don't want to play with you!!"
"Good, I ain't playin'. Go home because you aren't wanted here."
Can you link me to any evidence that clearly shows this person is allowing with gusanos in Miami or other people trying to overthrow Cuba's government? I will work on a resolution to expel her from DSA and get it percolating in my chapter.
Second, it limits the effectiveness of our external messaging and organizing, especially in regions of the country with large Hispanic and Cuban-American populations. While it is true that there are large sections of these diaspora communities, particularly Cuban exiles, who are hardcore reactionaries and have petty-bourgeois class interests, it would be a mistake to treat these communities as monolithic or immovable. In my own experience organizing in Miami, there is a large presence of Cubans in every local struggle, whether it be university students and faculty walking out against our far-right state legislature’s censorship of education, or local Starbucks workers’ struggling to unionize their stores.
So, she's based in Miami, the principle hive where all Cuban gusanos are located at. This by itself is an extremely tenuous link. But someone in the other thread dug this up:
He is one of the few journalists who cover the persecution of the San Isidro Movement and its leader Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara. In his journalistic work, he thinks it’s very important to provide the most complete information possible without getting carried away by personal feelings.
The San Isidro movement being a color revolution with NED funding.
These two facts, along with the complete disrespect for the Cuban president, paints a certain picture. It's extraordinary unlikely that someone who fraternizes with Cuban gusanos and met up with a journalist and other people closely tied with that abortive color revolution would just be someone who got tricked. There's a particular political objective she's trying to accomplish.
I don't think this is enough to kick her out, but she's someone to watch out for.
It seems like enough is there to get her off NPC or at least out of the International Committee. I can't trust this person to represent DSA or it's members correctly.
Lol. The fucking president of an AES country (or ANY COUNTRY) makes time to sit down and talk with you and you skip out? What in the entire fuck.
I've always defended DSA, even against many, many criticisms that are lobbed at them by other MLs, but this is... wrong.
So... wrong-headed of them to do this.
Sounds like the rest of the group was chill, at least.
yeh
Let's say that you are in opposition to someone's political project. Imo there are there are four major options available:
To ask or demand that they cease a course of action such as a war or that they release political prisoners like Leonard Peltier or Mumia Abu-Jamal.
This is useful in a Khrushchev-type situation because you can quote them directly, debunk their bullshit, and if you're lucky you might even be able to get ahead of where they have signalled they are taking things to provide pre-emptive critique with which to strengthen the counter-movement.
This is more in the style of the dying art of the adversarial journalist. You throw difficult or impossible questions at them and try to trip them up or expose more information than they otherwise would. Unlikely that this would be tolerated from a "friendly" delegation that is being extended the offer of a private audience to much extent.
This is where you are completely opposed to them or where they are doing something unconscionable at the moment. For best effect, attend and then when the hot-button issue gets mentioned or you bring it up, walk out at their response.
(Of course there are a million other options depending on the circumstances such as choosing to meet with king Charles so you can keep your hands in your pockets and spit in his face or to talk enthusiastically about the French or October Revolutions.)
These people are supposed to be part of a political vanguard.
The fact that they are playing at politics like it's a fucking highschool popularity contest speaks volumes about how deeply unserious and oblivious they are. I would have a modicum of respect for them if they had chosen to act in a way that advances their political ends to some extent, even if I disagreed with their goals. This, however, is dismal.
I hope the Cuban government rejects those people who didn't meet with Diaz-Canel and instead met with the opposition leaders next time they apply for a visa.
They met up with Cuban dissent groups. That's their political goal: to network with Cuban dissent groups in Cuba and Cuban gusanos in Miami (she mentioned how she focuses her organizing on gusanos in Miami) with the ultimate political goal of toppling the Cuban government.
She's an op.
Oh goddamn.
Without wanting to cause drama, I have a very low bar for my expectations of the DSA (especially the executive end of it) but despite that I'm still surprised to hear about this.
On a personal level the only reason I'd ever get involved with the DSA would be to network with people on a grassroots level, especially where there aren't other options in my region, or to foment a split.
Every time I speak to a self-proclaimed "democratic socialist" or I hear about a DemSoc org invariably I come away from it even more disappointed in them. It's funny how these clowns will chastise people like me for "advocating for bloody and violent revolution" and how reformism is the correct/only way or how I need to change my rhetoric or my approach because I will "lose them"; I always respond to them telling them that they are my ideological opponent and that I neither want their approval nor am I seeking it. This usually upsets them because they tend to have a serious case of political Main Character Syndrome where they presume that everyone agrees with them, where they think that they have a special claim over the term "socialist", and they assume that everyone wants their involvement:
"I don't want to play with you!!"
"Good, I ain't playin'. Go home because you aren't wanted here."
Ugh this sucks... maybe I can help.
Can you link me to any evidence that clearly shows this person is allowing with gusanos in Miami or other people trying to overthrow Cuba's government? I will work on a resolution to expel her from DSA and get it percolating in my chapter.
I have no clear links, so it's not actionable. There's enough plausible deniability that she could wiggle her way out.
From her article, there's this part:
So, she's based in Miami, the principle hive where all Cuban gusanos are located at. This by itself is an extremely tenuous link. But someone in the other thread dug this up:
The San Isidro movement being a color revolution with NED funding.
These two facts, along with the complete disrespect for the Cuban president, paints a certain picture. It's extraordinary unlikely that someone who fraternizes with Cuban gusanos and met up with a journalist and other people closely tied with that abortive color revolution would just be someone who got tricked. There's a particular political objective she's trying to accomplish.
I don't think this is enough to kick her out, but she's someone to watch out for.
It seems like enough is there to get her off NPC or at least out of the International Committee. I can't trust this person to represent DSA or it's members correctly.