This is where we would disagree. I don't think BJG has infiltrated the PMC in any meaningful sense. I just see it as her getting a paycheck from producing a show that entertains radlibs. From the Chomsky interview:
At 6:18 BJG talks about a coordinated mass of voters, the same way unions have arranged voting blocks in the past but it strikes me as hollow because I can't even think of a time within the last few decades when unions leveraged masses of voters to win electoral benefits. But even if they had, this strategy will not scale against the accelerating horrors that the ruling class aims to deliver to us. So this strategy of organizing one's vote just seems like a facile attempt to get electoral politics to deliver results for the working class.
At about 35:20 BJG says
the democratic party and Joe Biden is saying no you have to vote for me because of the environment i reject your individual material personal concerns i don't see it as i don't see how you can tell someone like that that even if there is are these bigger concerns that they should abstractly be invested in that they should put those things before their immediate material circumstances ... why is it that Joe Biden and democrats more broadly are rejecting these programs and what does that mean for our ability to actually affect change down the line without doing something that's more radical and and perhaps and and valuing our votes enough to arguably withhold them at some point.
See right here she's on the verge of saying something redacted, but she quickly backsteps to conditioning / withholding the vote. I understand why. And I think that's my criticism in a nutshell: carefully limiting the scope of one's arguments makes sense when Biden says criticizing capital makes you a criminal, but it's also lib shit.
At ~47:10 she makes her closing statement and it's all about Biden offering something more to get people to vote for him. I don't have confidence in this strategy to lead to good change or for anything to happen.
That is an excelent critique. If I am right and she is hiding her power level to maintain engagement with libs that doesn't speak well of her capabilities. I suppose I am projecting my hopes for her project onto her more than the evidence supports. I maintain I would rather see a comrade grifting the libs than a regular failchild but in the end that isn't a huge get so you got me there as well.
You are correct that at this point there is no major progress to report back. I think though it is too early to call her a lib and her work doesn't support her being a grifter. I could easily be proven wrong with time though.
This is where we would disagree. I don't think BJG has infiltrated the PMC in any meaningful sense. I just see it as her getting a paycheck from producing a show that entertains radlibs. From the Chomsky interview:
At 6:18 BJG talks about a coordinated mass of voters, the same way unions have arranged voting blocks in the past but it strikes me as hollow because I can't even think of a time within the last few decades when unions leveraged masses of voters to win electoral benefits. But even if they had, this strategy will not scale against the accelerating horrors that the ruling class aims to deliver to us. So this strategy of organizing one's vote just seems like a facile attempt to get electoral politics to deliver results for the working class.
At about 35:20 BJG says
See right here she's on the verge of saying something redacted, but she quickly backsteps to conditioning / withholding the vote. I understand why. And I think that's my criticism in a nutshell: carefully limiting the scope of one's arguments makes sense when Biden says criticizing capital makes you a criminal, but it's also lib shit.
At ~47:10 she makes her closing statement and it's all about Biden offering something more to get people to vote for him. I don't have confidence in this strategy to lead to good change or for anything to happen.
That is an excelent critique. If I am right and she is hiding her power level to maintain engagement with libs that doesn't speak well of her capabilities. I suppose I am projecting my hopes for her project onto her more than the evidence supports. I maintain I would rather see a comrade grifting the libs than a regular failchild but in the end that isn't a huge get so you got me there as well.
You are correct that at this point there is no major progress to report back. I think though it is too early to call her a lib and her work doesn't support her being a grifter. I could easily be proven wrong with time though.