Calling radicalizing baby leftists "fascists" is high up on the list of self-defeating things leftists do. We talk about a pipeline to the left all the time -- that's taking a dump right in the middle of it.
Whether it's accurate is immaterial -- if we insult people who are moving in our direction, or who might be convinced to move in our direction, we're going to hinder that movement or drive people away. Everybody knows someone who may have a good point here or there, but is such an asshole about it that no one ever wants to give them the satisfaction of agreeing.
It's extremely easy to explain the problems of social democracy (namely, that in practice it's relied heavily on imperial exploitation) without calling someone who just came around to the idea of Medicare for All a fascist. There's no reason to shit all over people who we're going to need to work with.
In my experience socdems do not move left unless harassed into it. The ones that actually say socdem and know what it means anyway. They have taken that position because they seek to uphold capitalism, understand what demsocs are and reject that consciously. They have literally taken an anti-communist position which for anyone who understand what fascism actually is makes it clearly a fascist reaction, although moderate variant. I convert more republicans through friendly conversation than socdems.
The terminology is not very useful rhetorically though I agree. It makes the eyeballs of libs pop out and could use some updating to fit a modern way to present it. This doesn't matter a huge amount here though at least not at the moment with no clear growth source occurring, I was generating a bit of traffic before but have been incredibly busy up until very recently.
In my personal experience you need to use both positive and negative reinforcement. I always cheer on my friends when they come around to some idea, like when they recognize the problems with police departments or something similar. On the other hand if they say something lib I don't hesitate to call them out on it. I would never call them fascists though, I would say that their thought process is similar to fascists' at the most.
Yeah, I've never liked the social fascist label because it just feels too provocative, decisive, and alienating. Hell even commintern basically ditched it back then. I get the reasons why we call it that, but I usually use something like accidental fascist enablers towards people that are clearly misinformed.
I believe fascists should be shot. Even otherwise moderate people are often fine with fascists getting beaten wherever they show their faces. When you call someone a _______ fascist, that's what you're saying to them. Do you think they're going to work with people who want them beaten, or even killed?
Even if bullying has its uses (and we place way too much stock in that), there's the type of light shit-flinging you might direct at a friend with a bad take, and then there's saying that if you had the power you might kill someone.
deleted by creator
Calling radicalizing baby leftists "fascists" is high up on the list of self-defeating things leftists do. We talk about a pipeline to the left all the time -- that's taking a dump right in the middle of it.
Dodeca is just confusing demsoc with socdem. Calling the socdems social fascism is totally accurate.
Whether it's accurate is immaterial -- if we insult people who are moving in our direction, or who might be convinced to move in our direction, we're going to hinder that movement or drive people away. Everybody knows someone who may have a good point here or there, but is such an asshole about it that no one ever wants to give them the satisfaction of agreeing.
It's extremely easy to explain the problems of social democracy (namely, that in practice it's relied heavily on imperial exploitation) without calling someone who just came around to the idea of Medicare for All a fascist. There's no reason to shit all over people who we're going to need to work with.
In my experience socdems do not move left unless harassed into it. The ones that actually say socdem and know what it means anyway. They have taken that position because they seek to uphold capitalism, understand what demsocs are and reject that consciously. They have literally taken an anti-communist position which for anyone who understand what fascism actually is makes it clearly a fascist reaction, although moderate variant. I convert more republicans through friendly conversation than socdems.
The terminology is not very useful rhetorically though I agree. It makes the eyeballs of libs pop out and could use some updating to fit a modern way to present it. This doesn't matter a huge amount here though at least not at the moment with no clear growth source occurring, I was generating a bit of traffic before but have been incredibly busy up until very recently.
In my personal experience you need to use both positive and negative reinforcement. I always cheer on my friends when they come around to some idea, like when they recognize the problems with police departments or something similar. On the other hand if they say something lib I don't hesitate to call them out on it. I would never call them fascists though, I would say that their thought process is similar to fascists' at the most.
deleted by creator
I got you
Yeah, I've never liked the social fascist label because it just feels too provocative, decisive, and alienating. Hell even commintern basically ditched it back then. I get the reasons why we call it that, but I usually use something like accidental fascist enablers towards people that are clearly misinformed.
The way I heard it explained once is:
Even if bullying has its uses (and we place way too much stock in that), there's the type of light shit-flinging you might direct at a friend with a bad take, and then there's saying that if you had the power you might kill someone.
Yeah, it's still an improvement over the radical wing of fascism that most are indoctrinated into
deleted by creator
:stalin-heart: