-7DeadlyFetishes
Lenin says "performative" votes are a necessary part of useful communist electoralism. You wouldn't want to disappoint this face, would you? :back-to-me:
I feel like your pulling my leg here but I can neither confirm nor deny your claim.
-7DeadlyFetishes
Legit Lenin said to use guaranteed-to-fail-in-bourgeois-democratic-chambers communist positions to demonstrate what is possible only through revolution and point fingers at those standing in our way, albeit as part of stating that you first need a mass of class conscious workers - such as those disappointed by anticapitalist reformism (itself promising and failing to deliver such things by necessity).
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/lwc/ch09.htm
But most importantly look at these widdle cheeks. :lenin-laugh:
Is there a good Lenin compilation? I read the one thing he has about the State (I have brain damage from sleep deprivation so I don't even remember if it was State and Rev) but I'm always amazed at how clever and insightful the snippets I see are
Man Lenin hated Kautsky it was weird reading a classic Marxist trash talking someone and having actually heard of them
Hmm. I think his main writings are so straightforward and of reasonable length that I'd recommend those instead. State and Rev, What Is To Be Done, Imperialism: The Highest State of Capitalism, and of course this essay, Left-Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder.
He was indeed highly insightful, particularly as someone who led an organized revolution. I think some of the best theory building one can do is to use these experiences and insights as a template that you then criticize and update based on salient differences between modern + local conditions and those of Tsarist Russia, Humiliated China, and Colonial Cuba.
Yeah Rosa said something similar, essentially use elections to lose while standing on a soapbox and agitating. The moment you concern yourself with if you win or get a loss or gain, you've failed https://www.marxists.org/archive/luxemburg/1898/09/30.htm
And only under these conditions do we fight in the sole permissible way for what is at any time ‘possible’. Now if one says that we should offer an exchange – our consent to militaristic and tariff legislation in return for political concessions or social reforms – then one is sacrificing the basic principles of the class struggle for momentary advantage, and one’s actions are based on opportunism. Opportunism, incidentally, is a political game which can be lost in two ways: not only basic principles but also practical success may be forfeited. The assumption that one can achieve the greatest number of successes by making concessions rests on a complete error. Here, as in all great matters, the most cunning persons are not the most intelligent. Bismarck once told a bourgeois opposition party: ‘You will deprive yourselves of any practical influences if you always and as a matter of course say no.’ The old boy was then, as so often, more intelligent than is Pappenheimer.[A] Indeed, a bourgeois party, that is, a party which says yes to the existing order as a whole, but which will say no to the day-to-day consequences of this order, is a hybrid, an artificial creation, which is neither fish nor flash nor fowl. We who oppose the entire present order see things quite differently. In our no, in our intransigent attitude, lies our whole strength. It is this attitude that earns us the fear and respect of the enemy and the trust and support of the people. Precisely because we do not yield one inch from our position, we force the government and the bourgeois parties to concede to us the few immediate successes that can be gained. But if we begin to chase after what is ‘possible’ according to the principles of opportunism, unconcerned with our own principles, and by means of statesmanlike barter, then we will soon find ourselves in the same situation as the hunter who has not only failed to stay the deer but has also lost his gun in the process.
We do not shudder at the foreign terms, opportunism and the art of the possible, as Heine believes; we shudder only when they are ‘Germanized’ into our party practice. Let them remain foreign words for us. And, if occasion arises, let our comrades shun the role of interpreter.
The Communist stance on shit like this is pretty fucking clear.
huh you know maybe signalling centrism on the "cannibalize the palestinians" act while trying to coopt leftism is a bad thing
As opposed to to signalling opposition of the "cannibalize the palestinians" act that still would have passed. It's definetly an AOC cringe compliation worthy moment but that's all it is, idk why people are acting like it's the end of the world becuase of it.
-7DeadlyFetishes
Compare the outcry about AOC's "present" versus Jamaal Bowman's "yes" and you'll start finding answers.
The answer is Bowman comparatively never gets any press, so no one cares about him. Electoral politics are a media circus. :shrug-outta-hecks:
Are the reasons AOC gets more press at least in part sexist? Yeah, probably. But I feel like putting that on most of the people here isn't really justified.
TBH I wish I heard less about the squad.
Same on hearing less about them.
But I feel like putting that on most of the people here isn’t really justified.
This is an offshoot of reddit and exists in the internet, generally. It is Hexberican Exceptionalism :very-smart: to think that this site is immune.
It's not immune, that's why I said most. I spent like half of yesterday in a struggle session over sexist language. However, most of the posters here do know better, as evidenced by the votes on comments arguing about it.
It definitely factors in, but the primary reason is IMO name recognition/media circus.
Well, I never said most people were guilty, just that it's a thing. So I'm not sure what the disagreement is here.
I just disagree with the characterisation of
Compare the outcry about AOC’s “present” versus Jamaal Bowman’s “yes” and you’ll start finding answers.
because it implies the main cause is sexism. But I guess we do agree. :shrug-outta-hecks:
Because we have moral indignation over apartheid and all who enable it or refuse to stand by their supposed principles. No one thinks its the end of the world, we just think it was cowardly. you are acting like people being disgusted are acting like its the end of the world IS the end of the fucking world
9
senatorsvoted against it, so its not like she's the only one who would've done it.That she broke down crying has been sitting heavy with me. Maybe it's just that interview Felix did with the imprisoned governor, but it feels like some seriously fucked up coercion is happening. I know her personal vote doesn't actually matter... but the DNC is so hollow and tone-obsessed, breaking out the serious threats just to preserve their "optics"... it's plausible.
Haven't thought of it that way, but still I wish AOC would stop having cringe moments like, every three weeks now.
-7DeadlyFetishes
The constant cringe is part of what gives me pause. She's voted 'present' on shitty bills before without breaking down.
All that being said, this could just be the straw that broke the camel's back. She's talked about how miserable she is in DC, and anything involving Israel is extra emotionally charged in general.
I think she's being groomed by the party. They want to consume her and turn her into either another party apparatchik or just grind her down to nothing.
Ah, I didn't watch the video, I just know of it. Watching a viral video of someone crying felt kinda intrusive
I'm generally on the "Squad good" train and feel like most of the arguments against them are sectarian ultraleft crap but like...there's no defending AOC and Jamaal Bowman's actions yesterday. The actions were pathetic (doubly so for Bowman), and we'd all be better off taking it at face value and calling them cowards.
I think Bowman has an excuse, given that he already had some werid pro-israel platform when running for Congress cause his district is full of jewish people who have nothing better to do but to elect pro israel canidates. AOC less so but I oppose all the melodramatic drama about her abandoning her progressive values, as if operating within the capitalist bloodlust government doesn't require sacrificing of ideals, otherwise your kicked out for rocking the boat to hard.
-7DeadlyFetishes
They have little reason to do so, they already have pretty much every vote secured except for a few. Sure they might do it anyway, but there's not particularly as strong a reason anymore.
That being said the crying bit does seem kind of out of place without that.
You know that's a really good point, I guess some AOC Nay vote could have some long-term impact on discussion of Israel because she's so popular she could bring her fans around.
I think the Israel lobby found something to blackmail her with
It doesn't have to be even that dramatic. It could be "If you vote 'No' then we're carving $10B out of the infrastructure bill for Green Energy initiatives" or something equivalent. Do this performative vote or we gut policy you actually care about.
AOC probably ran around asking how they can even do that, realized the degree to which the whole system was beholden to a handful of assholes, and cracked up over it.
You don't sound like a conspiracy theorist, but ascribing disproportionate power to "the Israel Lobby" is a hallmark of modern antisemitism.
They get their way because they're an outpost of american empire, not because they secretly control US politicians. America is the puppet master, Israel is the puppet, not vice versa, and to suggest the opposite fringes on "the Jews control politics"
What practical purpose could AOC serve if not to "performatively" vote for things that are unquestionably bad? Like, is there a stamp card where if she votes along with the party 10 times, the party leadership will support the GND or whatever?
What practical purpose could AOC serve if not to “performatively” vote for things that are unquestionably bad?
Well, there's this $3.5T infrastructure bill that she's got a slice of. Would be a shame if her share got accidentally nixed from the legislation because she couldn't vote for Palestinian Baby Murder.
That's the practical purpose of any House Rep. Sending money back to your district.
Notably, this objective could be accomplished just as well if her predecessor was still in office
Different Rep means different priorities. Crowley likely would have commanded a larger chunk, but you can guarantee he'd be throwing more of his share at AIPAC special interests in order to climb the ladder.
Same reason as Bernie Sanders, they're outnumber in every way shape and form, but Bernie and the Squad, for all the cringe shit they do did more to foster a leftist bloc in America moreso than SA, PSL and CPUSA combined, even if they aren't leftist themselves. I know this sounds like some 4D chess shit but we wouldn't be having this coversation had Bernie not stepped up to run for president back in 2015.
-7DeadlyFetisehes
Sure, but those gains largely came from using their platform, which is also the extent to which I think electoralism is useful as a tactic. Which is exactly why I would like AOC to publicly oppose shit like this.
Fair point, but people memory-holed the Israel shit from a couple months ago pretty quick, why now people are "drawing a line in the sand for AOC" is just... stupid. Your all going to forget and AOC will retweet a Robert Reich tweet about inequality and everyone will forget why they were mad in the first place.
-7DeadlyFetishes
I really don't care much about what AOC says or does because I don't expect a lot from her or expect her to be able to effect a lot of change. It has been clear that she's a Soc Dem that is committed to working within the existing party apparatus, a la Bernie Sanders. She is what she is.
This onion was home grown and had some spelling error in the title.
-7DeadlyFetishes
I mean that's also my outlook on things but the people making the biggest fit about this whole ordeal are sweaty terminally online leftists who've never attended a protest or union drive in thier life but preach proliteriet revolution and scream at you to read theory, as if that's what going to liberate America.
Oh, and hating on AOC is apparently also neccessary for the socialist project, no alienation happening there at all!
-7DeadlyFetishes
I personally don't really care, but if she keeps making clearly contradictory decisions like this it actually makes our job easier because she'll eventually alienate herself from her base and they'll look for another option.
So critical support for AOC making weird votes?
The fact that she refused to explain or even acknowledge having changed her vote is probably like the last straw for me.
Like fuck off if you're going to be that dishonest and just make rambling statements to distract everyone from your actions, please go collect your paycheck and never appear in left media circles again.
never appear in left media circles again
bold of you to assume she was ever left to begin with, shes a social democrat.
-7DeadlyFetishes
I dont think shes a leftist but she keeps showing up in leftist circles having a bunch of apologism thrown at her.
Like goddamn, if electoralism is so hard to do that you cant even do symbolic votes against ethnic cleansing I dont want any electoralism at all, why would anyone support electoralism if these circumstances are so impossible to even do anything in, and if the circumstances arent that tough then obviously AOC is not "the right kind" of electoralism.
the jump from 9 to 10 votes would have surely but the vote count on edge, it was effectivly preformative for the squad&Co to cast no votes.
-7DeadlyFetishes
I was super confused at first lol but yeah I gotchu.
-7DeadlyFetishes
https://twitter.com/m7mdkurd/status/1441546811957813251
But no AOC being mocked by commies is the real tragedy
Explain to me how AOC's single vote could have stopped this.
-7DeadlyFetishes
When did I say it would've? Doing the right thing is not dependent on if you will stop a bad thing from happening. Voting against Iraq wouldn't have stopped it. Opposing apartheid is the point of opposing apartheid. She wants understanding for not even being able to perform doing the right thing, meanwhile Palestinians are fucking murdered at that same time. The cost are the literal deaths happening as she cried or posted about why she couldn't even vote "no".
People are dying, voting no is not too much to fucking ask
Lol you post a random fucking tweet about a palestinian getting thier head blow clean off as if you you're pinning the blame on AOC, but the moment I challenge you on that you immediatly turn around and demand that AOC performativly vote to stop funding Israel even though you admitted it still won't do anything. It's called performative for a reason, arguing over whether AOC should have voted yes or no over a vote she had no real say is no different then literally any other American bitching over which geriatric old white man is going to save America. Literally let it go and stop expecting AOC to be the teh epic communist everyone wants her to be and realize that she's at best, a social democrat.
-7DeadlyFetishes
"pinning the blame on AOC"
Either just being disingenuous or actually got kicked in the head cause no, that's not what I fucking did.
But no AOC being mocked by commies is the real tragedy
That was the entire thing. You didn't "challenge me on that", you fucking made up a post I didn't make. No one is dodging your brilliant arguments, you are just being a badfaith lib. For real explain how the fucking hell my comment pins the blame on AOC? I mocked her attempt for sympathy and the people spending more time defending her than the Palestinians actively getting shot in the head.
If it matters so little, then why are you making memes bitching about people giving a shit and throwing a tantrum here and on reddit over people mocking AOC?
Voting against apartheid, even if it does nothing, is not "teh epic communist" you cynical fuck. This is what is so aggravating, this attitude that being uncompromising about the plight of a people being genocided is just "epic commie ranting" or something. This has nothing to do with being based, it has to do with outrage over our supposed "left" politicians calling themselves socialists and then being incapable of even performatively doing the right thing.
You sure seem obsessive about how other people think of AOC for someone who says its performative and doesn't matter. You need to make fake people and fake comments just to be outraged at people being outraged at cowardice towards apartheid. This woe is me shit is why we bitch about AOC, and its exactly what you are doing being badfaith and confrontational as fuck. Be a dick all you want, but don't fucking act like this is about "teh epic communist" rather than disgust over APARTHEID
