Seriously how has Parenti become so popular so suddenly????
People have been posting his shit all over tiktok and it always blows up.
Specifically the clip of him talking about “”poor”” countries and how there is really no such thing as a poor country, just an exploited one
Michael Brooks Show covered it too and even used my vid but I'm surprised his Cuba stuff doesn't get as much play. That shit was everywhere a few years ago. Maybe because libs are still weird about specific countries.
Seriously how has Parenti become so popular so suddenly???
People's material conditions have deteriorated to the point where they're looking outside of mainstream politics for solutions.
Because the Chomsky, Port Huron statement, SDS bullshit that we've been trying for 60 years has produced nothing but L after L after L. People are giving Leninism another look.
Yeah, we need a permanent purge of anyone who still associates with that garbage.
This worries me a lot tbh, especially because radlibs have started to latch onto shit like "material conditions" as a meme to just parrot whatever dumb shit they've always been asking for
Perhaps, but "Blackshirts and Reds" is a book that explicitly defends the USSR, there is a pretty large gap between it and Chomsky's more popular books.
I mean it helps that parenti spends the first chapter dunking the fuck out of the fascists and the capitalists.
And when you got some really juicy stuff like that as your opening salvo, people are gonna be more willing to dig into your stuff, especially when your work actually has a nuanced as fuck opinion on stuff you never read about in H.S.
Being auth-left is actually acceptable again in the US, for the first time since the 70s.
lol, calm down. "Auth" rolls of the tongue better than "illiberal"
Accepting the right wing framing of Marxism-Leninism as authoritarian (itself a term designed to conflate fascism with communism) because it "rolls off the tongue" is truly some galaxy brain shit
Stop buying into the right-wing framing that "authoritarianism" is a bad thing. The point of "speaking truth to power" is so that you can BE the power. Anarchists, I swear to God...
I'm not an anarchist, lol. Are you under the impression that "dictatorship of the proletariat" means a literal dictatorship rather than proletarian democracy?
While we're on the subject of how to best frame leftist ideas, the phrase "dictatorship of the proletariat" should be retired. It produces exactly the sort of confusion you describe: unless your audience is read up on ML theory, it sounds like you're calling for a literal dictatorship. This is doubly true when you consider how decades of American propaganda have invariably portrayed socialist leaders as dictators.
The phrase immediately poisons the well. Unless you very carefully explain the theoretical background before uttering it, your audience unthinkingly rejects it, and now you're playing defense and getting into semantics instead of making a positive case for how a leftist state should be run. And the phrase adds nothing besides a link to other theory (that your audience hasn't read) -- something like "proletarian democracy" conveys the exact same idea without any of the baggage.
If the choice is between sticking to verbatim quotes from century-old texts or rephrasing the ideas to maximize their appeal to a modern audience, that's a no-brainer. Lenin himself (and Mao, and others) didn't just stick to what had been written before them; they rephrased the fundamental ideas to better communicate them in their time and place. We should follow suit.
Power imbalance reversal. Democratization of the working class. Working class full participatory democracy (?) Socializing (or socialization of) democracy (i always liked this one cause it subverts democratic socialism a bit). Workplace democracy.
No, but there's nothing wrong with wiedling "authority". Sorry for saying a word from The Bad, Cringe Place with the Nazis and getting you in a tizzy.
Sorry for saying a word from The Bad, Cringe Place with the Nazis and getting you in a tizzy.
ARE YOU TRIGGERED ARE YOU TRIGGERED ARE YOU TRIGGERED ARE YOU
No, but there’s nothing wrong with wiedling “authority”
Authoritarianism doesn't just mean wielding authority. If it did, then literally any form of hierarchy would be authoritarian, and it would be a meaningless term.
I laughed way too hard at this exchange. Reminds me of the time I got schooled by communist back when I was lib and using 'authoritarian' like the word was my right arm.
Dude, you're the one who freaked out because I used the No No word from the Bad Place
Yeah, I'm freaking out so hard I'm literally running naked through the streets gibbering and raving rn. Please send help
Ensuring that the power of the masses always supercedes and crushes the power of the bourgeois is inherently democratic.
No, it's not, and that's OK. "Democracy" is a fucking sham.
Wow, an orbánism, wouldn't have thought it won't be me to use that word first.
Radicalizing takes time, and you have to hook them in through moderate stuff we’d consider libshit
Seriously how has Parenti become so popular so suddenly???
banging on the table Yellow parenti YELLOW PARENTI YELLOW PARENTI.
Damn I would really like for me to be wrong about the left being unable to succeed in the west
On one hand I’ll have to admit I was wrong publicly. On the other hand It would be epic
you can get away with not actually saying "i was wrong" by just stoically saying "well, I'll be damned...." and looking wistfully off into the distance.
I’m actually just going to retire to the mountains and grow a beard and write a book called “What happened” that 73 people buy
Blackshirts and Reds has been on my reading list for a while now, do I need to bump it up?
a competent liberal debatelord will laugh at you
You shouldn't be arguing on liberal debatelord turf anyway. Those are some of the least likely people to radicalize, they'll waste the most of your time sending you off on countless citation errands, and no normal person is going to read past maybe the first comment or two of your 50,000 word exchange.
If you're talking to libs -- and that's a good radicalization strategy; most people here were once libs -- aim for folks that are culturally Democratic, or maybe even decently informed Democrats, but who aren't bought into the party hook, line, and sinker. Think people who watch CNN, but who aren't obsessed with it to the point where they'll get in Twitter slapfights over Chris Cuomo or whoever's honor.
I’m probably what you would consider a tankie. I fall hard under ML, but im always expanding and reading other theory from other movements.
you probably are already aware of a lot of what's covered in the book and don't need convincing but it will most likely give you some good ammo and talking points when debunking/discussing common myths and lies about communism.
I get this take, but I'll offer a different one: even if you already know most of the broad strokes of the book, it's concise, highly readable, covers tons of ground, and is largely organized around refuting common anti-communist talking points. A big part of what makes it so good is that it helps the reader become a better advocate for leftism, which is needed if we're going to convince more people to become leftists.
I feel like Parenti has great 80's aesthetics in addition to a wonderfully enjoyable to listen to speaking voice. Its one of those where if you know you're reading his words you immediately put it into his cadence ala Professor Farnsworth. Big Dick Wolff is another example of this.
