Me

Caring too much about a better world to knowingly replicate unhealthy activist patterns

Yeah same lol, being in a party formation that's explicitly anti-imperialist in the belly of the beast and who work against the active settler colonialism of the US, it really helps practically and psychologically

I actually donate $50.1k every month so who's really building communism now huh???

There's probably a kernel of truth in this, but in all reality, the vast majority of the world was homophobic at the time. It doesn't excuse it, but is instead something that should (and can be and has been!) be a huge part of consideration for ML treatment of LGBTQ folks. In reality, this was an unfortunate failing of the Soviet project at the time (and many socialist projects during this period); some more analysis on why LGBTQ issues are so centric to Marxism is in this Liberation School article.

How did you make this???

WeBeanis

More accurately to the article, dual power can not exist and be built during regular periods, it has to be built and introduced during times of crisis (historically this has been done rapidly by having a well-equipped and well-connected communist party as the article suggest). You're right that we're not going to build those institutions now, and that's exactly what the article is saying, but instead that these things function and work in periods of instability in society; and are successful based off of being able to bring regular people into them and have regular people put their trust and faith moreso into them than their fear of the currently existing government.

The article says that "dual power" tactics as we commonly see them are best done for outreach, not to be done for their own ends, but instead as ways to access sections of the community and create the potential to really bring people into a revolutionary party and eventually building dual power structures when periods of serious crisis occur.

Removed by mod

You shouldn't blame yourself or voters in your country. It was the liberal party in the US that failed to garner any support due to it's support of genocide and other factors. These are failings of the political system both countries have inherently that are designed to fail this way, they need to be overthrown and not negotiated with.

¿Por qué no los dos?

Show

Death to America

This meme was made by stonetoss, a known neo-nazi

What the author is asking for in terms of systemic changes are not ridiculous and represent no type of discrimination, in fact the opposite, they represent centering those people most racialized and most dominated by our current imperialist and colonizer form of capital. To say that I'd instead be a member of the ACP, a pretty explicitly white supremacist aligned organization, is disgusting. I know I should be joking and clowning on you but that's just nasty.

I think you raise some interesting points but I think that this just falls back into the failures of prefiguration and expecting resistance and revolution to grow out of an "organic" movement.

If we require prefiguration for our organizational forms, i.e. that we try and create the world that we want in miniature in the organizations we create, then we'll largely fail without a greater strategic basis. This is the thesis of If We Burn by Vincent Bevins, which goes into how these tenets of prefiguration for our organizations lead to them being ultimately too flexible and loose to take hold of national revolutionary crisises which better-led movements are able to take to their advantage.

This just sounds like the age old problem of relying and requiring "organic" growth to happen. It'll happen, it'll get us far, but it has absolutely never been shown on a large national scale to get us far enough to lead to a revolutionary overthrow of society. The party justifies itself by being a conscious organ for working class people to collect knowledge, theory, and practice under one roof which is able to coordinate itself and operate outside the bounds of what would be "organic" or occur naturally otherwise. It doesn't exist at the exclusion of organic left-wing growth, as that's very necessary, but instead represents a section of this organic growth which is then conscious of itself and able to operate outside the bounds previously thought possible.

Am I understanding this all correctly?

American backed forces when they're pursuing power:

American backed forces when they achieve power:

I have to say my familiarity with NVNH is very surface level, as in I have no familiarity with it, but this concept of trying to create a "protocol" for safe, effective, and strong communication and cooperation between different people and groups sounds like the purpose of a socialist party. For example, a reason for a socialist party to exist is to give people from these different groups to sit down in one space, talk, compare notes, resolve tensions within working class communities for greater cooperation, etc. Am I wrong in saying that?

Social democracy and social democrats are more focused on maintenance of the current society than on fundamentally changing it, and the most critical part of the current society is the domination of one economic class (the ruling class, bourgeois class, whatever you want to call it). This party, as a social democratic party and not a revolutionary socialist party, is more interested in the maintenance of the gains they've made while not challenging the fundamentals of bourgeois class rule. Necessarily though, that means they'll abandon trans people like us, so this makes sense in a sad way. Much like how liberals and social democrats will talk about their lofty goals, but ultimately cooperate and work with fascists and fascism; when revolutionary changes are taken off the table, backsliding is inevitable.