Introduction187 posts and 19 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.
The left is currently experiencing a revival in America, so it is now a good time for the American left to plan out its long-term strategy. Before we can figure out what strategies to pursue, let's take a look at some of the challenges the left faces here:
-A weak and declining labor movement
-An electoral system that makes it nearly impossible for leftist parties to get elected to important offices
-Leftists are forced to run as Democrats if they want to win elections. It seems that being part of the Democratic Party makes leftist politicians less willing to challenge the political establishment.
-Large amount of fragmentation, especially on the far-left. For example, there are dozens of parties claiming the be the "vanguard" of the working class.
-A state that is ruthlessly efficient at repressing the left
-Racial tensions that could make it difficult to maintain a multiracial working class coalition
-A state that tremendous capacity to inflict violence on the left if the need were to arise
-Lack of left-wing paramilitaries
With these things in mind, I'll make some recommendations for what the American left should do.
The left should make a big priority of enacting electoral reform. They should seek to implement proportional representation at the local and state level wherever it can be voted on via a ballot measure. We can't expect legislatures to vote for legislation that would give them more competition, so we need to use direct democracy wherever possible. At the federal level it is not possible to enact proportional because there is a federal law mandating all House of Representative districts to be single-member. For the House, the left should seek to implement some sort of ranked or cardinal voting system like the Condorcet method or STAR voting.
The left should seek to abolish the electoral college, as it tilts American politics further to the right.
The left should seek to abolish the filibuster, as it biases the legislative process in favor of the status quo.
So long as they cannot win on third party tickets, leftists should run as Democrats. However, there are some more things they should do besides that. Firstly, their campaigns should receive only small donations from individuals and large donations from working class organizations like labor unions. They should accept no corporate money. Secondly, they should be part of some sort of left-wing pseudo-party like Democratic Socialists of America so that they have some accountability to an organization other than the Democratic Party. Thirdly, these pseudo-parties should 1) be mass organizations accountable to the working class and 2) have some sort of mechanism for holding their elected officials accountable if they do not pursue the policies that the pseudo-party wants them to. An example of such a mechanism would be for the pseudo-party to withdraw support for an elected official if they repeatedly fail to follow the policy platform prescribed by the pseudo-party.
The left should avoid forming personality cults around high-profile left-wing politicians, as it makes it harder to effectively criticize them when necessary.
The left should seek to win elections on third party tickets whenever possible. This would be easiest at the local level, especially in uncontested races.
The left should seek to abolish any other laws that make it hard for third parties to get onto ballots and win elections.
I do not know enough about organized labor to offer many suggestions for them. However, there is a strategy used by the IWW that other unions may want to replicate. The IWW avoids holding public union votes and instead secretly goes from worker to worker, asking them to declare their support for a union. Once a majority of workers at a given workplace have declared their support, the IWW goes ahead with forming a union there. This method makes it easier to avoid the sort of employer interference that has sunk many unionization efforts, most notably the recent Amazon union vote in Bessemer, Alabama.
While sectarianism may be fun in internet arguments, it is highly counter-productive in real life. Left-wing organizations should seek to increase their cooperation with other left-wing organizations, and perhaps merge together when possible. There's little point in having 50 vanguard parties, at least if they don't work together. Additionally, far-left organizations like CPUSA, PSL, IWW, and others should cooperate with more moderate organizations like the DSA so long as they have shared goals. I know Bernie killed Rosa, but the far-left will be able to accomplish more by working with moderate left-wing organizations than by shunning them. Additionally, moderate organizations can build a base of support that more radical organizations can tap into later on. Save shitting on socdems for when The Revolution™ comes.
State repression has wrecked the left numerous times in American history, so the left should have some strategies for combating it. However, I do not know much about opsec so I can't offer much advice here. I do expect there to be a balancing act between transparency and security though.
I know leftypol is a class reductionist board, but the fact of the matter is that the American working class is too diverse for class reductionism. The American left should stand in opposition to all forms of oppression including, but not necessarily limited to, capitalism, racism, patriarchy, ableism, homophobia, and transphobia. The left also needs to be careful to avoid alienating subsets of the working class, like some ethnic groups, in their organizing work. For example, while they should take a firm stance against racism and white supremacy, the left should be careful to avoid a "Fuck whitey lmao" type mindset.
Additionally, the left should offer support to identity-based social movements like Black Lives Matter, feminist movements, LGBT rights movements, immigrants' rights movements, and others. Building up alliances with those movements will be beneficial growing your movement.
The left should do whatever it can to weaken far-right movements
While the left should avoid instigating armed conflict, it should be ready to defend itself should it ever come under attack. Giving combat training to working people and organizing them into paramilitaries is probably a good idea, although I am not sure what kind of relationship these paramilitaries should have to other left-wing groups. The right already has its own paramilitaries, should the left should be ready challenge them on their own turf.
These are just a few rough suggestions of mine, and should by no means should be interpreted as authoritative wisdom on what the American left ought to do. That said, what suggestions, would you give?
Because Americans are terminally cucked and retarded
>what is to be done?
Relentless mockery and bullying until they understand they're just another country and a shit one at that
>>221069>AOC was the death kneel for the DSA.
What do you mean by that? If anything it seems she helped grow the organization.
AOC is a firebrand, depending on her rhetoric, a potentially useful one.
She's invested in criticising corporations and introducing welfare, if we can seek out her fans then it won't be difficult to radicalise them
This literally isn't true though. >>221044
third worldists are retards and lay as fuck People of college.>>221097
Abysmally retarded take.
Oh ok, I think I agree with this.>>221105
Oh shit, there's two syndie posters.
sorry, who's being abysmally retarded?
No incel poster just changed flags because I am right.>>221109
Their membership's exploded recently and only continues to climb. Pay attention, dweeb.
My whole point is that intersectionality suggests a common binding for oppression, just as Marxism does. Intersectionality lacks a superstructure. The common binding in Marxism isn't class but actually the superstructure that places the ruling class, the subordinate bourgeois state, and bourgeois institutions at the top, the proletariat at the bottom, and the proletariat being composed of multiple parts. It would not be a radical statement to acknowledge that the proletariat is comprised of subcomponents, such as petite bourgeois "small business owners" or cops who are not themselves part of the bourgeoisie but emulate bourgeois values and serve as a vanguard for the ruling class, occupying various institutions that are themselves totally subordinate to the ruling class. The proles themselves may also be oppressed by other forms of oppression, but these forms of oppression, like class warfare, are themselves consequence of the superstructure. Intersectionality does not indicate the presence of a superstructure but speaks of a common binding between forms of oppression. Marxism can fill that hole. I think if we can radicalize so-called "intersectionalists" by telling them that there is a superstructure responsible for oppression. However, if we just say that the binding component is class they'll think we mean the binding component is class oppression, which to them would sound just as ridiculous as saying the binding component is homophobia. Marxist conception of class necessitates class structure whereas intersectionalist conception of class just treats it as another avenue of oppression. I think that a Marxist reinterpretation of intersectionality is possible and that it would be instrumental but it can only be achieved through a clarification of what class is, and the use of bridging language that enables intersectionalists to see the forest and not merely individual trees. It is historical fact that whiteness in USA was invented by an English planter elite to prevent English indentured servants from aligning themselves with black african slaves to rise up against their common oppressor.
I agree that modern monetary theory is an incomplete thesis. Richard Wolff comments that MMT is missing something… https://youtu.be/etO6UqaDdRA
PSL is even more irrelevant (and more ultra) and DSA are glow ops. It's what we have. Stop being a lazy pos and get a job NEET faggot and start building the future you desire.
Yes none of this is technically incorrect what I am saying is that Dialectical Materialism does a far superior job explaining it and tethering it all together. Intersectionality theory should just be tossed into the dust bin of history.
The idea that people can be oppressed along multiple, separate forms is not anti-Marxist. My point, and I don't think you got this, is that intersectionality is missing the superstructure. It suggests that there is a binding mechanism for class oppression as there is for racist oppression. Marxism acknowledges the same point. The difference between intersectionality and Marxism is that intersectionality lacks the superstructure component. You could say that intersectionality is a defanged version created by libs. I agree that a worldview that consists only of intersectionality would be fundamentally incomplete and lopsided. I agree also that this is to the benefit of the state which doesn't wish to be seen as in league with the ruling class, or as part of a superstructure.
>>221143>Yes none of this is technically incorrect >>221131>It would not be a radical statement to acknowledge that the proletariat is comprised of subcomponents, such as petite bourgeois "small business owners"
Range ban USA for a week for this plox
How is PSL ultra? They support every socialist and anti-imperialist government in the world, they support unions, and they even run candidates for office.
Aligning in any way the democrats is a huge mistake imo, they are the most hated group in the entire country.
I don’t see why everyone shouldn’t just join CPUSA, every reason I’ve seen not to just seems like cope. Sure they don’t currently have the best line but how else do you expect to change it?
I don't have any statistical evidence for saying this but I think far more young people are aware of the DSA than they are of CPUSA. I think the DSA sucks, for the record, but CPUSA also sucks. I am for left-unity, however, so I support both as of now. Social democracy is not the end goal but I support those who advocate for it because I am ultimately for pushing the needle to the left, just in the same way that I am for anarchists who create autonomous zones and take over police stations.
That’s fair enough, I don’t particularly see much future in the DSA seeing as they have really thrown themselves into a position of aligning with the democrats, alienating large amounts of working people. Of course I don’t wish ill on anyone who joins with hopes of changing them from within, I just feel they are more far gone than the CPUSA at this point in this regard. At least for communists, I think checking out your local branch of the CPUSA is a smart move.
anytime someone mentions DSA i think of this video. If you ever wanted to create a cringe fest that completely alienates normal people this is how you do it
Also there's no such thing as left unity.
You either are for the dictatorship of the proletariat or you're a cuckdem
So there's only going to be a handful of us as we screech and…then die.
Not leftist>Europe has universal healthcare and strong unions; America does not.
Brought about largely through the presence of the USSR which gave pressure for the porkies to give some crumbs for the plebs.
See this kind of insane shit is exactly what I was talking about here >>221044
>>221168>they are the most hated group in the entire country
What makes you say that? Joe Biden has had an approval rating higher than 50% for his entire presidency so far.>>221221>A cherrypicked clip of a meeting posted on YouTube by a right-wing channel represents the entire DSA
There are a lot of things to criticize the DSA for, but goddamn that is low-hanging fruit.
This is precisely what I refer to when I mention that DSA sucks. However, DSA does not simply suck because of this but also because its relevancy is tied to bourgeois parties. PSL, SEP, etc., suck because they don't even have relevancy. >>221221>>Also there's no such thing as left unity. >>You either are for the dictatorship of the proletariat or you're a cuckdem>if you don't practice my very specific irrelevant leftist tendency, then you are a cuck
Meatspace organizing is the only thing that matters. That is why I am for left unity. If we waited until everyone was onboard with a specific theoretical tendency, we will never achieve a working class movement. The only path for MLs at that point is to wait for a civil war and to do a guerilla warfare, but guess what, you don't even have enough relevancy to do that! This is why you are a LARPER. Revolution can only happen as a result of a working class movement.
Gonna need to see citations on that about biden anon.
>>221236>Brought about largely through the presence of the USSR which gave pressure for the porkies to give some crumbs for the plebs.
A lot of countries got universal healthcare for the first time after the USSR collapsed. You can't chalk it all up to le red hero forcing le evil boojies to play nice.
I remember it at the time and it was constant cringe.
So? That doesn't disprove my point.
At what point does it stop being cherrypicking?
Isn’t 50 percent a pretty normal approval rating for this early into his presidency? He’s given some speeches about infrastructure and stuff and doing his whole “I’m gonna be FDR 2” shtick that people seem to believe for some reason, but i don’t really see how that reflects people’s general feelings toward the Democratic Party as a whole. Plus with people like AOC representing DSA to a majority of Americans, it only serves to confuse and muddle the meaning of socialism through guilt by association.
Alright, so, we actually need more data than this because I have no idea what the sample size was for this polling. Majority of Americans do not even vote and this makes me skeptical of how people actually feel about him. What we really need to be paying attention to is the X amount of people who do not vote.
It doesn't, the whole clip is cherrypicked. Here's a clip from that same convention posted on DSA's official YouTube channel:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljlxNCL6v1I>>221350>Isn’t 50 percent a pretty normal approval rating for this early into his presidency?
Yeah it is, although Trump was never able to get that high.>i don’t really see how that reflects people’s general feelings toward the Democratic Party as a whole
According to Pew Research Center, 47% of Americans view the Democratic Party favorably and 51% view them unfavorably. Compare this to the Republican Party who is viewed favorably by 38% of Americans and unfavorably by 60%.https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/03/11/views-of-the-democratic-and-republican-parties/>>221362>Alright, so, we actually need more data than this because I have no idea what the sample size was for this polling.
It's an aggregation of many polls.>Majority of Americans do not even vote and this makes me skeptical of how people actually feel about him.
You can change the setting on the graph from "All polls" to "Polls of likely or registered voters" or "Polls of adults". The data does not change much between each setting.
In both cases the majority of people do not view either of the currently existing parties favorably. I’m not saying that communists should align with the republicans as opposed to the democrats, but that we need to distinguish our platform for the current bourgeois parties that make everyone miserable.
The point I was refuting was that the Democrats are the most hated group in the entire country, which is definitely not true when public opinion is split on them almost 50-50 and their rival is more unpopular. I do think that leftists should make it clear that they do not promote the same agenda as the DNC, but I still think it will be often necessary for leftists to run as Democrats if they want to win elections.
>>221311>for MLs at that point is to wait for a civil war and to do a guerilla warfare, but guess what, you don't even have enough relevancy to do that! This is why you are a LARPER. Revolution can only happen as a result of a working class movement.
The ML understander has logged on. Yes, MLs are all going to do guerilla warfare. No MLs are organising at all
What you mean when you say "left unity" ultimately means giving into opportunism and social chauvinism. You actually just want us to join some big tent party like the DSA or one of the big British trot groups that spends its time (inevitably) campaigning for the Democratic Party or the Labour party. >>221305>A cherrypicked clip of a meeting posted on YouTube by a right-wing channel represents the entire DSA
If DSA didn't organise like Idpol riddled retards a right wing channel wouldn't be able to make a nonstop hilarious 3 min video of them
>>221605>If DSA didn't organise like Idpol riddled retards a right wing channel wouldn't be able to make a nonstop hilarious 3 min video of them
I'm sure you could find an embarrassing 3 minute clip of any political organization if you looked hard enough
>>220441>I think the USSR did a good job of desettlerizing their settler population by promoting anti-racism and giving the indigenous populations of the Russian Empire more control over their own affairs.
But they didnt really though I mean all of the indigenous people of Siberia were bundled into the same Republic as the White population which effectively killed any chance of them having the kind of power and control of the land. Ethnically European and even some Turkic peoples were given their own republics under the USSR but they were not granted that.
I bring this up because I dont understand the theory very well but at an initial glance it looks like the Soviet Union gets treated to an easier standard. >>220537>So, what colonial composition?
The millions of people indigenous to Siberia who faced colonization and genocide by European Russians akin to what was seen in the United States and Australia/New Zealand.
Even you saying "Far East is Far East" is making joke of all native peoples from the Ainu to the Yukaghirs
Dude, basques don't have an autonomy, bretons don't have an autonomy, small slav cultures in Germany and Austria don't have autonomies, USA's closest thing to autonomy is a fucking indian reservation, and otherwise they have literal colonial administrations for "territories" like Puerto Rico. Do tell me why is that USSR gets treated to "an easier standard"
>>220441>Do tell me why is that USSR gets treated to "an easier standard"
Because the answer to the settler/colonisation problem in the US said by that anon was the abolition of the country and the return of all land to the indigenous followed by mass-reduction and expulsions.
Based on the response I got from that anon and it does seem like the Soviet Union has a lower standard as a similar process wasnt seen as appropriate.
>>223260>basques don't have an autonomy
That's technically not true, as all Spanish subdivisions are given autonomy as autonomous communities or autonomous cities.
Sorry, my bad. Still, you get what I mean - USSR grants autonomies and republic-doms left and right, admits independences and such since 1917, and bourgeois "democracies" can't grant an autonomy for half a century, if not more.>>223293>abolition of the country and the return of all land to the indigenous followed by mass-reduction and expulsions.
Personally, I'd like to see the South, California and Texas seccede from the Union, with wh*tes granted autonomies within them while the majority of land nationalized and given for use by the people actually working on that land. Only after such reorganization, with people living there given real power, can they get admitted back into the Union as actual independent states. That's my anti-americanism speaking, though.
>>223391>That's my anti-americanism speaking, though.
I understand that feeling all too well/