• ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆OP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Sometimes they mean that someone knows theory, sometimes they mean that someone has talked to someone else about how the boss is annohying, sometimes they mean you’re planning a violent wildcat labor action.

    It’s like you’re unable to comprehend the concept of degrees. All of these things work together in practice. People who know theory help educate others, and people talk to each other at the level they are able. Trying to see this as black and white is absurd.

    The whole point is that when you’re cornered you rely entirely on quoting and throwing theory at people without explaining how that theory practically applies to the modern day.

    Another weird straw man. What theory means practically in modern day has been explained by me and many other people on this very site. I even explained that in this very thread earlier, and you promptly ignored that.

    Name one. Literally name one.

    Michael Parenti, Richard Wolff, Chris Smalls, Michael Hudson, Claudia De la Cruz, just off top of my head

    Hmm… It’s almost like uhh they’d rather watch Mr Beast on YouTube which is quite literally my point.

    And my point is that these people don’t matter. They’re not the demographic that’s going to drive any change.

    • _pi
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      27 minutes ago

      Michael Parenti, Richard Wolff, Chris Smalls, Michael Hudson, Claudia De la Cruz, just off top of my head

      If you’re looking for a Lenin, Parenti is your closest but he’s dead. Smalls is a good union organizer but has really just organized a single Amazon warehouse and fell off.

      De La Cruz got less than half the votes Debs got in his weakest run, when the population of the US was minuscule compared to now. De La Cruz wasn’t even on the ballot in her home state. You might as well say Bernie Sanders if you’re gonna say De La Cruz because their theories of change are literally the same and are proven failures.

      Wolff and Hudson have one foot in the grave as 80 year old men they’re not leading anything.

      Capital is running up the board as the Globetrotters and you’re fielding a team that’s playing worse than the Washington Generals.

      And my point is that these people don’t matter. They’re not the demographic that’s going to drive any change.

      Oh boy, “lets ignore the lumpen proletariat” is literally the most Democratic Party brained take a socialist can make. Weren’t you just singing Chairman Fred’s praises 5 seconds ago, and now this???

      In practice our society is amazing at making lumpenproles, the vast majority of people are lumpenproles by the Marxist definition (not the Engles or Leninist one where he gives them the old Kulak treatment).

      And in your opinion the demographic that is going to drive change are unpopular people who are subjects of news discussed on this site and this site only.

      This shit is silly dude, there’s no clear theory of change here, not even an analysis on a theory of change. Just bromides.