Over fifty years ago, when the American capitalist state was trying to figure out how to respond to the rise of the country’s social movements, one of the U.S. communist movement’s great leaders Gus Hall warned about how the state could gain a winning amount of leverage. He identified the problem of petty-bourgeois radicalism, the ideology of dogmatic opportunism and idealism that’s come to dominate American activist circles. This way of thinking, due to its rejection of building a relationship with a majority of the people, is a useful tool the state can use to render radical movements ineffectual. All the ruling class needed to do was learn to weaponize petty-bourgeois radicalism against the effective elements of the workers movement, and the New Left would become an asset for the capitalist state.
Do you consider Shea to be siding with Putinism (Or other class enemies) for supporting Russia in the special military operation?
If you haven’t, I suggest you read the comments on Shea’s work in !leftistinfighting@lemmygrad.ml. (Posted largely by @cfgaussian@lemmygrad.ml if that helps)
It’s not saying “Putin’s victory is a better outcome than a Ukrainian victory” that is my issue. My issue is with the support of the Rage Against the War Machine rally. I think it would be better to have different protests and more protests.
Some might say it is useful to have tactical allies to work together for a common cause, but I don’t think the American right has any true principals other than undermining what a Democratic president in office is doing.
All effective protests project memes into the consciousness of the populous. Diluting the idea of the protest just makes horseshoe theory look correct. That is the meme often showing up in publications of the RAWM. A Leftist protest against imperialism and its folly would be a more principled protest. It is also always sus to ever have to share a stage with Fascists.
Also, sniping at the PSL and DSA when they are institutions with leftist power seems like sabatour behavior. You can criticize them and ask them to reconsider or influence their members to take your position, but writing them off entirely to side with social fascists for minimal tactical gain seems like a foolhardy decision. I could understand wanting to support
It would be nice if we had the power like the 60’s and 70’s to actually change policy, but we can’t now. The real purpose is to change minds and support a better vision, to later actually have power.