Constructive Criticism: A Handbook Speaking & Listening More Effectively in Personal Relations, Groups, & Political Activities By Vicki Legion (Gracie Lyons), 1976
Constructive Criticism is a wonderful example of the blending of valuable and powerful socialist theory with a practical, down-to-earth pragmatism. The result is an extremely useful manual for people who work together for positive social change. Putting Gracie Lyon's suggestions into practice will increase the power of people's work as well as their personal sense of well being and satisfaction.
eBook: https://www.marxists.org/history/erol/ncm-3/constructive-criticism.html
PDF: https://frauenkultur.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Constructive-Criticism.pdf
Audiobook: https://youtu.be/rvTByQIQAxQ
I do think this community needs a bit of a cultural revolution for its own good. It wouldnt hurt to slap this image around more often, I think the guidelines are really good.
The "dirtbag left" is dead, and "bullying works" should have always had ROEs. I do think there is going to be a socdem future for the western left, and instead of being mad about all the liberal bullshit that's going to happen, it is far better to encourage that growth. This does not mean "vote blue no matter who", or forgiving accountability to the socdems when they lib out.
Take the Michael Brooks approach: "be kind to people and hostile to systems".
A historical materialist analysis should make it clear that "very cool revolutionary shit" is not gonna happen in highly industrialized economies (maybe the West isn't "highly industrialized" right now? Open to that discussion). The priority needs to be for the imperial interests of the West/US to collapse and/or contract as much as possible so that decolonial movements can flourish.
The US civil rights movement is likely the template that will need to be followed in the information age. A massive anti-racist/Anti-imperial/pro-social juste/etc... movement led by true Democratic Socialists with a smaller militant movement working in parallel. This movement will need to grow until it can force institutions to react, and channel public opinion toward supporting militant action when it responds to institutional failure to respond to the demands. The DemSoc side can also organize labor action, and build class consciousness that way too. I think a primitive version of this is happening right now in the Palestinian liberation movement, far less organized but the mechanics are similar. I think institutions will be forced to respond in the upcoming election cycle (which will prove my hypothesis right or wrong).
I don't think it is possible in the west to somehow build a revolutionary movement without a large social democratic (demsoc if we get lucky) movement working in tandem. I also think the revolutionary movement will play an important role, but is unlikely to be successful in its objectives.
This doesn't mean all is lost for the left, it doesn't mean that we should simply "redistribute the imperial spoils more fairly" and call it good, my intent is to angle for the most effective tactic to build the global socialist movement from my position on empire-occupied Salish/Chinook/etc land. It is a dialectical process, and while I understand the "rage against the machine", I think it needs to be chanelled into productive political organizing at every level rather than beating up on people for being wrong online.
There are many members of this community who forget to be hopeful for a better future, and I think we are in the darkest times right now, every day will be brighter from here (unless the US cancels elections, then global left might actually be fucked)
Repost the image often! I'm not sure I agree with you every step along the chain there, it starts to sound like entryism to me which I do think is a failed project. But the wider accessibility and popularity of even succdem politics would be more fertile ground for organizing than a bunch of scared libs still reacting to the very whiff of red-scare triggers, so I do think it's important to find patience and tolerance for those who, if nothing else, at least want good things for people. My critique of entryism or succdem politics is that it cannot succeed against motivated resistance from capital, and that entails more radical action will be necessary. Many people are going to have to see or experience that failure first hand before they get on board, though, so no sense in alienating them in the meantime.
Appreciate the constructive reply! From what you wrote I think we agree on many of the main points.
I would clarify by saying that I also reject entryism into wholly liberal institutions like the Democratic Party, however I think there is value in the growth of flawed organizations like the DSA. Like you said people need to see it fail, just like many of us watched Bernie go down in flames when he had all the momentum with him. Learning from theory is great, but learning from practice is even better.
For sure. All the Lenin posting on Chapo in the wake of Super Tuesday literally was watershed moment for me. I had to see it in real time for the message to sink in, for the theory to finally click and prove itself: the ruling class would rather have fascism than even the most sensible and mildest of succdem reforms.
I'm extremely happy to educate and be constructive but it always comes with important caveats. A person must be willing to learn, if they're not willing to learn you can not have a constructive conversation with them. This doesn't have to be blind agreement, sometimes it can be just sheer curiosity as to how someone can have the views that we do, how those views can be so incredibly different to their own and a real honest inquiry into how we arrived at them.
If a person doesn't have that then I give them the most negative experience I can give them so that when they come to the next leftist they reconsider their approach to that leftist and this next comrade gets a person who is willing to have a more honest conversation. In essence, setting up the next person. I find the sheer aggression I have can sometimes inspire some people to try a curious tone on the spot, if not the person I was talking to then someone else will interjet with a more useful tone for conversation and I will change my behaviour immediately to one that speaks eloquently and is clearly capable of deep conversation to generate more curiosity about how passionately angry and rude I was moments before.
It's quite a deliberate act and not my usual daily character because you don't get the same problems in person that you do in text, I can carry a conversation in a totally different way in person. Online I have a very specific goal in interactions and it's to get to a useful conversational tone for the other side to actually learn something instead of having 100 anti-tankie barriers between me and anything that resembles an original thought in their head.
Yeah what you said makes sense to me
What I see happening on this site is that any take that is less than the most radical position available will very often be at risk of ridicule or hostility right off the bat, even among long time members of the community who are operating off of a similar set of information.
A prominent example of this I notice in Mamdani threads where a bunch of users want to snap off a "fell for it again award" at the earliest possible opportunity. It has sometimes been thrown at other site users with a strawman of "you really thought he was going to be the next Lenin but you were wrong! [Idiot!]“. For some it is important to demonstrate that they are the leftest leftist in the room, rather than have a nuanced discussion. This turns existing users away from our community.
Another example occurs when people, usually on federated accounts, post something ignorant compared to the Hexbear party line. I notice that some people are quick to post ppb at the first opportunity and demean their thinking, rather than offer them an opportunity to engage with something that is more developed (further to the left). I think we should hesitate until they really demonstrate obstinance, maybe even offering two chances to show a willingness to engage before going in with the dogpile. This eagerness to dunk turns away prospective users (which is a problem because the userbase has been contracting for quite some time).
Based on what you wrote, I don't think you are part of the problem.
I definitely come across aggressive at times. But it's always a very calculated kind. I'm not one to just be that way for the sake of it, I have a reason and a purpose in doing it. It's carrot and stick at a holistic level where I acknowledge to myself I am not the only leftist a person is going to speak to in their lives. If I can't get through to someone, then my goal is to make it so that the next leftist doesn't get the same interaction I just had. We are collectively a team and we can think of our engagement with others as passing on the baton, if a conversation is not ideal it is possible to help the next leftist have a better setup. Even in some cases if I have to take the fall and look bad to achieve it.
I've had success shaming people into submission (not on hexbear), for me the trick was to not directly insult their intelligence or inherent character, but only attack their views or attitude, and strictly along moral lines, not "does it make sense or not" which is just an indirect insult. People will take a lot of abuse as long as you don't call them an idiot
Yes I am fond of this. I'm particularly fond of pointing out that I think a person is smarter than they pretend to be on the internet. A lot of people say really stupid things to hold on to something they want to argue, when they are not in fact stupid people but are simply in the reddit debate pervert mindset. The things they say are ridiculous, they themselves are usually quite able to see how ridiculous the things they say are too. It's possible to be a flatterer while also attacking.