US "socialists" be like "Vote for Anticomunism meow-fiesta"

https://x.com/MarcoFoster_/status/2102154437141700896

Abdul El-Sayed: “We don’t live in capitalism. We live in corporate socialism. If you’re a corporation, you can buy a politician to get that politician to rig the system for you so you make more money and you ex out every other market in which you compete. You need good healthcare. You need a good education. We need childcare. We need good roads and bridges. We don’t need to send our money to big corporations to subsidize them, we need to be invested in people so they have the human capital to be able to do all the things as they graduate and come out”

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [S] 106 points 6 days ago (14 children)
  • [–] 60 points 6 days ago*

    Educating others is not necessarily hard work, it's just steady and tedious. Liberals treating theory like it's fundamentally alien and therefore not worth engaging with is endlessly frustrating, but it's not an unwinnable battle (not that you made it seem that way).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 38 points 6 days ago (12 children)

    To be fair you need to read like 2-3 books to fully understand the modern concept of socialism fully.

    However in this case even reading a wikipedia article would be a massive improvement

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 61 points 6 days ago (8 children)

    I think one can grasp socialism in essence in as little as a pamphlet. "Full understanding" on the other hand takes many, many books and practical experience. The floor is actually pretty low, but the ceiling is very high. Bringing that ceiling down to digestable components to bring people above the floor is a core part of educational praxis.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 6 days ago (5 children)
  • [–] 20 points 6 days ago (2 children)

    Oh, haven't seen that one! And yep, a contemporary, clear, sober analysis of the political movement in the imperial core and an exposition on the basics of capitalism, imperialism, settler-colonialism, the struggle for socialism, and how we move forward would be a fantastic bit of agitprop. I know the various parties have their own pamphlets, but I'm curious if the method of distribution needs to be reconsidered. The core is rapidly changing and we can't fall behind.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 6 days ago (1 child)

    Personally I'm starting to think the greater question for communist parties is the question of how to forge quality membership and Cadre. Like this is something I've been thinking on for months, prior to the current shake up - in polite words - at PSL. I'm coming to believe the greatest weakness of the western left is our hyper-individualistic petite bourgeois baggage. General growth of the class consciousness of the masses will occur regardless of us handing out pamphlets as the rapid decay of our material conditions radicalizes people out of their slumber.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 6 days ago

    As far as the PSL is concerned, every member I have met has been extremely principled. Based on what PSL members past and present have stated here, it seems that it is genuinely effective at raising capable cadre. The PSL grew to the point it is today because it actually does have that strength. The current shake-up seems to be primarily driven by the fact that the cadre development is largely effective, while the org itself is facing a conflict between the old and the new.

    Where that leaves any org that may be seeking to learn from PSL, it seems that, above all, the cadre are the actual gems of any org. Any effective org needs effective cadre for democratic centralism to properly function, and it must have the democratic means by which to change and adapt to the will of the developed cadre. In the coming weeks and months, we will see if PSL actually does have the democratic institutions required to grow from this shake-up and become a better org, or if this will spell a crisis for the org that cadre alone cannot fix. My hope is obviously for the former.

    Creating cadre isn't as simple as a reading list. It takes practical work and struggle, leadership experience, a flexible org that can adapt, grow, and change, and a tight connection with the masses. The purpose of a pamphlet is to bring the masses towards a more correct understanding of Marxism, not to train cadre. The masses are limited to trade unionism without a party of effective cadre that can bring the local struggles to a connected and interdependent struggle, and the pamphlet is a good vehicle for connecting these points ideologically and in a mass manner.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 18 points 6 days ago (1 child)

    What's wrong with explaining it in a couple of sentences, like this?

    "We live in a society where capitalists, i.e. people who invest their money in various ventures and collect profits from them for a living, run both the economy and the government. Socialism is just about building a society where instead of capitalists making the decisions everywhere, workers do instead."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 76 points 6 days ago (9 children)

    All this shows is he has absolutely zero understanding of political theory or economics.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 6 days ago (8 children)

    dude is selling himself to the people of michigan who largely believe socialism is evil. whether he actually understands the basics of socialism isn't material to that goal.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 80 points 6 days ago*

    This is blatant tailism. Conceding to reactionaries undermines your goals long term unless you yourself are a reactionary.

    We shouldn't be fucking galvanizing the masses to take brutal action to suppress "socialists".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 61 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

    You can do that without making further political development more difficult. That's why I despise framing welfare as socialism, or tax breaks for capitalists as "socialism for the rich," confusing radicalized liberals inevitably leads to socdem politics as reinforced by bourgeois cultural hegemony.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 69 points 6 days ago (1 child)

    " we don't live under capitalism"

    opinion safely discarded

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 43 points 6 days ago* (1 child)

    I blame Bernie Sanders for spreading this worthless meme and convincing socdems that it's a good argument, it arises from the same place that convinces libs to try and "out flank" the right-wing in terms of reactionary signaling, except in this case it's somehow worse because the socdems don't even realize they're being reactionary

    The problem is it fails at a fundamental level as agitprop and rhetoric, people don't hear the "corporate" part (because the word is politically inert in the eyes of normies) all they hear is the socialism part, and voters are not gonna bother making the mental leaps necessary to figure out "oh he means the capitalists are hypocrites because they love "socialism" for their class, but they don't want us to have it, so actually socialism is cool"

    Like how many goddamn leaps of logic would that take an uneducated normie to get to that position, even the people claiming it's anti-socialism are wrong, because this rhetoric does nothing but confuse the average person, and confusion translates to apathy and disinterest among voters, in other words "in one ear, out the other"

    In the end who cares, Abdul is popular because of his polices not because he borrows worthless rhetoric from Sanders, but of course some people elevate rhetoric and it's perfection as the highest virtue

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 36 points 6 days ago

    lol fuck this guy

  • source
  • [–] 28 points 6 days ago* (1 child)

    Setting aside the misuse of "socialism", the quote also whitewashes capitalism. We are, in fact, living in capitalism; capitalism does, in fact, inevitably get this bad; and in itself provides no way out.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 31 points 6 days ago
    [–] 37 points 6 days ago

    We don't live in Capitalism! We live in *perfectly describes capitalism*

  • source
  • [–] 33 points 6 days ago

    no you don’t understand, by voting for anticommunism we will make americans more amenable to the idea of communism

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 6 days ago*

    the failings of capitalism continue to be socialisms fault. DSA having socialist in their name is worthless.

  • source
  • [–] 27 points 6 days ago

    Socialism is when bad thing

  • source
  • [–] 27 points 6 days ago

    I get the idea here, trying to communicate that the state serves the hegemonic class, there’s no fairy tale system in which it is neutral. But this particular framing just muddies the waters and reinforces the “socialism is when state does things” misconception.

  • source
  • [–] 30 points 6 days ago (1 child)

    This is a take i saw being peddled in like 2013 on reddit. What a loser

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 25 points 6 days ago
    [+] 25 points 6 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (4 children)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 15 points 6 days ago

    Typical landlord brain. I fucking hate landlords. One guy I know owns an apartment they rent out and gets angry when I call landlords parasites that want to east steak on their tenants dime lol.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 6 days ago

    What a cool country I live in

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 6 days ago (5 children)

    lol wait did the local DSA endorse him?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 6 days ago (2 children)

    If there hasn't been an endorsement there shouldn't be, but this is getting mad about nothing. He is a left liberal, and i would be surprised if any socialist mistook him as otherwise. These posts feel like yelling at clouds sometimes.

    That said, I do think he is principled in his stances (whether I agree or disagree), and in the context of 2026 electoralism I think he is a very useful ally to the DemSoc wing. I have never seen him punch left, but if he started to lean into that at any point I wouldn't have a lot of nice things to say. Being a liberal, he doesn't get any sort of grace from me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 17 points 6 days ago

    dog you can just say corporatism, that is a word that already means something

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 6 days ago

    [fart noise]

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›