This is not a matter of having a bad philosophy or opinion; it's an issue of having a completely wrong way of thinking. A fascist who is a racist because they believe in the Nazi philosophy can potentially be reformed, if we can deconstruct that Nazi philosophy for them and replace it with a leftist one; a fascist who simply blindly worships Hitler is more than likely beyond saving.
Our message can, will, and shall shine through because they are true and just. All we need to figure out is how to package our propaganda to better push them at the fence-sitters. To tie any revolutionary movement down to a few prominent individuals is flatly unwise: a revolution is built upon people trusting the movement more than the establishment, and if you tie your movement down to a few idols, then all the establishment needs to do is tearing the idols down.
y'all: "really well-versed" in Iran/Iraq relations as presented by talking heads who have degrees in how to talk past your cognitive processes and are being paid by folk who have everything to gain from manipulating your understanding.
also y'all: completely unaware that the zapatistas added nearly a third to their territories over the last season
I'm not gonna name names for this call-out, because it could apply to a LOT of you.
"It's good to stay informed about global events" is a very large claim to make without support and yet almost everyone I know believes in it without question.
Paradoxically they also tend to be really unaware of what's happening in their own community, and usually only well-informed about a certain set of topics that famous talking heads go on about, so I find it really hard to talk about what's happening in the world with anyone who consumes the news.
on logic, facts, and reason
Furthermore, there is no inherently correct or universal methodology of logic. We all process information differently and all these methodologies are collectively "logic".
How we can all use this information productively I think, is to be able to evaluate when disagreements arise based on a difference in values, a difference in logic, or a difference in both, and to reject those who use the superficial language of "logical correctness".
you know how they say you only use 10% of your brain? it's because the other 90% is devoted to keeping the hunk of meat that is your body working. it's almost like the mind isn't a special immaterial phenomenon and more a runaway emergent side-effect of keeping your organs running
but if we accept that it'll make the scifi sad :(
Leftist infighting; violence; death.
Holy fuck, "We need to straight up murder any leftists who see any use for a revolutionary state before we bother to do *anything* to Nazis or the bourgeoisie" isn't a left wing position. That's some "fascist paramilitaries that Definitely Weren't Nazi Collaborators™" level bullshit.
(TBF, vanguard-leaning leftists talking about anarchists as if they're categorically strategic enemies is also horrible analysis, especially while we're still under capitalism.)
dismantling the notion of "supporting the troops" in 2020
@Absolutely_Blakely well said. The mantra “all troops are bad” does not exclude veterans from the left, it just ensures that they reckon with and condemn their pasts before being accepted. Once that hurdle is cleared they’re as much my comrade as anyone else. The troop apologia is so dangerous precisely because it weakens the “condemn your past” part and hints at absolving leftist veterans of any kind of accountability or self-crit.
Personally, I think that if a veteran realizes how utterly fucked up and horrific it is to serve the military and devotes their life to actively opposing imperialism, then they’re welcome in the Left. That said, if a person who is a victim of American imperialism says “nah, fuck you” there’s really no valid reason to deny them that. It’s understandable and completely justified. Forgiveness is a gift not an obligation.
the fucked up thing about the iran nuclear deal that america made very difficult to adhere to and then backed out of , and then sanctioned iran for not upholding after backing out of, is it was never a WEAPONS program. it was always CIVILIAN for nuclear energy to get them less focused on fossil fuels. surprising if you live in america because the entire media and every journalist was complicit in calling it an arms deal, as if they were going to nuke america (americans have a victim complex, yes). You see, nuclear arms go completely against the iranian interpretation of Islam. They have experience with weapons of mass destruction used on them during the iraq-iran war and the leadership and people decided to not pursue them. and also: it would take like 5 years to develop arms after having uranium from the power, the media was consistent that as short as two years would have pure enough uranium to power weapons.
@melissasage don't forget that if you buy his book the proceeds will go to the US gov, so pirate it and donate some money to the people who sheltered him when in Hong Kong: https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1207629293230137344?s=19
A cool and chill place for cool and chill people.