Is it possible to build a Western Left anymore? : asklemmygrad

[–] RedWizard@hexbear.net 28 points 1 month ago

Are you a member of an organization? The only way we can deprogram more people is if we engage in practical work.

A recent poll showed that A Third of Adults Under 30 Support Communism..

Another showed that the belief that political violence can be positive is gaining steam:

We found that nearly one-third of Americans surveyed—and around half of those identifying as left-of-center—believe that the murder of certain public figures is at least somewhat justified. The figures are startling: 38 percent of respondents, and 55 percent of those left of center, said assassinating President Trump would be at least somewhat justified; 31 percent of respondents, and 48 percent of those left of center, said the same about Musk. Forty percent of respondents, and 58 percent of those left of center, deem it at least somewhat acceptable to “destroy a Tesla dealership” in protest.

We can not let these opportunities go wasted. We need to connect with more people and educate them on what our movement is about. To guide those with these feelings towards our progressive movement.

I don't think hope is lost, but the road will be long and treacherous.

[–] Xiisadaddy@lemmygrad.ml 19 points 1 month ago

Well we have small numbers. But it does exist. What it needs is organization which is serverely lacking in the west. There are some orgs, but many of the more effective ones, Black Panthers for example, are gone.

Personally i think it will be after a collapse of western hegemony that the conditions are right for full revolution. Which means leftists orgs need to be focusing on surviving that collapse, and having the means afterwards to offer material support to others. Forming a network of decentralized communes that are all members of the same organization unofficially, and keep in contact/support eachother maybe. Start recruiting people now, and do mutual aid to build good will over time. Focus on building a robust parellel production base for basic things like food/medicine, and do security training. That can be your base of power to expand from when conditions are right. Convert the communes into resistance cells, and try to claim some territory.

One of the issues becomes staying under the radar so you don't get infiltrated by feds. You can't give them a reason to spend resources coming after you until they're spread to thin to be able to.

[–] rainpizza@lemmygrad.ml 19 points 1 month ago

As a global south comrade of yours, I can only say that you have to persevere just like the water droplets that drill through rock. Now, that the material conditions in the Western countries are declining, more people will be willing to listen to an alternative to capitalism so just like RedWizard mentioned you gotta go out there and connect with people.

That essay from Xi Jinping applies to plenty of this issues such as this one. If you use that logic with people around you, you can probably get great results at organizing the masses.

[–] KrupskayaPraxis@lemmygrad.ml 19 points 4 weeks ago

My view is that even though in the west communism will probably arrive later, us building a movement can help speed it up a bit. Another aspect is that us communists in the west can help communism in the global south develop by supporting and doing anti-imperialist actions.

[–] amemorablename@lemmygrad.ml 14 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

It may be one of the biggest obstacles in the US is getting people to understand imperialism and colonialism, and further, what that means for people living in the US. That the US cannot simply "do a socialism" and have "what it has right now, but distributed better among its citizenry." It needs to end its exploitation of other countries; it needs to end its continued poor recognition of indigenous sovereignty; it needs to systemically end the institution of whiteness as it contributes to it and find ways to rehabilitate, culturally, those who are stuck in the viewpoint of thinking white is an inherent part of one's identity, rather than a construct based in notions of racial supremacy. These things are a bare minimum for it to be on the right track and some of these things may mean more instability for a while and some sacrifices made while rebuilding more so the local capabilities of the region for self-sustenance and caretaking of the environment.

But to people who are working a hard job, burning out, and for whom imperialism is largely an invisible bunch of mechanisms, this may sound like a lot of "I'm supposed to sacrifice even more because of stuff I never wanted or knew was happening in the first place."

And I think some people can take it like it's this guilt thing (like the "I shouldn't complain because of how much worse some people have it" trope), that it's about them needing to feel bad in some penitential way and wear a hair shirt for their sins of being part of such a system, when it's more about recognizing what is deeply wrong with the system so that we can do dramatically better and so that we aren't just fighting for "an empire with a slightly better off working class."

[–] Malkhodr@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

I'm going to speak on the US as I'm familiar with it.

These things are a bare minimum for it to be on the right track and some of these things may mean more instability for a while and some sacrifices made while rebuilding more so the local capabilities of the region for self-sustenance and caretaking of the environment.

But to people who are working a hard job, burning out, and for whom imperialism is largely an invisible bunch of mechanisms, this may sound like a lot of "I'm supposed to sacrifice even more because of stuff I never wanted or knew was happening in the first place."

Apologies but I think a part of the problem is that even we here in thus chat are capitulation to right wing framing, or are incapable of reframing what these "sacrifices" are. If you tell a working class American struggling to survive they must "sacrifice" for the sake of internationalism, of course they are going to react n a hostile manner.

Are there hints that Americans will lose out on? Yes, we know that, but why are we framing this as if it's purely a losx and that nothing will be gained from socialism. The reason that Americans keep falling for Soc Dems isn't because they outwardly say "we are going to do imperialism to sustain dollar hedgomony with a progressive face." Maybe socdem supporters say that but that's not why they were attracted to the Social democratic charlatans.

They were attracted becuase those socdems told them, and this us largely true, that the stark inequality of wealth is the cause of the People's issues, and if things were even slightly reorganized, their lives would improve.

Most people on the US who struggle want their basic necessities met. They want access to affordable food, to be housed without exorbitant rent, to have access to medical care without going into debt, to be able to go to school and not graduate with loans, to have any damn say in their own work places.

None of these core necessities are impossible to achieve without imperialism, and its proven by the fact that there are Global South nations that do it while suffering from imperialism. The treats and luxuries that Americans will suffer, especially the petty bourgeoisie and labor aristocracy, are dependent on the system of imperialism.

Most Americans, if they actually experienced the boons of socialism, won't see what are argued as sacrifices as actual sacrifices.

We need to stop framing anti-imperialism as purely a sacrifice on behalf of the global south (this should never be severed but focusing on it purely is a rhetorically uphill battle), but instead frame it how it's structure prevents progress in the US. That is:

"If You (Americans) want to be housed, want food (that we over produce) to be affordable, want to stop getting involved in foreign conflicts, and want to never have to worry about having employment, then it can't be built on the faulty foundation of imperialism. Anyone who tells you differenty is trying to remove these guarantees and just wants you to shut up."

However, I agree with you that the hardest part of trying to mobilize for socialism in the US is getting people to confront the settler structure and whiteness. Those are the things I genuinely see as the most difficult to get Americans to understand, though I've had success when using Palestine as a jumping off point, as more and more people are willing to listen when you act like an authority on a conflict they are sympathetic to but woefully uninformed about.

Americans are stubborn and annoying yes, however we often shoot ourselves in the foot by, ironically, not bringing forth the interrelatedness of imperialism to instability at the core of our propaganda. If the narrative people must confront forces them to choose between;

have your necessities completely guaranteed but need to work harder or get cheap McDonald's while live out of a car and still working hard

Most people will choose the former. The problem is we don't rhetorically corner them into this choice, and instead get bogged down entirely on individually explaining particular sacrifices.

Another way to put it:

If Americans want to live like humans then their state must be human.

If their state acts like a beast, then Americans will be treated like beasts.

I don't disagree with your comment comrade but I've found that we more often then not frame tge sacrifices of the west as you described in your comment. As if we are asking people to "sacrifice for things I never wanted in the first place." Rather then asking "this is what you would need to give up so your sacrifice can actually be rewarded."

So much of capitalist propaganda is obfuscating what Socialism actually is, and many people attacking us are attacking out of a misunderstanding. I know this because its one of the main things that comes into play whenever my mother and I disagree. Often she's simply misunderstanding the point I am making because she's conditioned to frame it in a bourgeois manner, however when I'm able to clear up the misunderstanding she nearly always comes to agree, and states how she was incorrect in her understanding. I've had this experience with others as well, and I think many of us face a similar predicament.

[–] amemorablename@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Fair points, thanks for the correction. My own understanding is never complete.

I think where I'm coming from is the understanding that the US is at this point a very "financialized economy" (I believe is the term) and has more limited productive capacity internally than it used to, due to so much outsourcing over the years. So my thought process is that things have to come from somewhere and if a lot of it is coming through exploitative relationships, those things would be disrupted in the process of ending exploitation. That may be wrong though, or an exaggerated understanding of the dynamic in the logistics of it.

[–] Malkhodr@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 4 weeks ago

I think your understanding is correct and that in order to create a more sustainable system adjustments need to be made, such as rebuilding production facilities in the US and redirecting the service sector towards this production. Also wages, especially for labor aristocrats, will need to decrease or stagnate. These things are being represented as sacrifices, however the policies of a socialist program would oughtweigh their effects. It's not as if a socialist US (I know it's problematic to refer to as such but for the sake of convention I'll use it) would implement this wage stagnation without also implementing affordable rent control, seizure of agricultural products/land (which far an away enough to geed everyone), allow access the health care (only expensive due to insurance/pharmaceutical corporations), reorganizing workplaces into a representative state structure (this would likely remove the bloat of executives so it would potentially improve the wages of non-labor aristocrats).

The financialization of the American economy will have consequences in our restructuring of it, however those consequences won't only be bad for American workers, in fact they'd beneficial. The trap is in assuming these can coexist with imperialism, which they cannot, and would be unsustainable.

Your analysis is correct, but if we want the west to have an organized left, that analysis must be framed in a way that makes people understand why socialism is to their ultimate benifet. Framing things as sacrifices, rhetorically implies that the current system is superior in certain individual ways. This suggests that economic systems are atomized individual processes all remote from another. We know, however, that they are in fact interdependent dynamic processes that collectively move forward.

If we reframe again, what exactly determines that our proposals are sacrifices, but doesn't label the daily alienation of workers as a sacrifice? Why is having less options of shitty fast food considered a sacrifice, but being forced to go hungry in order to pay rent isn't called out as a sacrifice? What makes having to work where the state tells you a sacrifice, but not having the option to work is somehow not a sacrifice people make to capitalism?

I'm just commenting this for the sake f understanding how rhetoric Luke our own can sometimes capitulate to capitalists when we really don't need to, and a simple reframing of the discussion exposes this hypocrisy.

[–] redchert@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

The left in america also tails after white urban yuppies, which are one of the most disloyal sectors of the american populace. Any party worth a damn needs to build a strong base and grow upwards from that. But the most disenfranchised are not easily reached/organized as the average bernie bro/mamdani voter.

[–] Malkhodr@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 4 weeks ago

This is why I try to create discussions within my mosque, and why I've found campus organizing to be useful. Marginalized communities often don't trust white organizers in the first place, which is fair and something I myself hold suspicion over, therefore there needs to be internal organizing. It's also helpful for white organizers to actually listen to what leftists in those communities have to say about intercommunal contradictions.

Personally I've got some amount of faith that things will go better then we expect the next few decades, but vigilance is important. As much as we all rag on its clear that public opinion has turned against Israel largely due to the efforts of Palestinian advocates winning the information war. Any time I've had tge displeasure of speaking to a zionist among a public audience, they've been thoroughly trounced by their terrible arguments and public disconnect.

It's really amazing, I must say, how easy it is to draw a parallel with Palestine on nearly every issue concerning capitalism, imperialism, and colonialism. People are receptive to it as well, and can be led to make socialist conclusions, on their own even, when you outline the Palestinian struggle.

We are at the start of a paradigm shift in the west at the moment, and I truly believe we can bring this momentum into something tangible.

[–] into_highest_invite@lemmygrad.ml 14 points 1 month ago

the people who have the time and energy and the lack of disillusionment to control the discourse in america are by and large members of the professional-managerial class or the petty bourgeoisie. naturally, a lot of them will (and have) change their outlook on life when the treats start to dry up.

i think there's more of us than you think, or at least more people who are open to becoming leftists. it's just that this country is so atomized it's difficult to organize or to hear about the successes of those who are organized. this isn't the same country it was even 10 years ago. luigi showed that.

the only way they win is if we stop acting and stop organizing. stay hopeful comrade

[–] PostingMyJaggahog@lemmygrad.ml 13 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It's also important to remember there's literally no historical precedence for the circumstances we find ourselves in. Sure some patterns repeat themselves but if you're looking to apply a revolutionary template from history to the current moment you're not gonna find it.

Personally I'm of the opinion the only way out is through. There's simply too much social and institutional inertia hurtling towards fascism for anything else to be the case. Three main conditions need to be met for a socialist project to get off the ground, and that's

-a population of discontented people frustrated with their lot in life who do not own capital

-a vanguard party of committed ideologues who promise that populace a better vision of the future than what is currently on the table for them

-the capacity of that party to defend it's projects locally and at scale from capitalist/fascist intervention

We've definitely got condition number one but the other two have yet to reveal themselves.

I think if you're looking for a way through, IMO it really does boil down to getting to know your neighbours and building dual power. The more community you can engender in your immediate vicinity the better off you'll be when the ratchet clamps down.

Eventually this shithole will balkanize and at that point it's the new world struggling to be born. Everything will be up for grabs and whoever is better organized up to that point will have the advantage.

[–] 201dberg@lemmygrad.ml 12 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (1 children)

Do I still try to convince people and teach people? Yes

Do I have hope it will gain enough traction to prevent the oligarchy from killing us all? Not really. Conservatives fantasize openly about killing us, and liberals fantasize about the conservatives killing us. Anarchist and "anti-fascist" groups actively fight against us and help the fascists. People say half the younger generation has a favorable view of socialism.

So yeah, won't stop trying but I really have no hope for it. America's weapons may be aging and falling behind. China may be able to achieve a level where American weapons are of little threat, but those aging weapons will be plenty capable of killing civilians. The empire turning inwards, fast. Meanwhile even in left spaces we spend more time making it a purity contest then trying to just get people started on the basics.

Edit: there's a half finished thought in here I finished in response to the comment below.

[–] Kawasaki@lemmygrad.ml 9 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

People say half the younger generation has a favorable view of socialism.

This would be really hopeful for me, but I need to know what they actually mean by socialism before I get too excited. It makes me uneasy that as the mainstream position shifts further right, even the most moderate lukewarm reformists start to look extreme. If what most of them mean is social democracy or a welfare state, we’re in serious trouble here at the imperial core.

I came across a comment on Reddit the other day that said, “I’m as left as they come; I’m so left-wing, I’m not even liberal.” And they weren’t joking. For some, not being a liberal is the ultimate form of being "left."

[–] 201dberg@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

Honestly that was a half finished statement I forgot to finish cause I got interrupted while typing this out. And then came back and forgot it was in there when I added the last paragraph. lol. What I meant to say was something a long the lines of "People say half the younger generation has a favorable view of socialism. But that's 50% of like 20% of the population. Further more, many of those people are the kinds that think "The Nordic Model" is socialism or are the kind of people that go "well, I support a socialist approach but communism is evil" and such things."

So, glad you mentioned that. Cause I never would have noticed that super out of place seeming statement. lol

[–] sinovictorchan@lemmygrad.ml 10 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

A few Pax Americana advocates still believe that scary red boogymen is behind the new youth culture, Donald Trump, and mass import of immigrants of non-European ancestry. If there are Pax Amerciana who still believes that the invisible hand is appointing Communists into key positions of the USA to manage the lazy Capitalist, then I do not see why Communists should give up.

There are key events for revolution. One is the depletion of Indigenous child slaves and Indigenous human child experimental subjects in fake schools in 1998. The lack of child slaves prompts the elite of European immigrants to import enormous number of immigrants of non-European ancestry and mixed-European ancestry to maintain their prosperity. They need to betray their fellow white people and dump them into poverty which cause radicalization and delinquency for anyone white people who are too lazy to survive without government handout. The lack of child slaves for unethical experimentation means that they could now longer advance their research to improve healthcare and food guide with their poor management and laziness.

Another is the weakening free riding over former European colonies. The Western European diaspora exploit their former colonies through the maintenance of puppet government, debt trapping, assassination of human rights advocates, and military invasions. They also maintain the division of a tribe into separate tribes, fragmentation of tribal alliance, authoritarian ideology, and the newly formed caste systems that allows a person to exploit the lower castes.

A third factor is Donald Trump who decided that the Global North should suffer from a small portion of the treatements that the Global South experienced. Donald Trump makes American unethical foreign policies more obvious and distribute economic aggression more equally.

[–] Maeve@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 4 weeks ago

I agree with most everything you've said, except that it seems very much more than a few Pax Americans advocates, from what I've seen in life and online.

[–] Commiejones@lemmygrad.ml 9 points 1 month ago

It is a big battle and we will probably never see the revolution but if we in the west don't do our part to agitate against the empire we are just delaying the inevitable outcome.

[–] pcalau12i@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

US politics is plagued by American exceptionalism. The overwhelming majority of the population do not even consider how people in other countries view things, and they implicitly assume their own Overton window is the global Overton window of "reasonable discourse." If anyone disagrees, they literally cannot fathom it is even possible to disagree with American politics, that literally cannot even register in their brain as a possibility, thus they assume you must either be lying or paid to disagree ("wumao" or "Russian bot"). This is why Americans are often so easy to convince that the US should intervene in other countries, because they nearly all implicitly believe that even the citizens of countries like China or Cuba also believe in American politics and are secretly hoping for Americans to come liberate them but are forced to lie about it by their government.

Honestly, I see no way to break this mass delusion without something seriously calling into question American exceptionalism, something that forces Americans to actually take seriously their own position in global politics, which is something I doubt can come internally from the US. It would have to come externally: something in the global geopolitical situation would have to change to force Americans to take seriously the diversity of global politics. It doesn't even matter if what it is is "socialist," there just needs to be something that breaks the illusion that US-style politics is the only way to understand the world and the only valid system. You aren't going to have much luck convincing a population of socialism in a capitalist country where suggesting anything outside of its own media Overton window is considered extremely taboo (which is ironic because if you ask most Americans straight-up if they trust the media, they will say no, but they will almost always defend everything the media says verbatim and act like it is absurd to question it).

[–] Munrock@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I would suggest that 'is it possible' isn't the best question. The majority of us would agree that it's somewhere in the range of 'unlikely' to 'impossible', but any answer seeking to be more accurate than that necessarily involves speculation.

I think, at least in terms of finding surety of direction, it might be more helpful to ask yourself and others: if you weren't trying to build a Western left, what would you do instead with that time and effort?

For some people, even if they knew the chances of making a difference were 1000:1, they'd still think it was the best use of their time. And some others, depending on their means, might direct their efforts abroad. Some might be Luigi.

I doubt very many would give up entirely and live a life of leisure. I don't think anyone who's at the point where they're having this kind of conversation with this kind of community would sleep well at night knowing that they just walked away.

[–] materialanalysis1938@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 4 weeks ago

That’s a very good point. You have to start somewhere.

[–] LeGrognardOfLove@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 4 weeks ago

I think that 70 years of McCarthyism poisoned the western discourse so much that without rebranding communism, it won't happen.

The overtone window is so far right that people mistake the center-right for the left.

Just saying communism or socialism is enough to brand one as such and close any form of debate.

History has been weaponized against the people in such a way that there is two versions of each events in the communism world - and no amount of verification and denial will make the participants realize that it's mostly fog of war and propaganda.

Right now, there is rampant sinophobia and russophobia that helps re-inforce the "communism bad" narrative.

News from North Korea are ridiculized and each success is turned into a "but how many person died for dear leader" joke.

In the western world, the media control is total and the political system is hopelessly liberal, to a point where it's a central democracy in which the only ideology possible is how to enrich the current kleptocrats.

Revolution is nearly impossible, as social movements are seen as disruptive, and the latent fascism of the west make the proletariats think they are better than their neighbors. This blatant lack of empathy makes it impossible for the proletariats to stage protests and class solidarity.

The proletariat has been atomized, bought and browbeaten into submission and will not move forward while the kleptocrats pillage the commun good, and build themselves survival systems for the systemic collapse of our ecosystem.

So, I think the future will see a collapse of human populations, a replacement of human expertise by technolocial systems, all of that to make the news kings - the childrens and chosen ones of the current kleptocrats - the new custodians of what will be left of humanity and our ecosystems.

I don't think the current post communist-era countries have what they need to counter this trend.

Fascism is rising again, and will oppose what could be the hope of all, for personal gains.

But after that, maybe communism and humanty has a chance....

[–] darkernations@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

It would require deep statistical analysis of the population to see who would benefit from the downfall of USAmerican imperialism and from there a pool of who may have most revolutionary potential (maybe those who are propertyless, which is why the proleteriat are considered the most revolutionary). It is material interests that drives the focus; if your target audience is not going to benefit in the short to medium term from your offer then you're not going to have a sustainable strategy. You may have those in the vanguard who engage class betrayal but the masses need to know they are going to benefit.

It is not about messaging or finding masses to sacrifice the little they have or brainwashing or any other idealist nonsense. It comes down to what can be offered in the short to medium term that aligns with socialist goals.

Maybe there is a sizable population in the US/West that reflects the above characteristics. Maybe there isn't as the conditions aren't there yet. I'm not sure at this point if I care. Maybe one day I will.

Ask Lemmygrad