Makes sense, PSL shouldnt risk their org over a based act of adventurism, especially since they dont really have the support and infraestructure to go underground
this post was submitted on 22 May 2025
223 points (100.0% liked)
chapotraphouse
13848 readers
564 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
He had a brief association with one branch of the PSL that ended in 2017.
Not surprised. The sort of person who would do this kind of individualist adventurism doesn't last long in the PSL.
Smart response since this isn't a free speech issue but a state security issue that could create severe legal blowback for them
I initially thought otherwise but, nah, you know what, I already disagree with myself. This was a fine statement and didn't really veer into any Zionist apologia. They're still going to be targeted though, probably unavoidable.
Anyway, I hope they make it but it won't be because this statement saved them.
Hope comrades here in the PSL stay safe.
Honestly with the responses I almost wonder if “He was not a member but we support his actions” would’ve been a better statement
Like, obviously I understand why they didn’t do that, but everyone’s acting like they did anyway, so why bother downplaying? At some point just say “Killing Zionists is good, end of sentence”
Edit: Sorry to be very clear I’m not saying they should have done this. This is just a comment about how even when they say the polite and proper thing people call them terrorists anyway
eh, no need to self-torch an org, especially over reply guys
They could have omitted the do not support part entirely from the statement
Meh, whatever. For based akzione there is unity of fields (which was nearly shattered over minor actions), and americans are largely passive, so it's not like even direct call to 
from psl would increase anything material, they are not bla with infrastructure to do that sort of stuff (and bla was not that effective due to chosen methods being extremely obvious, but same is true here so besides the point)
They didn't say why they didn't support it. If it was "we do not condemn ANY violence EVER" I'd agree with you. But the PSL does not support adventurism and they didn't explicitly condemn it either.
PSL has nothing to gain by associating with this act, so why risk it at the moment?
Ehh, their lawyers probably said to put it in for good luck.
This is probably the right move. "Do not support" falls short of "condemn," and now is absolutely not the time for them getting caught in the weeds explaining the nuances of how adventurism contradicts democratic centralism and posing hypotheticals like "this would be good if we decided to start doing assassinations in a committee."
PSL leadership is probably afraid they’re going to be terminated the way Ferguson organizers were
Yeah like I said, I know why and I do think it’s the right decision but fuck seeing the responses makes me go “Why bother”
that would be a massive security liability, the state is already black bagging people just for op-eds.
And let’s be honest, with enough traction, they qill be branded a terrorist org by the us administration either way
Absolutely not. The risk of that outweighs the benefit.
the benefit.
Which, tbh, is none. Anyone saying they'd join this organization if they defended this guy or something is lying and if not is probably very immature anyways.
load more comments
(1 replies)
One of the DSA chapters I was in had some things going down before I joined. I didn't know what it was but learned a bit through my time there. In short, they were infiltrated and some members got put on some list. And that's just DSA, way before the more visible Palestine movement.
I know of some people during the occupy movement who had their calls tapped and put on list.
Orgs/people in them will be targeted and hit regardless no matter how tame, minor, powerful etc. I think covering your ass is fine, especially because this person wasn't an active member and it's just libel, but being so scared of feds that you end up burying your head in the sand is turbo lib shit. We all knew feds were a thing before organizing, we should have been had opsec and failsafe plans for things like this. If everytime someone on our side, even if not in an org, does something like this and gets condemned for being tired of waiting. Then what movement are we building? I vaguely remember Aaron Bushnell getting condemned for his choice in resistance.
I think this event will change things, I've seem mostly positive takes personally, and maybe organizing can change for the better to be at least more secure when[it's not if because if we're serious then they're coming] the fed fight comes.
Like I said, it's good they covered their ass and the statement is relatively tame but this is something we all should've been thinking about decades ago.
Yeah I don't think there's a reason for an aboveground political org to put a target on its back to explicitly support this guy but you're 100% correct. Anecdotally I've also heard of infiltration, in both anarchist direct action groups and more tame socialist groups. And with DSA in particular I constantly see people behaving like wreckers, though it's hard to distinguish kids getting into petty drama and taking it too far from fed wreckers sometimes.
Opsec concerns... it's going to be hard. Every other door has a goddamn ring camera on it. Almost everyone carries a smartphone everywhere. Traffic lights all have cameras. And you can't erase the past, if you're already on a list from being related to DSA or food not bombs or doing local mutual aid, are you just inviting further scrutiny on your org by being involved? I guess the idea is to blend in. But it's hard to not end up on the radar of local cops if you're doing anything remotely cool, and already being on their radar seems like a mighty fine way to get popped when doing any more serious actions. We need mass mobilization I guess, it can't just be the same old activists doing everything.
I will say though, it's at a point where its probably more important to do something than to not get caught (though both is ofc the goal)
Opsec is very hard these days. But it's harder for them to find bodies to infiltrate people than it is for them to just login to a website and pull any info they need. Going offline or even off of public social media is one of the easiest ways but this should be org discussions
yeah I just don't see going offline as a total solution at all (I assume you don't either)
I mean yes it's a good thing to do but you still exist in the built environment with all the things I mentioned and more all surveilling you, and you don't even get to reap the benefits of modern communications. I think you need community buy in on some level to deal with some of these. mass shaming and defacing of cameras would go a long way. We are at a point where not having a phone or taking even mild precautions makes people think you're a drug dealer. That level of penetration of society means cops can just look for anyone they can't track rather than find a needle in a haystack. or at least I fear we're there.
I vaguely remember Aaron Bushnell getting condemned for his choice in resistance.
people thought it wouldn't be effective.
If anyone actually reads this and thinks "ah they should've praised the guy and said they supported him", please don't
I get why this is their statement and I agree that it's the best they can say in this situation, but I wish the Western left was big enough and militant enough that they could add one more sentence like "those zionists nevertheless deserved it" to the end of it.
I’m already written too much in this thread, but I just made the mistake of reading CPUSA’s statement and it (as usual) makes PSL look like Ansar Allah by comparison. To hear CPUSA tell it, apartheid was apparently defeated in South Africa exclusively through legal nonviolent protest and violence has no place in the “fight” for Palestinian liberation. This probably is the best statement PSL could realistically make in this deeply evil settler colony.
Liz: don't do it
Brace: but if you do...
Liz: we disavow
Couldn’t be me disavowing support for armed resistance to genocide.
You don’t have public offices and staff for the state to kidnap or kill
Or family and friends. People need to remember that if you decide to come at them, they will come at you even harder and will not hesitate to kill everyone and everything you love for even having the pretense to challenge their monopoly on violence.
I don’t. No one needs to convince me that it’s scary, risky, and dangerous to be a target of the empire. It’s also something unavoidable to anyone who’s ever called themselves a communist. The state can kidnap or kill any of us at any time, and we’re watching them do it every day. No combination of magic words exists that will protect a party committed to the revolutionary overthrow of a state from being targeted with state violence.
I don’t demand that anyone throw away their lives because I say so, and no one should take me seriously if I did. What I won’t do is stand shoulder to shoulder with the empire and disavow anyone with the courage and integrity to risk their lives taking direct action to bring about the change we all spend every day hoping someone else will bring.
I’m not the leadership of PSL. I can only assume they believe they have a good faith reason to think there’s some tactical benefit to saying whatever they’re saying rather than just saying nothing. I don’t see it. I hope they’re right. I hope it’s not just useless capitulation, and I hope they’re getting whatever they think they need to out of it, but I don’t see it. I don’t need to look at the replies to their statement to know that not a single person believes that PSL members genuinely oppose violence in pursuit of liberation. What would be the point of them if they did? CPUSA already exists.
Edit: I recognize that “do not support” is different than “disavow” as another commenter pointed out. That’s true, and I’m sure it’s something they gave a lot of thought to. I’m still not convinced the audience reading it would interpret them differently or believe either.
It’s also something unavoidable to anyone who’s ever called themselves a communist.
Yeah I’ve been reading some history of leftist movements, and right now the relative lack of persecution we have in the west feels like the exception rather than the rule. Be prepared for the winds to blow from another direction. Though overall, I think the response was “smart”. The PSL has to consider things like their current resources, momentum, revolutionary environment, etc and I think in that context the response was correct.
Fair enough comrade, happy to have you in the fight
Aren't they saying, "that's not our guy" and "we don't support adventurism"? Organized armed resistance is very different from an unaffiliated rando assassinating Israeli functionaries in this way. The action isn't even unambiguously directed at the state of Israel or Zionism. What would be the benefit of supporting it at all?
Pretty much this. This guy wasn't a Hamas fighter blowing up an IDF tank, he was a random person who targeted two other random people.
Eh, disagree. They contributed to the war machine, the world is a better place without them
That's a slightly different conversation and I'm actually with you on that one.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
"do not support it" can also be they just dont support adventurism, which is in line for them.
Ngl though I badly want someone to drop a "the chickens are coming home to roost"
I'm sure this is somewhat the sentiment of most PSL members and leadership. They aren't mourning two random Zionists. But publicly they have to keep distance from it and obviously this type of adventurism is not in line with their tactics
too late. the headline is already out there, which will allow the trump admin to crush the party completely with no pushback by the general public
rip
Libs will sigh a breath of relief that they don't have to worry about those 'tankies' any more.
"Excellent, we got rid of the tankies! What's next? ...Wait, why are you calling me 'commie'?"
load more comments
(2 replies)
I think the "correct" statement would this is a negative externalities of genocide and that when you do evil people aren't going to respond well to it. As that will get someone arrested I think the equilibrium statement is something to the effect of, " we have nothing to say because the government is not respecting first amendment rights at the moment" They chose the safest option and I am not mad about it.
Not condoning adventurism is principled ig
while they were absolute ghouls, a couple staffers were probably not very effective targets, and they could be more easily twisted into "victims of anti-Semitism" because of their distance from the levers of power
Well made statement. Says as little as possible and gives minimal meat for adversaries to latch on to.
Imagine being upset by this, LARPers. Imagine not understanding why this is a problem and even in terms of ill-advised adventurism was badly done with bad targets. This was not a planned act of some disciplined person, this was an individualistic act of despair and anger likely made with very minimal planning and highly emotional thinking. Movements cannot afford that kind of thing. Demcent exists for a reason.
If you care about something you owe it to that cause to be rational, to think clearly through your actions and their consequences and what they can and cannot achieve. Ask yourself are you doing this out of a selfish desire to be a martyr in the easiest way possible? Or are you trying to maximize the good you can do, the effect you can have. I think arguably if this person had gone to California and spent the next 6 months harassing Google employees for their company's participation in genocide they would have had a bigger impact. But that's not grandiose, that's not satisfying to the ego and martyrdom drive. It's not dramatic enough.
I really, really hope this person wasn't at any point a member. I really hope that they haven't been organizing with ANSWER lately. I hope they dropped out entirely because the zionists will use any excuse however tenuous to enable a harsher crackdown on what is very much a BDS movement not based around violence but economic and social pressure.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Not Based
say what you want about Maoists in south east Asia ,they're principled as fuck even when they're wrong and they are mostly correct
Those last 5 words will not save them.
This kind of thing is why we don't do adventurism. The shooter decided, without talking to anyone, that it was time to start shooting. Now PSL has an unexpected PR battle, and possible investigation, dropped on them without warning. Where is the strategy in that? How does this help PSL or the rest of us win the class war?
It's not even really about being on our best behavior or good PR, it's about practicality. Feds will come for the orgs eventually. But this kind of shit does not combat it in any way.
load more comments
(5 replies)
view more: next ›