Skip Navigation
agitprop @hexbear.net
CoolerOpposide [none/use name] @hexbear.net

‼️‼️Hexbear Agitprop U.S. election response/commentary resource post‼️‼️

YOU are speaking!

Have you made any poignant commentary on the recent election in the U.S.? Do you have a good response to liberals who are upset with the results or process of the election? Have you written or seen something as a comment reply/post that you think has standalone value? Did you see a new take or analysis you hadn’t previously considered?

Whether it’s a long idea with lots of context, or a short and sweet one liner, we want those thoughts aggregated here. This post is intended to be a resource for comrades to draw from when having actual discussions outside of Hexbear both online or IRL regarding the election.

Consider this a mini-effortpost aggregator. This is not for shitposts, but humor is completely acceptable if it helps make the point.

251 comments
    1. The DNC learned nothing from 2016. It is the definition of irrationality to do the same thing twice and expect different outcomes.
    2. Bernie could garner huge crowds and massive support by campaigning on the basis of policy that has mass appeal, such as universal healthcare. Kamala chose not to do this because she prioritised business as usual over stopping Trump.
    3. You say "things will get worse under Trump". That's true. But things got worse under Biden/Harris after Trump's first term as president - environmental policy, the border camps, reproductive rights, trans rights, cop city, the genocide of Palestinians etc. So when you say "we must vote for Kamala or things will get worse" that line of reasoning is at best unconvincing and at worst it betrays the 4-year state of amnesia you have lived in because you are so politically detached from the consequences of your voting.
    4. Telling people to protect democracy—the system where you vote for the candidate who best represents your political values—by voting for a person who in no way represents your political values in order to save democracy is tortured logic.
    5. No, I'm not an accelerationist. Me advocating for people not to vote for Kamala Harris is not an accelerationist position because we should not be giving a mandate for a genocide, climate change, and civil rights-eroding accelerationist by voting for them.
    6. How many delegates did Harris win in the last primaries? How many did she win in the primaries to get her to run for president this time? Is this what you claim as your democracy?
    7. When I list a number of legitimate grievances with Kamala Harris and Joe Biden's regime and issues with Kamala's election platform, none of which have a single thing to do with her race or gender, and you respond by calling me racist or misogynistic it drives home how little you are willing to listen to my political concerns and how intransigent your favoured party is. When you act this way and then tell me that people have to vote for Kamala in order to push her left while you yourself are unwilling to even acknowledge the fact that Kamala's platform has serious issues, it signals to me that there will be no shifting left on anything. I already knew this fact but you have done an exceptional job of inadvertently teaching other people this lesson.
    8. When entering into negotiations with someone, it's a uniquely terrible tactic to hand over your one state-sanctioned bargaining chip before making even one single demand.
    9. You are chasing the DNC to the right and one day you will wake up and wonder to yourself "How did I end up all the way over here?" I'm not following you into that marsh but you're welcome to go into it yourself, just don't get upset at me when I point out what you're heading into and don't get angry when I refuse to blindly follow you.
    10. Kamala Harris is the only thing that can stop fascism. Kamala Harris cannot do anything to protect reproductive rights, trans rights, Palestinian lives, the lives of Marcellus Williams and Robert Robertson etc. because she is powerless to do anything about it 🫠
    11. Kamala Harris said she would "follow the law" regarding trans people. She was angling to become the primary lawmaker in the US. Not only does this show a lack of whatever libs care about like "leadership" but it shows how cowardly and detestable she is because she understands the law and she is willing to follow it but not when it comes to things like international law, only when it's laws that she can use to hide behind while trans people are subjected to further oppression through legislation that strips them of rights.
    12. Historically, fascism has never been stopped at the ballot box. You being convinced that this is possible does not sway my opinion on any matter aside from my estimation of your political awareness and your ability to achieve change.
    13. You had four years (eight+ if you count Trump's regime and the lead-up to it in this calculation) to "stop fascism". What did you do in this period of time? Did you push Biden and Kamala to adopt policies which have mass support? Did you do anything except go to back to brunch?
    14. When you accuse me of not organising irl, when you say that I'm not doing anything:
    • I'm not about to dox myself
    • I'm not going to make a laundry list of the things that I have done w/organising and activism just to impress (?) you, especially not when you've already told me that I haven't done anything
    • It's a huge self-report and it's obvious that you're projecting
    • You alienate others by telling them "I do not recognise your efforts and everything that you have done is unimportant in my estimation"
    1. You aren't entitled to others' votes. Stop pretending that you are.
    2. We aren't splitting the so-called left, Kamala Harris did that all by herself.
    3. You have no red lines. There is nothing that could make you not support Kamala Harris and we know it. Telling people to drop their standards and ignore their conscience to vote for Kamala is a fatal strategy and you killed her campaign by deploying it.
    4. Selective invoking of people of colour to advocate for Kamala was ridiculous and disgustingly tokenistic. Yes, Angela Davis is smarter than I am. Telling me that I'm stupider than her and so I should take my political cues from her with regards to electoralism is a losing argument and it's low-key ableist became you're arguing that the person who lacks intelligence also has a commensurate lack of political virtue. Historically speaking, very intelligent people have had absolutely atrocious politics. Also people like Thomas Sowell and Clarence Thomas are almost certainly a lot smarter than I am. It would be wrong of me not to defer to their superior intellect and their politics, isn't that right?
    5. You say that democracy is going to be strangled in its crib and that fascism has come to town. You are maybe posting about this online in your echo chamber and that's it. You do not take politics seriously, not even your own, yet you demand that I take your politics more seriously than you yourself do. There are things that I am doing right now to avert this trend in politics. There are things that I would do if fascism proper had seized power, none of which I would post about online. We are not the same. Enjoy your brunch though.
    6. Almost all of your arguments for voting for Kamala Harris (aside from the "it will stop Trump" argument which, in retrospect, appears to be a dismal failure) also apply to reasons for voting for Trump. "You can push them left", "By voting we will get a seat at the table", "Voting third party or not voting at all is a wasted vote", "We have to vote this way to protect the country", "Politics is about comprise - you cannot expect them to be your perfect political candidate", and whatever hold-your-nose-and-vote arguments you trot out. Did you ever stop to ask yourself why it is that you do not find these arguments for voting Trump to be convincing?
    7. Last time Trump got elected you were brutally vindictive. You took glee in the thought of people in red states and marginalised groups suffering due to policy and things like natural disasters, regardless of their politics or how they chose to vote. You were excited to tell these people that they were going to get deported and put into concentration camps. You will do it again this time too because you have learned nothing. November came and these people you targeted with your vicious schadenfreude remembered. They aren't going to forget how effortlessly you abandoned them and how you wished the worst suffering and ill-fate upon them.
    8. You said that a non-vote or a 3rd party vote is a vote for Trump. We have been shouting from the rooftops that Kamala Harris is fundamentally unwilling and incapable of stopping Trump. History vindicates this position; Trump managed to win the popular vote while Harris underperformed by millions of votes, even compared to Joe Biden. Thus your support for Kamala Harris was therefore support for Donald Trump's presidency. Congratulations on getting the candidate which you campaigned so hard to get elected.
    9. I don't care about the US. America must die and if Trump is to be its undertaker then I am relieved to hear it. What you have done is to accelerate the destruction of the US. If I were cynical about achieving my political objectives, wouldn't have said any of the above. If I was an accelerationist I would have been pushing for all of the things that you've been pushing for instead of pushing back against them. I would have even gone so far as to furnish your side with more poisoned chalice arguments (I do this with the far right, I exactly know how to do it). Instead I've been defending your political project against your own excesses and self-defeating narrow mindedness. You are right in the fact that I am your enemy but you are wrong to oppose me because you are a far greater enemy to yourself than I could ever have the stomach to be. You won't listen to a word of what I've said because you refuse to learn and to reflect.
    10. A cynical person might argue that my strategy is to oppose you in the knowledge that this will make you react by becoming more deeply entrenched in your position, encouraging a sort of siege mentality in you, so that you see any criticism or difference of opinion as being an existential political threat that must be eradicated as a means to create more disaffected people to radicalise out of bourgeois democracy. This is not my intent. If things improve for the proles and the marginalised because of what I argue for then that's a win for my political objectives. However I can't control your actions and if you choose to respond by taking a hatchet to your precious liberal democracy then, likewise, that's a win for my political objectives. Which way, western man?
    • No, I'm not an accelerationist. Me advocating for people not to vote for Kamala Harris is not an accelerationist position because we should not be giving a mandate for a genocide, climate change, and civil rights-eroding accelerationist by voting for them.

      Also, if they did want to put the breaks on they'd have to stop Harris and the DNC from doing this every 4 years. Harris is very much the accelerationist sabotaging whatever isn't rotten in the system to push Trump and company in to power.

    • Uphold ReadFanon thought

    • My next hb handle is gunna be ReadReadFanon

  • A softer list I made on a Lemmy.ml thread that got a good amount of momentum and very little pushback on what liberals should do in the coming years, a mini What is to be Done?

    1. Get organized. Join a Leftist org, find solidarity with fellow comrades, and protect each other. The Dems will not save you, it is up to the Workers to protect themselves. The Party for Socialism and Liberation and Freedom Road Socialist Organization both organize year round, every year, because the battle for progress is a constant struggle, not a single election. See if there is a chapter near you, or start one! Or, see if there's an org you like more near you and join it, the point is that organizing is the best thing any leftist can do.
    2. Read theory. A good primer is Blackshirts and Reds. It will help contextualize what fascism is, what causes it, and how to stop it. I can offer a good introductory reading list regarding Marxism if you'd like, but this is a good starting point.
    3. Aggressively combat white supremacy, misogyny, queerphobia, and other attacks on marginalized communities. Cede no ground.
    4. Be more industrious, and self-sufficient. Take up gardening, home repair, tinkering. It is through practice that you elevate your problem-solving capabilities. Not only will you improve your skill at one subject, but your general problem-solving muscles get strengthened as well. Theory guides practice, which sharpens theory to be reapplied to better practice.
    5. Learn self-defense. Get armed, if practical. Be ready to protect yourself and others. The Democrats will not save us, we must save each other.
    6. Be persistent. If you feel like a single water driplet against a mountain, think of the Grand Canyon. Oh, how our efforts pile up! With consistency, every rock, boulder, even mountain, can be drilled through with nothing but steady and persistent water droplets.

    Here is the reading list I am working on, open to advice! I copy and paste it whenever it is asked for, which has been surprisingly frequent.

    Edit: Folded the reading list and this list together, I believe that works better.

    • Blackshirts and Reds remains 🔛🔝

      • It really is fantastic agitprop. It slips beyond the liberal shields like a slow knife in Dune.

      • What is the Blackshirts and Reds reading level? Seems to be a lot of agreement that we need theory that's written at a 6th grade level because that's where most American's reading skills are. I'm not entirely sure what htat means in terms of word choice and concepts, since I think what we're going for is present the concepts straight, but using language - words, sentence structures, things like that, that people whose reading skills aren't strong. Like, they're not stupid, they're lacking a particular skill, kind of thing.

  • -Can't blame third parties, the margins are too big and they wouldn't have mattered in a single state.
    -Can't blame non-voters, voter turnout was relatively high.
    -Can't blame the Electoral College, Trump won the popular vote by almost twice the difference that Hillary has in 2016.
    -Can't blame it on people being ignorant of the ramifications, Trump had already been president for 4 years, he was the presumptive nominee all along, and throughout election season he actually polled higher than his favorability when he left office.
    -Can't blame corruption or voting machines, the last week of polling had Trump ahead, and the exit polling lines up with the results.
    The only thing the Democrats have to blame is themselves, for running a bad campaign with an inferior candidate and striking out on a softball.

    A close friend of mine was remarking in the last few weeks how the Democrats had pivoted from the "weird" messaging, which seemed to be working, back to the "he's dangerous and unstable and a threat to democracy" messaging, which they knew from experience did not have much of an effect. In fact, from exit polls, out of people who said "democracy in this country is threatened" or prioritized a candidate's capacity to do the job, a clear majority supported Trump! This is yet another damning piece of evidence that suggests that Democrats were actively not doing what they could to win the election. Either they prioritized fundraising at the expense of outcome, or they actually threw it.

    Also, Allan Lichtman BTFO.

  • Harris did not lose (primarily) due to her gender or race. I feel that people who are operating under this assumption need to examine the dialectic here a lot more closely. Kamala's major L is not a testament to Trump being any degree of magnificent but rather a demonstration of how God awful she is. Liberals need to garner far more awareness. If your answer to the question, "Why did Kamala lose?" has anything to do with assuming that it's mainly the fault of reactionary, sexist, and racist white men, you are cutting out a whole bunch of very important factors from this equation. Plenty of marginalized people feel utterly disappointed in the bourgeois, imperialist machine that is the Democratic Party of the United States. 

    We've seen that they will truly do nothing to further our rights or even maintain them as they currently stand. They don't care about economic equality, and the most we've gotten from them is lip service. Democrats and Republicans are two heads on a vicious and malevolent double-headed fire-breathing dragon. One of these heads breathes fire of its usual color, and this head will explicitly warn you that this fire is there to kill your ass. The other head, on the other hand, will breathe a mesmerizing, astonishingly flashy rainbow-colored fire instead. On top of that, this head will tell you that if you get touched by this fire, you'll heal from all of the wounds that the other head's fire has given you, but in actuality, it just exacerbates the damage.

    This double-headed dragon has wreaked havoc on marginalized communities, and these marginalized communities know, be they oppressed on the basis of race, gender, class, sexuality, disability, religion, or anything else, that the rainbow fire actually has zero healing properties, so stop acting like they do not know because we do. In addition, stop pretending that you care about us because you liberals have constantly demonstrated to me, a poor neurodivergent transfem of color, that you do not care about my view on bourgeois electoralism. It's clear that I am nothing but a pawn to you, and you seem to want to dispose of me the moment that me being your pawn stops working in your favor. If that were anything but the truth, you'd listen to me on how to be a better ally to the marginalized, but you never do. If your outlook is that you want to hurt marginalized people while pretending that you care about them, it's no wonder that KKKamala HarriSS seems right up your alley.

    “Imperialism leaves behind germs of rot which we must clinically detect and remove from our land but from our minds as well.”

  • (On Democrats running to the right to appease donors, rather than left to appease voters, and losing the election)

    They always will, they serve the same donors and bourgeois powers. Marx and Lenin are vindicated by the passage of time. They were not clairvoyant, they just accurately analyzed the systems around them and saw what necessarily follows from their directions.

    Everyone, get organized, read theory, learn self-defense and self-sufficiency. A good primer is Blackshirts and Reds. Defend yourselves and protect each other.

  • The real story here is that Trump won the popular vote. That signals an enormous shift in sentiment and culture, and should be the subject of any serious analysis here. This is nothing less than a catastrophic failure of the liberal project and liberal vision--a total implosion of the do-nothing "centrist" political consensus. Democrats have shown over and over and over again that they have nothing to offer the majority of Americans. The Harris campaign was just the apotheosis of the trend: courting capital and neo-conservative ghouls while jettisoning any talk of policies that might help people. This is not a winning election strategy. That should be screamingly obvious now. People are angry, hurting, and looking for anyone that even suggests they understand that pain and might do something about it, even when the suggested solutions make no sense. The only sane response to this result is a SWEEPING reexamination of the neo-liberal consensus. Liberalism in its current form has failed most people, and the Democrats have failed to articulate any message or position that appreciates that. Until someone in the United States starts articulating a positive vision with policies to engender some hope for the future--healthcare for everyone, housing as a human right, SERIOUS action on climate change--the far right will keep winning. They're the only ones with ideas.

    Now is the time to reach out to your liberal friends to help them understand that this is not a fluke, but the system working as designed. This failure by the Dems didn't come out of nowhere. Lots of us on the left saw this coming a mile away, and can help make sense of it. They're flailing and looking for an explanation. We have that. Help them understand. Help them see that we don't HAVE to live like this. We don't have to put up with only being given a sliver of political power every 4 years, with the threat of fascism hanging over our heads. The people at the top--the donor class, campaign managers, and beltway lanyard bros--aren't worth your time. But your mom or friend who voted for Kamala and is devastated and confused by the loss of the popular vote definitely IS worth your time. Those people can be comrades. Give them a chance. Reach out and listen to their frustrations and concerns. Don't be smug--be sympathetic. Talk to them about why they think this happened. Offer your perspective. Ask them why the Democrats raised over a billion dollars and still lost the popular vote. Ask if those might be connected. Ask why progressive voter initiatives--protecting abortion, sick days, wages increases, etc.--outperformed the Democratic presidential candidate so much in so many places. Ask what they think that means about the state of the electorate; does it mean most of America really is irredeemably evil? Or could it maybe mean something else? Ask if they really think Kamala Harris and "nothing really needs to change" is the best we can do, or the message most people need to hear. Help them see that it isn't. Help them see that a better world is possible. Help them get organized. This is your chance.

    • Don't be smug--be sympathetic. Talk to them about why they think this happened.

      I’m so glad you (and many others) have included this part, because this is such a huge and important takeaway that gets so easily over-analyzed in online leftist spaces, and it’s exactly why I made this post.

      The echo chamber effect will often have us losing sight of the actual goal, but god damn it just feels so good to be correct. That first hit of vindication after years and years of warning liberals that this would happen is euphoric, but extremely toxic if you let it slip into rhetoric.

      Frankly, nobody likes to be wrong, and accepting that can take quite some time for some people. That’s why the most important thing to focus on is giving others the proper tools to analyze what happened. Being smug together can come later when they inevitably find themselves on the same side as you

      • Yeah, the place to be smug is here on Hexbear when we're just talking to each other. If we're trying to actually reach people and change their minds, its really essential that we restrain the natural urge to dunk. Remember that these people are heavily propagandized, and that many of them were voting for Kamala because they genuinely thought it was the only possible option for producing a better world. Believing that doesn't make someone bad or dumb when they've been told it their whole lives by everything they've ever consumed. Rubbing their nose in it now is just going to alienate them from the left even further and make it easier for them to shift blame off of where it belongs and onto us. The goal is to bring new comrades into the movement, and we won't do that by making people feel bad--we'll do that by giving them hope that there's a better way.

      • Hard agree. Yelling "We were right we were right we were right" feels good but it doesn't, like, help anyone.

    • The real story here is that Trump won the popular vote. That signals an enormous shift in sentiment and culture, and should be the subject of any serious analysis here.

      Yes! And we should emphasize early and often that the shift in the popular vote is not because the populace got 10% more fascister since 2020, it's because (as you explain), of a total collapse in the faith in liberalism's ability to address or keep in check more reactionary elements, or really offer anything of worth

  • This should be a signal for american liberals that the democratic party is not a viable option anymore. Look at what happened, a total defeat, the republicans control both the house and senate in addition to having elected someone who according to your own law is a convicted felon.

    Do you still want to cling to the democratic party as it keeps on recycling the same impotent strategy over and over again magically expecting a different result?

    • Losing the popular vote should be a real wake up call. Hundreds of millions of dollars spent to win over moderate voters and republicans, and they turned out for Trump in even larger numbers than before. The working class has been so deeply gouged that you can no longer keep offering nothing and expect to be even competitive.

      This Democratic Party and its electoral “strategy” are beyond cooked. It’s crazy to think that the election numbers Democrats are seeing are receiving a GENEROUS boost from abortion rights being on the ballot, the incumbent boost, and several very important down ballot races.

    • The dude is a criminal, an Epstein associate, a creep, an absolute loser and a nepobaby failure of a businessman who is a clown that just says the first thing that pops into his head and makes decisions based on whatever the last thing was told to him in a flattering or convincing way.

      And the democrats lost to that. Twice.

      Nearly three times if not for the fact that people were desperate for respite from him and they got sold on the Obama-era myth of promising progress and change that, shockingly, went unfulfilled once again.

      Anyone could have tripped him up in a debate by making reference to the importance of reading to a president and saying that there should be a mandatory test for literacy before someone becomes president so they can fulfill their duties. You could have gone for a one-two punch and followed that up by saying that you don't believe that literacy is a barrier to being successful in life because even if you are illiterate you can still inheret your father's fortune and run crypto scams, although it does limit your ability to star on TV unless of course you go for the bottom of the barrel reality TV shows where scripts are little more than a suggestion, but you still believe that it's important for a president to be able to read.

      Trump is so unhinged and incapable of managing his emotions that saying something like that to him would make him so infuriated that he wouldn't possibly be able to think clearly after that point. Sure, it wouldn't win you any points with his diehard supporters but I can tell you that at least half of the American population would love to have seen Trump getting publicly dunked on so hard that he became a bumbling fool for the rest of a debate, plenty of conservatives included. It brings me no joy to say it but something like that would be a media coup that would win over so many undecided voters where policy and voting records would not.

      But Kamala suffered a resounding defeat at the hands of that buffoon.

      Ask not how Donald Trump could become president (twice) but ask if anybody could manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory the way that a DNC presidential candidate can.

    • I don't think this kind of messaging can be effective on its own without making explicit how capitalist democracy will always reproduce this result even if you manage the genuinely impossible task of slotting a third party in as one of the two majors. That's the real hurdle when it comes to bashing the democratic party. They always come back with a correct observation about FPTP.

  • For anyone talking with trans friends or loved ones, here's a good resource @marcie@lemmy.ml prepared.

    • Some things I would caution here for clarification:

      Matrix is known to leak metadata and has weaker E2E encryption than other E2E encrypted platforms.

      Signal is better than most platforms for one-on-one messaging (can also be used for larger groups but doesn't have channels) but it has shady requirements like requiring a phone number and requiring an Android or iOS device (doesn't support less corporate OSes like Linux as primary device) and the desktop application message storage not being secure (largely a desktop OS problem since their security tends to be horrible, but Signal could add more protections and doesn't), and other weird things like requiring proprietary libraries and not having fully FOSS builds and crypto stuff. It's not anonymous meaning theoretically the Signal backend could link sender IP addresses to exact recipients which is just enough data to be useful to intelligence agencies if Signal happens to be compromised (which they have received government funding in the past and suspiciously stopped updating their backend repo for like a year not too long ago). Signal is fine for the average person, but I've seen political activist groups use it and act like they're anonymous and I would be very careful in that situation. Otherwise if you know people that use Signal it's still better than most platforms, I would recommend using the Molly client which is actually FOSS and has more security features than the official Signal client.

      Cwtch looks like the overall best alternative (edit: actually it's not on F-Droid which is weird) to Signal since it is decentralized, doesn't require a phone number, has all of the main encryption features Signal has, and has an option for running a server to reduce battery life and increase message delivery reliability. Briar is similar and works over Bluetooth and local Wi-Fi making it a decent option for protests (if you even bring a phone). SimpleX Chat looks better than Signal as well since it doesn't require a phone number. Also XMPP which is decentralized and self-hosted but it requires a server setup. I haven't really used either of these platforms though so I can't attest to whether they actually work well.

      Lemmy and Mastodon are not private unless you are very careful in signing up for a public instance and not revealing your identity, assuming the instance you sign up for even allows that. However, they aren't run by corporations with shady agendas which is the most important part.

    • this is nice but there are a couple of logistical issues:

      • the point of social media and social platforms is to be in touch with other people. not just random other people but the specific people/groups you are friends with or interested in.
      • matrix is so goddamned complicated to use with encryption. I've honestly never gotten it up and working despite several concerted attempts. it is absolutely not a drop in replacement and suggesting it is only sets comrades up to fail and therefor feel powerless.
    • Salute marcie, always doing fantastic work

  • Edit: Replaced list with a link to Cowbee's "Read Theory, Darn it!" Introductory Reading List on Marxism-Leninism as it's easier to update one post than constantly edit all copy-pasted lists every time I make a change (I can never finish projects lol).

    • Black Belt Thesis Reader is a great add

    • maybe for 6. you could add foundations of leninism i thought it was pretty good as an summary of lenin, maybe add one that focuses on colonialism like Wretched of the Earth

      • Leaning heavily towards Fanon, need to read it myself first but additionally I am trying to find a good, easy link for it that isn't just anna's archive. Epubs and online versions are much nicer for quick agitprop IMO.

        Foundations of Leninism is good, but I do think the rest of the works thus far touch the same bases. Plus, since this is directed at libs, I fear linking Stalin may scare too many away, when the primary purpose is churning out MLs who will read Stalin at some point anyways, still going back and forth on that one in my head. Trying to capture the radical sentiment of disillusioned American libs in the aftermath of having their worldview rocked, not existing comrades. (Don't want to create ultras, but if you ask me reading the works listed should logically prevent ultrafication due to the inclusion of Blackshirts)

    • for also including the audio versions

      • (It wasn't me that thought of it, a certain comrade sent them to me and I don't know if they wish to remain anonymous since it was over DMs) but thanks!

  • I think we can use this to put the nail in the coffin of arguments about stalling or harm reduction. I think even people who find that convincing as a concept would have to concede that they've ridden that horse as far as it can carry them. It seems self evident that this is not a working strategy at this point.

    So if you're talking to a progressive/lib ask them what their plan was once they stalled as long as they could. Because they have.

  • Comrades in the Pacific Northwest might be interested in my post from last week, opening discussion about a socialist movement originating in and focusing on Cascadia: https://hexbear.net/comment/5576727

    There are flaws, but rhetorically it should be liberal-friendly. We live in the most politically progressive region of the US, but we are constrained by U.S. federal politics. Perhaps we should develop a Cascadian identity of our own that better represents us. Getting your politics from CNN or MSNBC will never ever take you there (as has been thoroughly proven for three elections, how much harder can our states support Democrats?bits not enough).

    • Just read your post and you may have answered the question, but the concept of Cascadian secession has already been taken up by conservatives and white nationalists, right? So if it were to be a movement to try and radicalize more people to the left how would we break away from that association?

      • It's addressed in the last section of the linked post.

        The Cascadia = white nationalism thing was mostly a figment the 70, very few people even know about it, and the imagery is used far far more by liberals in the present era. It is an important thing to be aware of, but it can be addressed down the line. For now, there is no movement, so you need to work with what you got. Rebranding is totally something that should be discussed down the line when there is a party (or other entity) to discuss it.

        The thing is that in our region, it's not very much work at all to radicalize people further to the left of what they are. We are in a place (in the major metro regions) where there is a really solid amount of people that need to give up on the US because it as anti-progressive in pretty much every way (as people here already know). Socialists and progressive liberals need to stop viewing themselves as "American" and start seeing the US government as an outside force that is holding us back, because that's what it is.

        Even with all that said, regardless of the "Cascadia" brand, the region has a long history of being infested with white nationalism. Cascadian socialists must be well educated on this, and it needs to be a pillar of the movement.

  • I have come across a somewhat uncomfortable scenario more than once this past week that I need some advice on from non-white folks here as a white woman in real-world organizing/activist spaces that do not necessarily lean very far left. I do not know how to approach BIPOC folks in these spaces (or even just in the general public I’ve encountered) espousing the virtues of voting Kamala Harris. I feel like @Angel@hexbear.net’s response to this in here is absolutely the correct perspective, but…is that even my place to say? I do not want to tell any non-white person how to express their frustrations and especially not as a white person, but…voting for Kamala was not it. It was never going to be it. I heard the same things back in the Obama days, too, and we have the benefit of hindsight now to tell us how poorly that goes. But I feel like I can’t be the one to say it. Is that the correct way to handle stuff like this? I feel very stuck.

    • There was discourse on tiktok where a white leftist called out democrats and Kamala. Kamala liberals then went on to smear them for being racist or whatever. Then other leftist, including POC, came to their defense because they were right. I don't think people changed their minds after but even if you're right, you'll have to be strong enough to take whatever backlash comes, even if wrong or in bad faith. The people who are open to dialogue will follow.

      I don't technically think it's good to self censor but if you need to talk around something for people to understand better then by all means do that. Ask questions and make it a conversation, if they're dead set on holding onto liberals then move on, it's not your fight.

      Never talk down on BIPOC people either because then it'll be harder to defend you. You may know more than SOME but lived experience is a bitch, dismissing or undermining that will backfire. Eventhough you and I are likely on the same side, I still take your word with caution because white folk are finicky. It's nothing against you personally.

      • Wanna know something interesting?

        That creator has ADHD and they suspect that they have undiagnosed autism. ADHD comes with auditory processing disorder at a really high prevalence rate (~40%, from memory). Autism and auditory processing disorder occur so frequently together that they might as well be considered a package deal, although I'm not aware of any studies that have looked into prevalence of auditory processing disorder because it's almost like looking for tiredness in insomniacs.

        People went after them in part for saying Kamala wrong, claiming the way they said it was racist. Thing about auditory processing disorder is that it can cause people to mispronounce words.

        This person actually mispronounces things fairly regularly. There's a video where they mispronounce about 3 words in the span of 30 seconds. Not in an egregious way but enough that it pings my decidedly unexpert radar. So as far as I'm concerned there's a lot of evidence for them likely having auditory processing disorder. (Armchair diagnosis of people especially remotely via media is a loathsome habit but I'm okay with breaking personal policy in this instance.) Meanwhile evidence of their being racist is nonexistent.

        I did drag one person who came for them asking them if there was any circumstances under which mispronouncing Kamala's name would be permissible to them. They said no, of course (which is, ironically, racist to expect that everyone knows Kamala Harris and knows how to pronounce her name correctly). So I figured to fight fire with fire and if baseless accusations of racism are okay then I'm well within my rights to accuse this dingdong with being ableist. I'm sure that they didn't consider that disability might be the cause for mispronouncing Kamala's name but then ignoring the challenges that people with disability face is inherently ableist anyway. So I levelled that accusation against them and gave the reasoning for the likelihood of the creator having auditory processing disorder and how this would explain a mispronunciation of an unusual word like an uncommon name such as Kamala. Of course, immediately they accuse me of making a diagnosis.

        The exchange we had didn't prove anything besides the fact that this type of person operates without any semblance of good faith.

        Did I bait them? Sure. Was there going to be any personal expense whatsoever for them to make an admission like "Well I guess I didn't think about how a person who survived a stroke might have a good reason for why they mispronounce names"? Nope.

    • Respectfully, this applies to irl spaces too.

      If you are objectively correct, you can’t live in constant fear that somebody might think you’re wrong. Beating around the bush and appeasement IS doing harm. Of course you don’t have to be rude, and I know you understand that this is obviously a very sensitive issue, but when push comes to shove it’s important to make your stance clear.

      Be kind, be compassionate, be understanding, and make it clear that you stand on the objectively right side of the issues. In real life spaces, as long as liberals know you disagree with conservatives from the very beginning, they are far more likely to listen to what you have to say. Most people are not the online frothing-at-the-mouth liberals we talk so much about

      • But that’s what I mean — is it really not doing harm if me, a white person, tells a Black person who says something like “this is all the fault of you people who didn’t vote for the Black woman” they’re wrong, actually? Because this is a real life thing I’ve encountered, and something my partner did too, and I feel like I just don’t know how to tactfully handle this. I know the correct stance, but it doesn’t change the fact that there are frustrated POC who are not looking for two white girls to tell them they’re wrong even if they are. I feel like this is not my fight, but at the same time, if there’s no one else to do it…I dunno. I gotta say something, right? But do I actually?

  • I've been trying to figure out how to innoculate/poison the rhetoric in use that gets people to go along with whatever liberal/conservative talking heads set as an agenda for discourse.

    Deconstructing rhetoric, analysis of media narratives - "media literacy" - more generally. I need a really fast way to read people into that frame such that they are immediately deonstructing narratives as soon as they feel empowered to do so.

    I basically want to utterly snuff out the average person's credulity towards people who are seeking power or modelling behavior from a highly visible place.

    In order for things to get better, people have to have the tools they need to distrust power. That needs to be paramount, over anything else. Once you have people going "oh wow that's kinda bullshit" rather than uncritically entering a receptive state and parroting what the guy on their screen told them to say and think, a lot of the work will just get done on its own

    We really need to be poisoning the rhetorical space as much as possible. I need something that devalues propaganda the same way capital is trying to use AI to devalue art. I need something that poisons the dataset.

    • I try to go "diagonally." Don't go full on, strike true and at weak points without wasting any additional effort. Analyze each opening. There isn't an easy one-stop formula, sometimes you have to focus on peripheral aspects, as long as you shatter the liberal worldview bit by bit.

    • One of the biggest problems I face when trying to do this same thing is that it’s so easy to go too deep too fast and really turn off somebody’s willingness to listen or start using that frame of reference on their own. You can’t just jump into the conversation, because to them we sound like conspiracy theorists when we do.

      So what do we do? We make them pry. The way I’ve been combatting this is by using familiar sayings or adages to get the ball rolling. When you’re talking in such a way that a liberal or conservative feels like they SHOULD understand what you’re saying, more often than not they will agree and engage rather than risk looking foolish. One of my favorite phrases that I’ve seen work over and over again is to just throw in a casual, almost dismissive “follow the money” to somebody bringing up an applicable current event. It’s too true to even be argued with. It’s too familiar and universally understood to not be a reasonable assessment to anybody. The phrase is too familiar. This person has likely already had to investigate something for the same reason before. You’re priming them to go from talking about an ad during the Super Bowl to talking about access to resources.

    • The problem is that there's no shortcut.

      People have to be motivated to seek the truth, with the discipline to not fall for convenient scapegoats or going off on wild tangents in conspiracy-minded thinking, and that's especially hard if the truth does not align with the material interests of the seeker. You can introduce a frame of thinking that's distrustful of power, but if the person you introduce it to is not armed with the critical thinking necessary they will just fall into their own biases and come to the wrong conclusions.

      You need to give actual material reasons for why a person should think for themselves on issues like "the economy" or "politics" and not just outsource all that to "the experts", be that Jake Tapper or Jordan Peterson, and then after that you might have to do the long hard work of teaching people how to follow the money (as CoolerOpposide put it)- which might require teaching the basics of Marxist theory.

      That's the bad news. The good news is that once you overcome that (admittedly difficult) hurdle, media literacy is a skill that anyone can learn.

  • Ultimately the fault lies in Harris and democratic leadership who were in charge of the campaign. Harris got like 10 million fewer votes than Biden and you can't blame that on any one group. They made the conscious decisions that led them to have only a few million more votes than Hillary got almost a decade ago.

    If someone is hell bent on a certain race/ethnicity let them know it can't purely be black or Latino voters fault if this is a majority white country. Are these people going to vote scold white people for sitting out or voting wrong? Democrats seem to lash out against their supposed allies more than the apathetic whites. They just write off the disengaged and target the apparently 20% of African American men that voted for Trump this time. Most of them still voted for Harris and if they went against voting for a black Democrat then she had to have a terrible campaign since that is one of the most loyal voting blocks in the United States.

    Also, important to remember that Hispanics/Latinos aren't a coherent group within the United States. Some are fifth generation jet ski dealers that don't know Spanish and some are recent citizens who work as day laborers and need their ballot to be in Spanish. There's too much variety to tie them together like can be done with other groups.

    • The Dems do seem to have this view of the white majority as a sort of monolithic rock they can climb over or around but can't shove.

  • Umm, yes. Specifically for Leftists of the non revolutionary sort, or those tempted to hide and wait out the tide of reaction, or those in despair. This is off the cuff and a bit scattered, so any critique is probably justified. I guess Agitprop for communists is still Agitprop. Perhaps Inspirprop (god that's bad, surely I can think of something better)?

    #On maintaining sanity.#

    Mao once said "Everything is chaos under heaven, the situation is excellent." General Foch, while saving the French army from destruction in 1914 said "My centre is giving way, my right is retreating, situation excellent, I am attacking."

    Everything is not, quite, chaos yet. The only centre giving way is the libs and the right is definitely not retreating. What remains of the centre is, to the extent it functions anymore, focused on beating down the Left.

    The situation is not excellent.

    I have lost three comrades to despair since election night and one of them wasn't even in the USA. Three worlds dead. Three revolutions that will never happen. How can I possibly describe the sorrow? I have spent hours with many more leftists and fellow travellers, talking them through this time. I think, I hope, I have had some small effect on their mental state.

    The situation is terrible.

    Nevertheless we must attack. Defense is not enough. Apathy is not enough. Fleeing and hiding is not enough. It is not yet a time of chaos but it is a time of opportunity. There are a million things to do. We must (ha ha) Combat Liberalism, because in a few months we will surely be combating Fascism, or at least reaction.

    For the Libs are bleeding. The reason they are attacking us is because this represents an incredible opportunity to Take Their Stuff. Their funding has collapsed, their "grassroots" institutions lead by lanyards but run by socialists and increasingly panicked progressives. Their policies clearly have no meaning. Union action continues to spike despite constant efforts by union leadership and state labour boards. As leftists, if we are in a liberal organisation now is the time to speak up, become insufferable, and turn it into a seed that the revolutionary orgs can use. If we have liberal friends or family now is the time to show them hope by the eternal light of our saviour, Karl Marx.

    I understand, this is risky, but the Liberals are disheartened, and a voice of hope (with some critique) can be very powerful.

    Every suggestion I have is simply that. Not everything I say is good for every person. I don't have every strategy. Use this as a launch pad. These are off the cuff notes. One thing I will say is don't just dismiss these. Saying "this is too hard" is a form of Liberalism.

    In every revolution, leftists in businesses, bureaucracies and social orgs quickly decapitated the leadership and established socialist councils. Many of these were not members of formal orgs, or even activists. They were simply the people who were right, consistently, and who when things went crappy knew what to do. It is easy to become this person. Just be good at your job, help your fellow employees, especially mentor new workers, and don't hide your socialism as much as you can without getting fired. Don't put up with chud-lite bullshit, but also help them at their job. Often, a quick light hearted jab does wonders without embarrassing them. Show them Socialists are Better. Better Friends, Better Workers, Better Conversationalists, Better Politicians.

    This is a lot of work, and will go against a lot of our anti-work prejudices. anti-work is for workers, not for Cadre. We don't work for the boss we work for our co-workers. And you do want to be Cadre, right? The result is not a Socialist workplace, but a workplace that when reaction comes to town will back you, and not the fascists.

    There is also opportunity with individuals. I think, in the coming days, this is the most important thing. First we must help leftists and the oppressed, but we know how to do this, we are used to failure.

    Next, Adopt a Liberal. Progressive ideally, but a lanyard type is fine too. They're having an even worse time than we are, and they could use the company. Listen, patiently, to their half-baked ideas about how Latinos are all nazis and should be sent over the border. I know, I know. Scratch a Liberal, but really, they are just acting out. Their belief system has collapsed and they haven't forgotten it yet. Talk to them, ask them questions. Give Standard Maoist English and strident analyses about how we are right all the time only as a last resort. Use data as a counter sparingly, use Pathos as much as possible, because Libs are Idealists. wring out catharsis using Socratic dialogue (the non insufferable kind) let them clarify their thoughts, and show them a path forward. This is something that will take days, weeks. And it will only be the beginning. But a Liberal who begins to see the possibility in Socialism is 98% there, they'll get themselves the rest of the way, eventually.

    Finally, yes, join an org. This is much easier than you might think. Do you have rl friends? Are they Socialists or Anarchists of some stripe? Congratulations on your new Vanguard Party, General Secretary! This is how the first orgs started. Friends or co workers, bitching about how work sucks, swapping ideas and stories, reading newspapers. That's all you need to do. Find some friends, then find their friends. Merge if you want to, stay independent if you don't. Engage in praxis if you'd like, or stay theory-focused and just work on agit-prop techniques.

    By now you are full of ideas, either shit I've not thought of or a thousand objections about how none of this will work because you have no friends, are unemployed, cannot speak to people, and live in a town entirely populated by Rhodesian expats who are also AIPAC members. Good, live with those thoughts and objections and think them through. Progress the contradiction in what must be done and what cannot be done. That in itself is a useful act. Do post if you find out the way through.

    I'll stop by saying that phrase that we've all heard so many times it sounds naff. A Better World is Possible. Let's mull over what that means, because I feel it really encapsulates Socialism. All the stuff in Capital or Mutual Aid is simply extrapolation.

    A Better World is Possible.

    A Better World is Possible.

    A Better World Is Possible.

    A Better World Is Possible.

    As communists, it is our job, our sacred duty, to be that possibility.

  • Very important to note that all the motherfuckers playing the identity politics card about Bernie and his campaign in 2020 are the FIRST to throw trans people and latinos under the bus. First in line to blame Kamala's loss on her being a woman.

  • Is there a list somewhere of all the things Democrats have said they're gonna do, possibly with corresponding elements of the actual results of their policy? I know it's really basic stuff but tbh news moves so fast now and actual results (if any) of their policy move so slow or get cancelled at the last minute that I can't even remember a lot of it. I have some but it would be useful to have more to build a broader point that these people aren't helpless against

    The Parliamentarian™️ and
    ®️, they could actually do a lot to help people if that was actually their intention. Getting ready to have this conversation with my mom lol, she's actually been rly receptive lately. I just hate seeing people I know falling over and over for the same shit they say while nothing changes or things get worse either cuz they have no alternative or they adopt the same positions as the far-right

    Ofc

    was peak this type of Democrat, Democratic supermajority in congress and what did we get for "Hope and Change"? The fucking ACA lmao

    We must remind the libs that history exists and that the last 3 (only counting presidential ones) elections have all somehow been "the most important election of our lives"

    Also ofc this is all a lib framing and regardless of what they say, they are committing a genocide and steward a global empire for their class, but its good for meeting people where they're at

  • I have none except that:

    1. This country is going to get worse and worse. Neither party offers any way out (because they are beholden to capital) and the unviability of a third party means people will constantly bounce between the two, blaming the current signs of decline om the incumbent party. Incumbent disadvantage will be a thing. In the end, Harris lost because she was a member of Biden's administration and Biden himself only won because he wasn't a member of Trump's administration or a member of Trump's party.
    2. The majority of people already recognize the sham election for what it is and opt out to not waste their time. Imagine wasting an entire workday standing in line with nothing to show for it in the end. And as the country further declines and third parties continue to be unviable, more people will check out. These people are fertile soil for radicalization. They are disillusioned with the status quo but don't know exactly why and are just begging for somebody to show them the way forward.
    3. The people who still believe in the electoral process will be and ought to be treated like Jehovah's Witnesses: a bunch of evangelizing and obnoxious freaks. Believing in the electoral process should be treated like believing in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy.
  • Copying over a comment I made in another thread:

    I think this article I shared earlier in the week on /c/history is a pretty good piece to send to people, especially those at least sympathetic towards socialism. It outlines how the abolitionists actually managed to achieve lasting change in the United States, despite its 2 party system and powerful slave-owning aristocracy.

    Basically it lays out what was done by the abolitionists to achieve a better world. That could help us start a serious discussion on what is to be done in our time.

    The Abolitionist Dirty Break by Ben Grove

    From the introduction of the piece:

    How can a small movement challenge the Leviathan? How can it find strength in its independence? How can it topple a power that seems omnipotent and achieve a revolution?

    In 2024, these tasks may seem hopelessly difficult to socialists in the United States. But defying the powerful has never been easy, and we will always have lessons to learn from our predecessors. One of the most important, yet also misunderstood, is the American abolitionist movement.

    It’s easy enough to celebrate abolitionists for their righteous principles: activists of every stripe invoke their legacy. Yet abolitionists and their Radical Republican allies were more than just moral idealists. They were also cunning revolutionary strategists. Using principled independent politics, they successfully attacked America’s slaveholding oligarchy and the two-party system that protected it. Their insights and debates have tremendous relevance for modern socialists, because abolitionism helped to ignite the most important revolutionary rupture in U.S. history: the Civil War and the downfall of chattel slavery.

    And these were the conditions that their movement built itself in:

    By the 1820s, a two-party system of Whigs and Democrats was developing, nurtured by the brilliant New York politician Martin Van Buren. Van Buren’s explicit goal was to use the excitement of party politics to distract the masses from more dangerous conflicts over slavery. Whigs and Democrats would have fiery conflict and genuine power struggles—but both sides suppressed opposition to America’s true ruling class: the planters of the South, the Slave Power.

  • I might not be good at agitprop.

    Every time that someone implies that Palestinians should have been sacrificed for the country, I just call them fascist.

    It is after all what they are but I'm not sure if that convinces people to try something different.

    • I understand this urge so deeply, and it really is so much easier sometimes.

      That being said, you have the perfect opportunity to separate online life rhetoric from real life rhetoric and make progress for the Palestinian people here.

      I think it’s safe to say that MOST liberals who were ok doing the whole “vote for the lesser of two evils” thing are actually not thrilled about the ongoing genocide of Palestinians. To them, it was just an unfortunate situation that they couldn’t worry about when they felt they had issues they could do something about. But that is exactly where you take the win as a principled leftist. You get to come to them with an actual analysis and tell them that not only did voting for “the lesser of two evils” damn the Palestinian people, but in the end it didn’t even protect the things they were hoping it would for exactly that reason.

    • my ecstatic gloating over Kamala's failure to normalize genocide shines like a burning sun

  • #The Houdini Line: Our Post-Election Statement and Goals

    My friends, brothers, sisters, comrades, today we face a moment that will test us all. It's the kind of moment that comes once in a generation. As you know, Donald Trump has won the presidency again, and there's no sugarcoating it—things are about to get harder for working people, for women, for our LGBTQ comrades, and for every community that's been pushed to the margins of this country.

    And what have we seen from the so-called opposition? The Democratic Party—the party that was supposed to be for the people—has shifted so far right that they're promising walls and advancing genocide. They've got no vision, no courage, and no heart for the people. They don't want to fight for you; they want to fight over who gets to hold the reins of power. But let me tell you, folks: the people who hold that power don't care about you or me. They don't care about us any more than they care about the grass they step on or the wind that blows.

    Now, I know that many of you—especially those who are young and facing this for the first time—might feel like the ground has been ripped out from under you. You're worried, maybe even scared about what the future holds. Some of you may even be wondering if you'll be safe here, wondering if you need to leave this country just to find security and a fair shot at life. But let me tell you this: you are not alone. You are not alone. There is an entire generation of people who have been where you are, who have felt that same fear, and they're still here. And I'm telling you, the sun will rise tomorrow.

    Let me tell you, my friends, DIY networks exist. Real, true communities exist—communities that don't rely on politicians and their empty promises. You don't have to depend on the person on your TV screen. You can depend on each other. And I'm asking you right now: reach out. Look to your left, look to your right. Connect with your neighbors, your friends, your comrades, because now is the time to build, and build strong.

    In the words of the great revolutionary Thomas Sankara: “There is no true social revolution without the liberation of women. May my eyes never see and my feet never take me to a society where half the people are held in silence. I hear the roar of women's silence. I sense the rumble of their storm and feel the fury of their revolt.”

    And we're going to take that message and put it at the heart of our movement. Because, folks, there is no liberation if women aren't free. There is no justice if women's rights, including the right to choose, aren't protected. This is not a side issue—this is the issue. Women's rights are human rights. And we're going to make that clear in every corner of this nation.

    We're still in the first half of this new American century, and what we build now will set the course. Let's remind ourselves of those words held by Lady Liberty herself:

    "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."

    That's the America we could be. And in that struggle for a better, freer future, women have always been the ones pushing forward. They're not just part of this movement—they've been leading it, keeping it strong, giving it life. Women are the backbone of every fight for real change. And we're here to say that if we want freedom, if we want equality, we have to start with them.

    Because, let's be real: what kind of country are we building if we don't guarantee the basic rights of women? What future are we heading toward if half our population has to fight to be seen, to be heard, to be free? Fighting for women's rights isn't just the right thing to do—it's how we build a country where everyone can live with dignity.

    So let me put it plain: if we're going to face these next two years with courage and strength, we need each other. We need connections that go deeper than the political rallies, that go beyond isolated protests on college campuses. We need a robust national network, built by us, for us. Not from the top down, but from the ground up, with every voice, every hand, every heart pulling together. I'm talking about a coalition that spans this whole country—local organizations, radical youth, labor unions, mutual aid groups—all of us together.

    I believe it's time to think big. It's time to organize at a scale we haven't seen in decades, a century even. So here's what I'm proposing: December 20th, 2025, New Orleans. I want a national convention, a place where every corner of this movement can come together. I want to see communists, anarchists, democratic socialists, labor union leaders, Indigenous leaders, prison abolitionists, climate activists, creators, content makers, and organizers from all walks of life come together to build a plan, a strategy, a path forward.

    This convention isn't just some meeting on a calendar. It's a starting line—a launch toward a future we choose, a future we build together. Because we're already 25 years into this century, and we've seen where the current leadership has taken us. The crises of our time—climate change, economic injustice, systemic racism, the oppression of women, the attack on LGBTQ+ rights—are too critical, too urgent to be left to the whims of the powerful. This convention is where we draw the line and start shaping a new way forward.

    Folks, this convention is where we're getting down to the brass tacks. We're not just looking to fill up seats; we're looking to make real changes, to organize and strategize for a future we actually want to live in. If you want to help make this convention a reality, here's what you can start doing right now:

    1. Join a Group—Just Pick One and Start Showing Up

    Look, it doesn’t matter if it’s Freedom Road Socialist Organization, PSL, the Green Party, the Socialist Alternative, Food Not Bombs, or a mutual aid group in your area. Just pick a group and start showing up. Get into their meetings, meet people, understand their goals, and make connections. Our aim is to have people embedded in all these organizations, and we need them all talking to each other. If there’s a meeting or event coming up, go. Bring up this convention. Even if they aren’t officially involved, open up the conversation. 2. Educate Yourself—and Pass That Knowledge Along

    Not everyone has the time to sit down with a stack of books, and that's fine. But if you do have that privilege, use it. Educate yourself, but don't stop there. Bring that knowledge to others. Be a resource for your friends, family, and neighbors. Don't talk down to them; we're not here to preach from some high horse. We're here to learn and build together. Remember, we are the masses. Share what you know in a way that's practical, that connects with people where they're at. If we want to see change, we have to make education and dialogue something real, something people can understand and see in their own lives. 3. Start the Conversations Where You Are

    This is where it starts—right where you live, work, and spend your time. Talk to your friends and family, your coworkers, the people you already know. Bring up what's happening around us, what we're working toward. If you're a community leader, even if it's not a political setting, make space for these discussions. If we're going to change anything, it has to start by opening up these conversations in our everyday lives. Get people talking, thinking, and, more than anything, ready to take action.

    Now, why New Orleans? Why December 20th, 2025? New Orleans has faced it all—storms, floods, and years of being neglected by those in power. It's a city that embodies resilience. But with climate change pressing down harder every year, there's a real risk that it won't be here in another 100 years. That's why we're gathering there: to make a promise, to take a stand, and to ensure that we don't let this moment slip away.

    I'm not alone in this vision. None of us are. This is something so many of us feel in our gut—that together, we can do something different, something real. And I want to make something clear before we close: the attacks on women's rights in this country are attacks on all of us. We cannot build a free, just future if women are held back, silenced, denied their basic rights. Women hold up half the sky, and we will not stand by while they are pushed down. We need every voice, every hand, every heart in this fight.

    So let's take this energy forward. Let's walk out of here knowing that we're not alone, that this movement is growing every day.

    This is our moment in history. I know we will rise to meet the occasion.

    Thank you.

    -Erik Houdini

  • Anyone have any thoughts or reflections on better messaging towards men from the center and left given the results of the election?

    • You see this guy? This guy is cool as fuck. You're not cool as fuck. Do you know why he's cool as fuck? Because he's fight for COMMUNISM. If you fight for communism you'll be cool as fuck too. Here read this 900 page brick of theory.

    • My only thoughts are:

      In America currently life is bad for most people. The corporations are rat fucking society, poring pollutants into the water supply and laying off staff to save costs. Prices are rising and opportunities are falling. For many men they feel like DEI and wokeness are attacking their prior advantage to get those dwindling opportunities and the bad news is they’re right. Access to opportunity is a zero sum game. Extending opportunity to marginalised groups does indeed reduce your own current unfair access to opportunities. The good news is that opportunity itself is not zero sum. Progressive policy can make new opportunities and expand the pool.

      Your political choices are as follows: Liberalism just wishes to stabilise the current misery. As Joe Biden said nothing will fundamentally change. No new opportunities or prosperity will be made for you under liberalism. Just continued extraction from the capitalist vultures.

      Facism wants you to fight your fellow citizens for the scraps of a burning economy. No new opportunity for you here either, just the chance to tread on the backs of your fellow man to get the scraps from the cooperate table. And the pool of opportunity will continue to shrink as more wealth is extracted. Sure you may get the scraps today, but when those scraps run out? Perhaps it’s your turn to be trod on.

      Only socialism actually wants to make life better for everyone. It wants to give everyone access to a better future. It wants to build and work towards wealth for all people not just the corporate class of vampires. End the capitalist rent seeking that sucks the life out of society. Build things for public good. Bring back jobs even if they’re not as competitive as foreign Labour. Capital cannot do that, that would be sub optimal behaviour for maximum profit. Socialism doesn’t care, it can do that if it benefits the people.

  • I've been saying this for over a year, but: I will not vote for a candidate who would rather threaten me with fascism than say "okay maybe we should tone down the genocide", who is willing to risk open fascism to keep the guns flowing, who gives their finest most bloated cutting edge weapons of murder to the literal Hitler apologist neo Nazi piece of shit actively on trial for genocide he admits to like every five minutes, and old outdated crap we would otherwise be throwing away to Ukraine¹.

    Like, putting aside the fact she's a legendarily transphobic cop, and nothing short of personally going down in culturally aware and exceptionally competent ways on every single trans adult in the country would make me forget that long enough to vote for her, these chucklefucks were never going to be the bulwark of democracy. They did not question the extremely suspicious election results² the open election interference or more than half assedly prosecute the violent coup. The defenders of liberal democracy would have had gallows up on January 7. Elon musk would have been hung drawn and quartered by now, and it would have been shown on cspan, mandatory viewing in every school in the nation. None of this is surprising, for those of us who remember 2000. I've been telling people the libs would roll over for belly rubs at the slightest excuse for years, that they're not worth voting for, because they will not even attempt to hold the line. They have affirmed that this was the right decision.

    Bringing on the Clinton and starmer teams as advisors was just a declaration that they wanted to lose. Actual democracy can involve a vote, but it is at best a small part of it, and I don't believe its valid here. The strict adherence to voting is a failure of imagination, a failure of volition, and an abdication of ones role in society.

    I dont know how many of you have long talks with random strangers outside of lefty spaces, but so many people suffer from this failure of imagination. They have died inside, their imaginations and consciousness, even their sense of themselves and connections to community stifled by lifetimes of obedience and fear, their horizons cut away in bloody strips by the knives of capital, individually packaged in neat little boxes by alienating neoliberal media. Their resurrection, and the murder of the metaphorical cops residing in their heads, is our responsibility. Even if we don't immediately love the person who climbs out of that dirt. Where we as leftists must act is not just in feeding the hungry, in practical needs or armed resistance or whatever the fuck your praxis is³, but in sparking the imagination, expanding horizons past the options explicitly presented by their masters, and connecting those expanded views and ability to act to everyday life. We can and should use this chaos to break out of the ordinary, to make the world more surreal, to blur the edges of what capitalist subjects see as possible. This is the responsibility not only of the mass chef and the soldier, though it does remain a part of theirs, but of the artist, the drug dealer, the thief, the builder, and the engineer-including and especially of software.

    Get out there and do some necromancy, folks. Scream messy poetry in a coffee shop, project a movie on a blank wall, make your error messages surrealist. Intrude on peoples fucking tiny little lives. Make the world a little stranger. Bring back the dead.

    ¹I know, not popular here, but at least in the lib rhetoric they're fighting a defensive war against a genocidal invader. Whatever you believe, it shows what the libs really value. And more importantly, there was a god damn treaty since they gave up their nukes. Nobody's ever fucking doing that again after this example. The failure to defend them ended even the most remote dreams of nuclear disarmament without dismantling the state. There will be fallout from this, and it will be literal. Just when we were back to making fresh modern LBR steel, too. Fuck.

    ²I'd believe trump won the electoral college, but he absolutely did not win the popular vote. Not honestly. They cheated. We knew they were cheating. We caught them cheating. They admitted they were cheating. Nobody cared.

    ³its still that. I don't mean to call what youre doing unimportant. Whatever it is, we probably still need that. I'm saying its not enough. What I was doing wasn't enough either, as demonstrated by a lack of revolution. By lack of mainstream resistance. By the left still being marginal.

    • ²I'd believe trump won the electoral college, but he absolutely did not win the popular vote. Not honestly. They cheated. We knew they were cheating. We caught them cheating. They admitted they were cheating. Nobody cared.

      Nah big doubt, I fully buy the way the vote tally came out, would be wild if I was wrong tho

  • There's some simple agitprop you can do especially on fearful libs, point out how various economic or progressive things didn't improve, for example personal econ situation remaining similar, hate crime going up etc, and point out wistful thinking is just that, action needs to be taken for improvement. Don't go deep into

    just point out some things. This works on chuds if you mention how the supposed progressiveness of Obama wasn't really there and then the supposed econ improvements under Trump weren't of his creation (if spicy and they seem like the sort). Try to meet them with what they're familiar with.

    I did some agripop at work to poor randos that dared bring up politics and coworkers alike since my health beat me so soundly I couldn't even pretend to be 'detached nonpolitical', got no energy for that. I was really amused how a lot of basic econ concepts, the failure of lib progressiveness, some worker rights was alien to people. It was like people had just heard of it 200yrs ago shit. Overton window is so far right any actual left is some non-Euclidean geometry.

251 comments