No? Support for Israel is bipartisan, because both parties depend on imperialism. Of the differences that do exist between the DNC and GOP, support for Israel isn’t one of them.

Again, more strawmen. “Everything they want” is hiding DNC participation in the genocide of Palestine and the continuation of imperialism, which is a hard line for many people, not just MLs.

This is not at all at odds with what I said. You keep framing it as “Marxists cannot spare a few hours to vote,” or “Marxists claim voting is harm.” The Marxist position is that organizing is far more effective at gaining change, such as the civil rights movement, and that elections cannot bring about socialism. I’ve explained repeatedly what the Marxist position is, and you either intentionally or unintentionally continue to misrepresent it. For what reason?

Yep.

No? I have no idea where you got these ideas. Revolutionary organizing doesn’t necessarily mean throwing your life away, it means building an explicitly revolutionary and disciplined organization of cadre. These revolutionary organizations can participate in elections to advertise their platforms and grow the movement, but the understanding is always that you cannot establish socialism through reform. Marx himself was a revolutionary, not a reformist.

Again, I am not some Hasan hater. He’s not an anti-communist, but his positions are those of a social democrat sympathetic to communism and socialism. That’s not “silly,” it’s taking a consistent stance based in Marxist understandings of revolutionary change and the class nature of the state.

Revolution doesn’t just “happen,” you have to organize for it directly. Crisis is not the same as an assured revolution, to actually get revolution you need a revolutionary party leading the charge.

I never said resources cannot be allocated to both elections and organizing. If you do organizing work, you understand that your resources, both monetary and in terms of volunteer labor, are exceptionally limited. The position is that because elections cannot bring about socialism, the bulk of the work should be done on grassroots organizing and struggle.

You keep insinuating a binary that nobody is arguing for, using a strawman you call “.mls.” To begin with, Lemmy.ml is neither an ideology nor a party, it’s a site commonly used by Marxists. Why not just say “Marxists” or “Marxist-Leninists?” Because you’d have to engage with Marxism and Marxism-Leninism directly, not through a strawman.

Isn’t it difficult to push for solidarity while misrepresenting our points at every chance you get, by referring to a vague strawman of “.mls?”

More vague character assassinations against “.ml,” without actually engaging with the point: the Marxist position is that elections cannot bring about socialism, so the primary focus of any organization should be on grassroots struggle and growth, cadre training, and organizing, not on electoral campaigns. That’s the point, that’s the critique of the overwhelmingly electoral DSA. You keep beating this vague and impossible to actually define “.ml” because it’s harder for you to criticize actual political positions and parties, and it’s for those very same reasons that I reserve my critique for positions and parties as they actually exist, not vague “.world types.”

You said Marxists “cannot spare a few hours to vote.” I stated that the actual position is that Marxists emphasize the importance of grassroots organizing over focusing primarily on elections and trying to change the system from within. Marxists do not fight against reforms, we oppose methods that leave reform as the dead-end. The DSA, as a reformist party, cannot achieve socialism. This is why I do not support the DSA in its present iteration. Do I think they are as bad as the DNC or GOP? No. Do I think they are taking an ineffective path? Yes.

You keep referencing a nebulous, vague, “.ml type.” This “type” is a strawman you drag around and beat publicly, not an actual position, ideology, or political party. This is probably convenient for you, but it isn’t particularly compelling of an argument. The Marxists are organizing, to the point that the state is cracking down on all manner of left groups.

Critically, I am not okay if we do not establish socialism within my lifetime. Climate change is an active danger that stands to kill us all if we do not end capitalism’s insatiable lust for profit over people, and imperialism kills millions while the US Empire still exists. We do not have the luxury of ineffective practice and taking it easy while climate change is on the clock and the global south suffers for our inability to do what must be dons.

The US State certainly seems to think communist organizers are dangerous.

Congrats to the DSA for winning the mayoral seat in New York City! The primary advantage of this is that it advertises the DSA as an organization that, at least nominally, supports socialism. Mamdani’s position, however, helps highlight the futility of trying to change capitalism into socialism brick by brick from within, why electoralism is inevitably a dead-end, and the only utility it has with respect to socialism is advertising.

You are correct to say that many places do not have a DSA, or a PSL. This is why the focus should be on grassroots organizing, not electoral campaigns. Imagine if the resources used by the DSA to canvass for elections were employed by disciplined cadre sent out to these areas to start new chapters! The PSL does this, but by nature of being a demcent party is smaller. The strength of the DSA is in numbers, the weakness is in always tailing behind when it comes to strategy and tactics.

To the DSA’s credit, internally there is widespread debate about reform vs revolution. If the DSA successfully converts to a revolutionary organization, then I will re-evaluate them.

I am not “ranting about people wanting the general public to vote as left as possible.” This, again, is a dishonest characterization of myself and the Marxist position on resource allocation in an organizational capacity. I am vocally opposing making elections the primary capacity by which an organization uses its resources and efforts, and instead advocating for making grassroots organizing the primary effort. This is the Marxist position, not what you have been presenting in memes and comments.

Why funnel people into an imperialist party? When you tell people their primary means of opposition is at the ballot box, they don’t organize. How do you grow a party in opposition to both the DNC and GOP while propping up the DNC? This isn’t even extending to what you personally choose to do, in secret, if genocide and imperialism aren’t hard red lines for you and voting for the DNC sits with you morally. I am talking about the practical process of growing an org.

Do you organize? I don’t mean this in a “I do more than you” kind of way, I mean it in the sense that it seems like you are using voting as an outlet to not organize, because others haven’t built an org big enough for you already yet.

So, to retread that comment, I said 2 important things:

1. Organizing is the method by which to grow working class power and gain change

2. Marxists do not emphasize voting because capitalism cannot be reformed into socialism from within

I fail to see how identifying a working strategy and arguing against a failed strategy is “demoralizing.” If anything, knowing for a fact that organizational practice is key, effective, and practical is extremely uplifting. I am also explicitly in this comment against focusing on elections, not against voting in any and all capacities.

Perhaps you should stop spreading disinformation and sowing division by misrepresenting the views of Marxists? Then you likely wouldn’t see such strong pushback from people correcting the record. It’s the same tired strawman as those that say socialists support Trump because we also oppose the DNC.

Your framing was that Marxists oppose “sparing a few hours to vote.” This is incorrect, and now that I drew attention to this mischaracterization you’re pivoting hard from this. Many Marxist orgs do run candidates, such as PSL, but this is never the focus, as resources can always be better spent. You used my comment as an example, so it’s important that I set the record straight.

Tons! Any specific area? How familiar are you with Marxism?

Sorry, I’m a certified grass-toucher.

None of us want Trump in charge. Accusing communists of being fascists or not supporting Palestinians simply because we emphasize the importance of grassroots organizing over trying to change the system from within is dishonest.

Since you’re using me as an example, my point is about the enormous efforts and resources some organizations pour into increasing voter turnout and electoral strategies over the time-tested and far more effective strategies of actually struggling and organizing. No, an individual taking a couple hours to vote isn’t a problem. It’s a problem when an organization makes preparing for, canvassing for, advertising for, and organizing for elections their primary focus. That takes far more effort than even week-long strikes, yet it’s a common strategy.

The point isn’t that individuals shouldn’t spend a couple hours to vote. The point is that voting cannot establish socialism, so organizations that pour a ton of resources into electoral campaigns are wasting valuable resources that could be poured into unionizing, organizing tenants, educating cadre, and growing the organization through on-the-ground struggle.

It’s intensely dishonest to frame it as opposition to spending a couple hours voting on election day. The entire political theatrics that surround elections is a months-years long process that takes up mountains of resources better spent on growing and organizing than pinning all hopes on candidates being able to change the system from within.

Again, you are advocating for increasing state repression against anti-war activists and socialists. The groups I gave are not “actively or passively supporting the Russian war effort,” you are confusing advocacy for peace and a cessation of the far-right slide into increased repression and militarization with supporting Russia. You maintain this doublespeak because you need to. This is 100% McCarthyism, calling anti-war activists and socialists “foreign agents.”

My issues with Hasan are that he pushes a reformist line, and focuses primarily on electoralism. I’m not some hater of Hasan, but those two positions put him squarely into social democratic territory. It’s not about some arbitrary level of “leftness,” it’s two strategic positions he has that puts him at odds with communist struggle. And no, it isn’t a silly issue at all, the concept of reformism vs revolution is an active struggle among the left in the imperial core, and the communist line historically is 100% in favor of revolution since Marx.