/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Proletariat without Borders

catalog
Mode: Reply
Name
E-mail
Subject
Message

Max message length: 8192

Files

Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3

Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

Remember to follow the rules


/leftypol/ is a non-sectarian board for leftist discussion.

IRC: Rizon.net #bunkerchan
https://qchat.rizon.net/?channels=bunkerchan

(545.32 KB 600x300 Sanders_2020.png)
If Sanders Wins The Presidency Anonymous 02/14/2020 (Fri) 06:43:31 No. 277053
What do you think the neoliberal, rightoid meltdown will be like? Better yet, complete control of Congress. I want to watch r/Neoliberal commit suicide, along with all the MAGAtards. Blue Checkmarks will have another meltdown.
(1.94 MB 400x280 giphy (1).gif)
It will be the day when we can finally close our eyes and relax, knowing... finally... that we've done it. We have successfully triggered the libs.
That old spurdo comic where Obama turns on Islamic Communism, except for real this time, and we can finally execute all non vegans. Libtards btfo eternally and capitalism never recovers. Congress and the Senate do everything they can to stop Sanders from accomplishing minimal tasks and nothing happens for 8 years. Like always because this is America.
They're gonna try to coup, I hope Bernie bros are ready to defend
>>277088 What are the immediate steps of coup-proofing him?
>>277088 I hope they do after he wins, and Sanders goes full tankie
>>277107 >What are the immediate steps of coup-proofing him? how about have a VP that wants to make drastic cuts for Military spending
>>277053 it will be crazy but the real fireworks will not begin until we execute chris matthews
>>277064 /pol/ done triggered the libs. Now is our turn.
>>277088 This is seriously my biggest worry >>277107 Have a heavily armed militia to defend the president, but we don't have that unfortunately. Or, hope the rank and file of the military like him enough to disobey orders
>>277275 Isn't the military filled with retard who love have a boot shoved down their throats?
>>277053 Who cares? Bernie is a capitalist. Plenty of blue checkmarks support him as well by the way.
>>277351 Truly a revolution in political theory. Thank you anon.
>>277088 if this happens (as a covert coup, don't believe they'd do it out in the open), what are the chances the bernie movement will see and accept the need for violent action toward dethroning capitalist oligarchy across the west? I'm a bernie bro and I'm hoping for peace, but I wonder if push came to shove we would be able to do what's necessary to stop porky and whether or not it would even be a bad thing if we were unable (you dont need to reply to last musing, im aware you're all tankies)
>>277351 ok, explain to me the tanky outlook that leads you guys to call bernie a capitalist
Make your bets now, will it be: >how can bernie be a capitalist if he doesn't own the means of production? or >bernie is a capitalist because he will not abolish the commodity form
>>277356 He's just a reformer, he will not and not make any lasting change, because he will not attack the power dynamics that make capitalism what it is. He is not opposed to private property, he is not opposed to copyright, his "workplace democracy" shit is absolutely fucking pitiful. Any change he manages to push through, if anything, will be dismantled by the capitalists he left with all the power. You can't leave the capitalists as the owners of the means of production and expect them to not roll back any and all reform you make.
>>277351 >what we want and what blue checkmark wants happens to collide, therefore we must support someone else It's exactly this retarded tankie logic that makes you justify voting Trump.
>>277370 Voting Trump is based and FASTpilled
If Sanders wins hopefully all the red painted liberals stfu and move the fuck on or become actual communists
>>277356 The one that starts with knowing what capitalism is and reading his proposals
I know I will be spamming 4chode with tons of OHNONONONO tier posts until they ban me from every board
>>277375 If you even gave an inkling of a shit about the beliefs you claim to espouse and the political project you supposedly promote you'd be more helpful to people asking honest goodwill questions about your worldview and ideology. As it is you are nothing more then a strange kind of tankie that's angry and completely unproductive towards any improvement of the material conditions of the proletariat. You care more about presenting an edgy posting style in which asserting your delusional sense of self-superiority is the goal above all else. You're an actually unironically bigger cancer to the leftist movement then the most cucked succdem. Enjoy your meaningless existence :)
>>277072 So should we form militias? I will say this Secret Service has really stepped up their game since Reagan. Guys (and gals) are positively superhuman, always watching. Loved going around DC when ((Trump)) was around because you could see the secret service with binoculars on a distant rooftop. Theyre damn good at keeping folks protected. Theres a reason bourgeoisie fuckers in America buy 'em out as body guards post deployment.
Sanders isn't winning so it's a moot point, but this whole thing reeked of putting up a strawman so the left can be crushed and humiliated. In any event, it's over for America and shit is about to get really really bad. You aren't going to get healthcare or anything good out of this government.
(3.43 KB 114x136 download-1.png)
>>277385 >HOW DARE YOU CALL BERNIE MY BERNIE A CAPITALIST, RED FASCIST TANKIE SCUM, THE ONLY REASON YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT THE DNC PRIMARY IS BECAUSE YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT WORKERS, VOTING IS REVOLUTIONARY!!!!!!!! <It's your fault people aren't communists!!! Lmao When tf did the board become infested with chapos?
>>277363 True, but wouldn't you agree if I said that even just moving the discourse and political thinking of the USA much further left (assuming that could or will happen) is in itself a worthwhile cause? Surely we can adjust praxis at a later more opportune time, for the moment attempting to construct socialism/communism in the models you favour would require nothing less then all-out civil war (in which the left would be greatly outnumbered and most likely lose), wouldn't you say? Don't get me wrong if you tankies sucessfully started an armed revolutionary movement with some hope of suceeding or even surviving the inevitable reactionary counter-insurgency I'd be right behind you, right now it very much just looks like grandstanding (althought very possibly I'm being unfair on that last point)
>>277385 >if you don’t think Bernie is the second coming of Marx, Rosa, Lenin and Che then you’re the cancer killing the left Bruh I really wish Bernie wins, I really do. But face the faxx, he has low chances and even if he wins, he will be a reformist at best.
>>277392 I don't think it's at all your fault people aren't communist, at all. I'm also not opposed to describing bernie as a capitalist, I'm just worried you're doing i for edge and "da epic lulz" moreso then because it accomplishes anything irl. I also don't think voting is at all revolutionary or that the need for more truly revolutionary action can't be very convincingly argued for. I also don't think you're a fascist at all. I'll be honest, I find your uncontrolled propensity towards antogonising and insulting anyone who disagrees with you even slightly to be kinda repulsive, only because it shows how emotionally invested you are in this relatively meaningless conversation we're having and how much it blocks your ability to be rational. But even on that point I'm partial to the outlook that I'm just too fond of debate team nerd bullshit and maybe I too perhaps should be more emotional and less rational. I'd also like to add that I see you tankies as genuine allies (comrades would be the more schmaltzy term) in the fight to overthrow capitalism, even though i know full well the feeling isn't mutual for the most part
>>277405 not tankanon but dang I'd like to be able to have your eloquence someday. You got a good way of holding your tongue while saying what needs to be said. The future is far better with people like you
>>277416 In my country we call that “cantinflear” which means talking a lot but saying little or anything at all
>>277421 While I disagree with your charges against anon405, that word does give me far more reason to learn spanish. Imma do that shit
(24.65 KB 768x312 293497.jpg)
>>277356 It's not even a "tankie" outlook, it's the standard far left outlook. He is a social democrat and social democrats are in favor of capitalism with welfare programs.
Sanders will make you miss Trump
>>277457 Pretty sure I'm going to miss Trump no matter what happens.
>>277457 I’m going to miss seeing him get in retarded antics every day, yes
(1.90 MB 300x309 sb.gif)
>>277053 The day Bernie Sanders takes office he will be greeted on the steps of the White House by representatives of big business and the military-industrial-surveillance state, who will dictate to him in no uncertain terms what will be off limits in terms of reforms and foreign policy choices. Sanders will inevitably comply, because he is politically isolated on Capitol Hill, and the electoral movement behind him is not the same as an organized working class that could threaten capital with strikes/insurrection to back up his political demands. Outside of the Executive Sanders will face a hostile Congress, with only a handful of Democrats supporting him, and courts packed with right-wingers eager to challenge his legislation. Bernie will have to rule through executive orders and other Bonapartist measures to bypass legislative gridlock, which will prompt hysterical acrimony from the news media and hordes of lawyers/"constitutional scholars" even though these measures were created years ago by Bush and Obama. At best Sanders could pass his healthcare bill and some new labor legislation, but they will either get tied up in the courts or sufficiently watered down in Congress to not pose a serious threat to established capitalist industries. Foreign policy will probably be flat, the USA might not engage in any more imperial wars but there's no way in hell global US military deployments or CIA skullduggery could be scaled back. A recession will inevitably hit during his term (because the current economy is quite fragile and basically waiting for something to trigger a correction), which will inevitably be blamed on Bernie's policies. Sanders will be a one-term president, and will be defeated in 2024 by a 'moderate' Republican that will receive tacit support from both political parties. The best part is that all during Bernie's presidency, all the left-liberal Jacobin/DSA types will vehemently denounce "radical, sectarian, unpopular" actual socialists/communists, insisting that Bernie's embattered social-democratic policies are "realistic" and the "only real option." The idea of independently organizing the working class or building a revolutionary socialist movement will be abandoned in favor of helping big, conservative establishment labor unions. DSA will gradually dissolve as members either grow disillusioned and leave or get absorbed into the Democratic party, and WSWS will yet again be proven correct, which is unfortunate because they're still shitty Trots.
>>277351 at the moment he is the best we got
>>277513 Then as always, there is no hope in bourgeois democracy
>>277470 Freezing the US for 4 years however is a good thing. Like, if there is a revolution somewhere across the globe, Sanders will not send in the troops to crush it.
>>277053 He won't
>>277541 >so you would think
>>277421 Is it possible you're confusing being conciliatory with being anodyne? In other words, is there any way in which someone could speak in a tone that tries to find a common ground of some sort that wouldn't sound meaningless to you?
>>277416 Thank you anon, truly the best compliment I've gotten in years. I think it's just a combination of autism with really liking words
(422.07 KB 600x648 cia heart attack gun.png)
He'll have an unfortunate heart attack.
>>277453 Yeah, I'm aware. I was just curious and wanted a more in-depth articulation of the thinking behind that view
>>277088 This is already happening. See: every newsworthy Democratic Party moment of the past month. >>277107 Campaigning for him. Phonebanking, textbanking (it's easy as shit and NEET-friendly), canvassing (more fun than you would think, if you have a good team), and challenging constantly and forcefully all the misinformation you see being spread. Worry about the gun later—we're still at the stage of electoralism and as such, need to make sure he gets elected.
>>277332 >implying the only people who have acess to guns in the USA is the military
>>277355 I'd say 02% chance for mass organized directx in his favor; don't shoot anyone in his name unless SHTF because it'll just make him look horrible to have a "crazed gunman" as a supporter
>>277332 >Isn't the military filled with retards Unfortunately no. Compared to American civilians, they have higher IQ and more education on average.
(238.23 KB 1080x674 2020-02-14 09.55.02.jpg)
>>277583 Bernie has already proven to be immune.
>>277470 Thinking that support of congress is a Catch-22 type thing. Sanders winning the general is predicated on a surge of non-voters/voters critical of traditional dems and the establishment, which would mean that they'll probably also vote for Our Revolution (etc.) affiliated insurgent lefty candidates and/or flip red districts, meaning the blues would take over both the House and Senate, meaning that Sanders gets to pass his agenda. Don't expect that old-school dems wouldn't vote in favor; it's Never Trump all over again. Is Sanders loses the general or the nomination, it's because those same people that would take over congress failed in their aims. Can't have one without the other.
A vote for Bernie Sanders right now can achieve real results. 1. If Bernie gets screwed out of the nomination (again) it will only further radicalize young working people. 2. If Bernie wins the nomination, it will energize the left for future struggles and break the Democratic party establishment. ("Nothing succeeds like success.") 2. If Bernie wins the election against Trump it will establish a new space for socialists and the left in American politics. 3. If Bernie is elected but can only enact 10% of his program, we're still objectively better off than we were under Trump. The Democratic Party is attempting to sabotage the Sanders campaign. Former President Obama has made jabs at him. Warren cooked up a bogus smear against him. Hillary Clinton is engaged in nonstop gossip about him. It should be pretty clear that Sanders is tolerated by the status quo but he is not one of them and they do not want him becoming the face of the Democratic Party.
The political system creates the laws and the laws can either help or harm things like labor organizing, renter / tenant protection, and access to public services. If you tell working people to abandon electoralism (which in the US means abandoning politics period) then you're surrendering the political and legal system to the ruling class without a fight. The US is terrible for working people because the legal and judicial system has been so completely rigged against them. Why? Because there is no organized labor movement and no labor party that can engage in real political struggle. This was the PRIMARY concern for Marx - to win political power for the working class. In countries with democracies this meant taking advantage of electoralism. In countries under the control of kings and dictators it meant democratic revolution. If you think that electoralism was, is, and always will be a waste of time then you're wrong. It's a rigged system, sure, but the ruling class is extremely aware that political outcomes are not air-tight. That's why they constantly attempt (in the US, at least) to disenfranchise specific groups of voters - normally the poorest - and engage in gerrymandering to favor certain groups over others. The ruling class spends uncountable sums of money simply trying to maintain control of an electoral system that they know could turn against them. Did you know that in New Hampshire there was a new law passed which may have reduced voter turnout for younger people? It was young people who overwhelmingly voted for Bernie in 2016. The share of primary voters aged 18-29 dropped from 19% (2016) to 11% (2020). That's a pretty huge drop for a demographic that overwhelmingly favors Bernie and something that makes a real difference. In terms of overall numbers, in 2016 there was a turnout of ~250k but in 2020 it rose to ~300k. Bernie won 150k votes in 2016 but only 76k in 2020. In spite of people cheering that Bernie won New Hampshire, he actually suffered a real collapse in his voter base compared with four years ago.
In the United States it's not a question of mobilizing the labor movement behind a social revolution: the labor movement must first be created almost from scratch, winning whatever gains it can via the means available. The issues facing Americans are: -Almost unmanageably low & stagnant wages -Complete corporate control of the American political system -Large numbers of people going bankrupt due to healthcare costs -An extremely overpriced education system which doesn't even deliver results -In some areas, skyrocketing housing costs. Americans want what many of their parents/grandparents used to have - a decent standard of living, the ability to form families, and upward mobility. Those sound like very mild demands but in fact young Americans have been facing a crisis for the past twenty years. According to a recent study, household income for ages 22-37 actually declined after the year 2000, only recovering to pre-2000 levels in 2017. Union membership, however, hasn't recovered since WW2. The Sanders campaign is an effect, not a cause. Bernie Sanders has gained popularity at a national level in the past 4-5 years because he has always fought for exactly what a majority of working people are now once again demanding. Even if Sanders fails, future candidates will need to copy his message if they hope to win over voters. (Sadly, Sanders is the only politician at a national level who seems sincere about those issues - the rest are like Warren, they copy his rhetoric but will never follow up with action.)
>absolute state of this board
Sanders is no gommie, but he's far to the left of the burger establishment. He's already done a shitload by pushing young people to get into politics from a relatively left wing perspective. The rest of the job is up to us, whether he wins the presidency or not. These people are not going to swing to the neoliberal right because it doesn't work for them, and that's why it took Sanders to get them moving. Our job is to show them the real left wing - its theory, its praxis, and its historical accomplishments. Sanders has tapped into the vein of class-based disconent, and we need to mine that shit, smelt it, and forge it into weapons of class war whether he can continue fighting or not. Hopefully he does because unlike Hillary v Trump or any of the current dems v Trump, Sanders would actually be a marked improvement on the shitty situation we're in. More labor protections would make it much easier for the proles to organize for socialism and anti-imperialism. Politics isn't a game of who is the most pure or who can find the best personality to endorse. It's a strategic power game played with people's real lives. Understanding the strategic value of someone like Sanders doesn't make you a reformist. It just means you're aware that as far as communism-as-a-movement goes, bourgeois electoralism is in play. It's a factor we should consider and an arena where we can have some effect. It's also very useful for propaganda purposes because when for instance Bernie Sanders gets cheated via election fraud we can point to that to illustrate how the system exists to dick over the proles on behalf of the bourgeoisie. We lose nothing and gain a lot by engaging strategically in bourgeois electoralism. Honestly, it's like 90% of people who are "politically engaged" only understand politics as online political debates and figuring out who is "right." Being right doesn't win you any material battles. You have to fight those materially, and it's fucking stupid to throw away a useful tool like participating in or seriously considering elections. Fuck's sake I fall within the leftcom umbrella, but class struggle is an ongoing process not something that happens organically and spontaneously one day when the most pure and dialectical great leader comes along. Don't make excuses for abandoning battles and giving up ground to the enemy class.
>>277470 >The idea of independently organizing the working class or building a revolutionary socialist movement will be abandoned in favor of helping big, conservative establishment labor unions. The viability of a revolutionary working class movement does not depend on whether or not people want to get on board with a bunch of tankie LARPers. It depends on the objective presence of revolutionary conditions, which is to say protracted economic crisis which eats away at the integrity of bourgeois cultural hegemony. Sanders failure (which I could easily see playing out like you described) will not change this. It will not avert the next recession, it will not avert the continued fall in standards of living, it will not avert the shrinking of the middle class. The arrival of a protracted crisis of capitalism is now a reality, and revolutionary conditions are objectively on the rise. Class consciousness is a process, not a moment, and as the crisis drags on the working class will be forced by necessity to engage in struggle, and thereby it will begin to increase its class consciousness. However this class consciousness will necessarily begin as crude and unformed, as a general lashing out at the misery of working class existence. As Lenin wrote: <Their spread over the whole of Russia clearly showed the depth of the newly awakening popular movement, and if we are to speak of the “spontaneous element” then, of course, it is this strike movement which, first and foremost, must be regarded as spontaneous. But there is spontaneity and spontaneity. Strikes occurred in Russia in the seventies and sixties (and even in the first half of the nineteenth century), and they were accompanied by the “spontaneous” destruction of machinery, etc. Compared with these “revolts”, the strikes of the nineties might even be described as “conscious”, to such an extent do they mark the progress which the working-class movement made in that period. This shows that the “spontaneous element”, in essence, represents nothing more nor less than. consciousness in an embryonic form. Even the primitive revolts expressed the awakening of consciousness to a certain extent. The workers were losing their age-long faith in the permanence of the system which oppressed them and began... I shall not say to understand, but to sense the necessity for collective resistance, definitely abandoning their slavish submission to the authorities. But this was, nevertheless, more in the nature of outbursts of desperation and vengeance than of struggle. The strikes of the nineties revealed far greater flashes of consciousness; definite demands were advanced, the strike was carefully timed, known cases and instances in other places were discussed, etc. The revolts were simply the resistance of the oppressed, whereas the systematic strikes represented the class struggle in embryo, but only in embryo. Taken by themselves, these strikes were simply trade union struggles, not yet Social Democratic struggles. In other words, the class consciousness of American workers is simply in an embryonic form, and the movement behind Sanders is the political manifestation of this. As such, the objective conditions do not exist for the successful independent and radical organization of the working class. Purely vanguardist and syndicalist strategies are not currently viable, simply because the worker's lack the consciousness to join them. As such we need to adopt a strategy that is tailored not just to the current consciousness and militancy of the workers, but to the site of their most advanced and active political mobilization. Right now that is unquestionably the Sanders campaign. It has to be the focus of our work at the moment, simply because it is the central focus of worker mobilization for the vast majority of politically active proles. So we have two options: participate in this movement and have a hand in shaping it, or remain outside of it and be isolated. Either way, the conditions that created it will continue to worsen, increasing the potential for working class militancy. Our job is to nurture that radicalism, and help it grow to the point where independent radical organizing becomes a viable strategy.
Anyone who's talking about consciousness-building and the workers not being aware of how much they're shafted is totally missing the point. People know they're getting fucked, it couldn't be more obvious and it is thrown in our faces. It just turns out that the middle class is fundamentally hostile to the lower class, and so long as the disposal of the lower class is not too sudden, we will see what we've seen for the past 40 years. The Sanders campaign's own middle class biases are sinking its popular appeal, because it will only be able to really appeal to a minority of people and its promises are not realistic. This is most keenly seen in Sanders' education policy which is slanted in favor of the universities keeping their money stream rather than a genuine reform, and really changes to the education system and credentialing have to happen in the primary and secondary stages, and in the employment market. We wouldn't have this student debt crisis to such a degree if a university degree weren't basically mandatory to be a full citizen.
>>277731 Based smart tankanon. I couldn't agree more, and as a berniebro I think it's fair to say that the role that the far left may have in shaping the future increases with every attempt by the establishment to sabotage bernie. That will be a once in a lifetime opportunity to really create a stronger and more rooted socialist movement in the US. I mean I know it's cool to hate on chapo around here, but it's a fact that over this campaign their rhetoric has ramped up to now when they pretty much every episode rant about how important true hatred of porky and the capitalist world order is, if a few more dominos fall the ground will be fertile for radicalization among bernie bros
>>277788 >People know they're getting fucked, it couldn't be more obvious and it is thrown in our faces. Knowing they're getting fucked isn't the issue. The issue is in turning that knowledge into class consciousness and political mobilization. This is a process, which begins as a very vague sense that "rich people" are "screwing you over" and develops from there as class struggle plays out. >The Sanders campaign's own middle class biases are sinking its popular appeal First of, it objectively isn't. He remains the most popular senator in the country, and he's leading numerous national polls both against Trump and other democratic contenders. If anything his campaign only seems to be growing in momentum. Second, I'm not sure what "middle class biases" you're refering to. He has a greater proportion of working class supporters than anybody else. Besides, the issue is not Sanders or his policies. It's his movement, what it represents, and how we should be reacting to it.
>>277788 >It just turns out that the middle class is fundamentally hostile to the lower class t. scared porky >and so long as the disposal of the lower class is not too sudden, we will see what we've seen for the past 40 years. Except that the dominant trend in the US has been the death of the "middle class." You would have to be totally ignorant of the economic trends and/or believe the people posting here are ignorant to think this bullshit would fly.
>>277842 >t. scared porky He's not wrong tho. The middle class is potentially the most dangerous segment of the population. They're effectively the worst of both worlds, since they are "ordinary people" who "made it" under capitalism, and thus they most greedily eat up the ideology of being able to succeed through hard work alone. As such they regard the poorer workers with contempt and easily internalize narratives not only about their laziness, but also their desire to take what the middle class has "earned," thus creating a fear of socialism.
>>277832 Sanders has a ceiling to his popular appeal, largely because a lot of people have every reason to not buy his promises or his thinking on the solution to matters like education. He's harkening back to the old class collaborationist alliance of the New Deal era, where the state needed to raise lots of educated middle class technicians to compete in any way with the USSR. Once that class was raised, there was no further need to provide a genuine education, so long as the educated class was self-perpetuating enough. Far from it, the purpose of the current education apparatus from top to bottom is to make people stupider and afraid, to degrade them through repeated trauma for the sake of maintaining an unequal social order. Most of us who have failed, who have been rejected time and time again, know well that Sanders' free college will only go to worthies. The middle class is fundamentally opposed to the lower class, always has been. We need to deprogram the notion that the middle class is something worth salvaging, or that the majority of Americans were ever "middle class" in any way.
>>277860 I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Aside from totally ignoring my main point about Sanders himself not being important, you keep talking as if Sanders policies and support are drawn from a middle class basis. They aren't, both he hand his proposals are massively popular with working people. Regardless of any of this, the key is to recognize what Sanders movement really is. It is the reawakening of class struggle in America, and his campaign is currently the focus of that struggle. The only question is how we ought to nurture this fledgling class consciousness, and I maintain that the best thing to do so is to engage in class struggle alongside the workers.
>>277879 I said quite clearly - Sanders is trying to reignite the old low-middle alliance of the New Deal era, and the rationale behind that plan is not lost. But that alliance is dead, for a variety of reasons. If the plan was to straight up build an American NHS, it would be more credible, but that is also completely outside the realm of political possibility. The only reason that M4A can even be considered politically is because the "tax" levied on low-class people is utterly outrageous for insurance that doesn't even translate to care, and everyone is obligated to enter this regressive system; but the factors which lead to outrageous prices in the first place also make national health insurance prohibitively expensive. The only way it's possible is with a total economic realignment, something Sanders hints at - but at the end his middle class base will resist such reforms because they have more interest in keeping the low down than lifting the low. You're being completely unaware of the actual class character of Bernie Sanders' campaign. Sanders himself may be more radical than he lets on, but he is at the least beholden to the liberals that were his core base and the only reason Sanders can run with any seriousness. The low class people came on mostly because Sanders was the only one offering anything remotely good for them, because the Democrats went full dictatorship of capital and run candidates that gloat about selling your organs to Chinese and German booj.
>>277898 >You're being completely unaware of the actual class character of Bernie Sanders' campaign. What makes you think that the middle class forms the basis of Sanders' movement?
>>277879 >Regardless of any of this, the key is to recognize what Sanders movement really is. It is the reawakening of class struggle in America, and his campaign is currently the focus of that struggle. The only question is how we ought to nurture this fledgling class consciousness, and I maintain that the best thing to do so is to engage in class struggle alongside the workers. This. >>277898 >but the factors which lead to outrageous prices in the first place also make national health insurance prohibitively expensive. What factors are you talking about? The entire American health system is just a racket for pharmaceutical and insurance companies. The outrageous prices exist due to allowing industry cartels to run everything.
>>277918 Because the middle class is the most politically active class by far. Low class people don't have their own party and are vociferously rejected from the entire political process, with the few who do have a political mind having no choice but to attach to middle class interests and act as collaborators. Sanders in his presidential campaign wasn't rallying the common man first. It was middle class teachers and people within the institutions that were the first to get on board. The working class generally liked Sanders if they had any familiarity with him, but it was quite clear that Sanders was going to prioritize his middle class core when it came to actual policy. The low would just get more scraps than they've received under the Obamacare regime; and again, we wouldn't have the energy behind a Sanders if the Democrats didn't totally shit the bed on healthcare. The old demand for universal healthcare, the one that used to be a part of Democrat platforms in the '60s through '80s, was far more modest and would have wound up more like the German system. (And you gotta break the notion that the Euro states have it really good... if you're of low class, you get the shitty public option the government gives you by default, kind of like American Medicaid if it weren't completely shittified by welfare reform.) At any rate, I don't see the Sanders movement as the reawakening of class struggle, but elements of the middle class trying to gin up an attachment to "socialism" because the "progressive" label wore out and they need something new. It's a curious mutation that adopts the language of class but tries to tell low class workers to subordinate themselves to credentialed professionals. Some are better at selling this than others - really the only politician that is at all effective at this pitch is Sanders - but at the end of the day, Sanders' stated proposals are more about shoring up those elements of the middle class, and also about salvaging something out of the carnage that is the American state. If you are of the low, what you're voting for is just a desperate hope that Sanders will give something good, or at least not get us all killed like Trump or Hillary.
>>277583 This.
>>277961 (cont.) Sanders himself might be a lot more radical than he lets on, and some key people might be more radical, but these constitute a minority within the Sanders camp. The broad base of Sanders is the shattered state of the "left", cloistered academics and DSA types that are removed from class struggle for the most part. That was the core. The lower working class supports Sanders more often than other candidates, but it is by no means universal, and even those low class people recognize their subordinate position (it would be nearly impossible for them to be in the forefront of an American electoral movement for a variety of reasons).
>>277961 >Sanders in his presidential campaign wasn't rallying the common man first. It was middle class teachers and people within the institutions that were the first to get on board. That doesn't mean it isn't also a working class movement, or that it hasn't mobilized working class voters moreso than any other candidate. >The working class generally liked Sanders if they had any familiarity with him, but it was quite clear that Sanders was going to prioritize his middle class core when it came to actual policy. Give specific examples. It seems clear that his policies are all popular with the working class, and that they would greatly benefit them if they were to be implemented. Even if they were inferior to other models, literally anything is a major improvement over the current system, and M4A has proven extremely effective at mobilizing working class votes. Sanders himself constantly talks of the working class and working families in his rhetoric, and his entire strategy is explicitly based around mobilizing non-voters, ie the working class that you say is apathetic. >At any rate, I don't see the Sanders movement as the reawakening of class struggle, but elements of the middle class trying to gin up an attachment to "socialism" because the "progressive" label wore out and they need something new. Do you have any actually evidence for this? There are numerous indicators of strong working class elements within Sanders' base. The extremely low average donations and high proportion of black and latino supporters to name a couple. If what you're saying were really the case then you wouldn't see the frantic pants-shitting coming from bourgeois and upper middle class circles. You wouldn't see the media constantly trying to undermine his campaign, you wouldn't see the nonsensical attacks of sexism or whatever coming from the far more middle-class based campaigns like Biden and Warren. You wouldn't see every major democratic donor avoid him like the plague, or the democratic establishment openly rig elections to keep him out. Furthermore even if what you are saying about the middle class character of Sanders' movement were true (it's not) it still wouldn't negate the fact that his campaign represents the most active and advanced focus of working class mobilization today. You yourself acknowledged the greater presence of the workers within his movement relative to other candidates, and that they majority of other workers remain inactive. Therefore my point regarding the need to engage with Sanders' movement due to it being the most advanced manifestation of class consciousness in America still stands.
Bernie isn't there to do reforms, hes there as damage control against something worse (right wing) Move the overton window Organize the working class
>>277984 The middle class is not immune to internal warfare, in fact under neoliberalism it is omnipresent as competition within the middle class is kicked up to 11. At best the lower class should be taking advantage of those middle class elements for their own gain, and refuse to subordinate themselves too much by agreeing with the Sanders' campaign plainly middle/upper class talking points (for example, basically say "fuck this" to the Green / climate change malarkey, only holding our tongues because it is politically convenient in the short term).
>>277529 sad but true
>>277997 >The middle class is not immune to internal warfare, in fact under neoliberalism it is omnipresent as competition within the middle class is kicked up to 11. That still doesn't explain what we're seeing. We're seeing a massive and possibly coordinated response from all the institutions of bourgeois control, particularly the media and the democratic party apparatus. If all Sanders represented was a faction of the middle class desiring minor changes without any real challenge to the status quo, then this wouldn't be the case. >and refuse to subordinate themselves too much by agreeing with the Sanders' campaign plainly middle/upper class talking points You still haven't made any real arguments in favour of your belief that Sanders' movement is primarily middle class.
>>278022 If Bernie had literally no institutional support, he wouldn't even be allowed to run, nor would he be able to find staff for his campaign outside of a few old-time loyalists. It's the upper crust of the bourgeois media that colludes, and because control of media is concentrated in like 5 corporations and they exert incredible power, they can pull off the sort of full-spectrum dominance that you're seeing on CNN/etc. Not far beneath the big establishment media, the coverage is far more favorable to Sanders, whether they agree or disagree; they have at least some interest in appearing fair, some may be willing to say that Bernie is actually kind of good for the country. It's the echo chamber at the tippy top that has gone into a fit of frothing insanity and is dragging the rest of the country along for the ride. I told you guys that if Bernie was going to run, you're going to see what it's really like for the establishment media to be against a candidate - still, they could go far harder against Sanders if they truly believed he was a mortal threat or a potential cause for lower class riots. The whole point of Sanders is to offer the lower classes a sop, knowing that Sanders was unlikely to win an outright majority for a variety of reasons. They do have to keep the propaganda at this pitch for consistency and to drive the country towards war, but it's better for them to offer a conciliatory Sanders than to leave the lower classes to their own devices and potentially rally behind a non-systemic candidate.
>>278022 You're talking about a country where arbitrary arrests of political dissidents is now the norm, where your supposed constitutional rights are abrogated far more often than they have been historically. If TPTB really wanted to shut down Sanders, you'd see stuff like Sanders' lead campaign staff being arbitrarily arrested for imagined crimes, or the Democrats and Republicans rebooting the HUAC and purging suspected socialists. Probably you'd see members of the Squad outright impeached for imagined crimes.
>>277416 I was thinking the exact opposite. I wish he'd be more concise.
>>278050 >If Bernie had literally no institutional support, he wouldn't even be allowed to run, nor would he be able to find staff for his campaign outside of a few old-time loyalists. That's not true at all. Even Gene Debbs was allowed to run several times before he wound up in jail. Keep in mind that the democratic party has to maintain a facade of democracy and fairness in order to retain legitimacy. If they could simply ban him without any political fallout they would. Right now they are doing everything they can to keep him from succeeding. We know from the wikileaks documents in regards to his 2016 run that the DNC is actively trying to sabotage him, and they've only grown more blatant with this Iowa debacle. >I told you guys that if Bernie was going to run, you're going to see what it's really like for the establishment media to be against a candidate - still, they could go far harder against Sanders if they truly believed he was a mortal threat or a potential cause for lower class riots. They're going harder against him than against any other candidate. Still, even if they could go harder, and even if Bernie doesn't represent a mortal threat to bourgeois rule (which he doesn't) that still doesn't disprove my point about his movement being a working class one. >The whole point of Sanders is to offer the lower classes a sop Make up your mind. You acknowledge that the DNC and MSM are actively trying to destroy him in one breath and then say he's controlled opposition in the next. The two are mutually exclusive. If the bourgeoisie didn't fear him then they wouldn't spend so much time trying to undermine him, and they would treat him the same way they treat Warren. In fact Warren far more closely resembles your description here, and the massive disparity in the way each candidate is treated only serves to illustrate my point. >>278053 >You're talking about a country where arbitrary arrests of political dissidents is now the norm Not really. Most political dissidents are allowed to operate without that kind of repression. The ones that do face it are typically literally who's anyway, the workers by and large neither know or care about them. Sanders and those close to him are different. They are massively popular and hold their own power as politicians. >If TPTB really wanted to shut down Sanders, you'd see stuff like Sanders' lead campaign staff being arbitrarily arrested for imagined crimes, or the Democrats and Republicans rebooting the HUAC and purging suspected socialists. Probably you'd see members of the Squad outright impeached for imagined crimes. You're hugely exaggerating what the political establishment in America is currently able to get away with. Bernie isn't the black panthers, he can't be safely targeted by by the surgical application of repression COINTELPRO style. He's a senator with a massive following. Such blatant repression would cost the American establishment far too much legitimacy. Thanks to the struggles of the working classes over the past century, there still exist legitimate institutional barriers to outright bourgeois dictatorship in America. It remains a bourgeois democracy and thus a bourgeois hegemony, considerably more limited in the viable use of repression than an openly fascist state. You're basically trying to argue that because the American ruling class has yet to resort to outright fascism, this is somehow proof that Bernie is controlled opposition, or that his movement is a middle class one. Keep in mind that militant workers movements existed for nearly a century before the emergence of fascism.
>>278239 It's not that Bernie is controlled opposition, only that you are a fool if you think it's about the rabble rising up to claim power or some silly narrative. You think Bernie could possibly be a thing without the (Porky) Sunrise Movement? Without lots of university types knowing that Bernie is definitely their guy for getting enrollment and the money train back? It's not so much that they'd bar him from running, but that he would be ignored because the core of his support would not have coalesced. He'd have maybe 10% of the vote plus whatever he could get from anyone-but-Clinton voters, then he would have been quickly forgotten as a presidential candidate. He had to get a core of middle class interested people to boost his campaign, and importantly get the funds to actually run a campaign. Debs came at a time where a mass party of working people was possible through sheer numbers and the party system being fairly weak, plus he was running entirely against the whole American system as it stood. He also only managed 6% of the vote, and Debs was skeptical about electoralism even while he was making his case to the public.
>>278263 > You think Bernie could possibly be a thing without the (Porky) Sunrise Movement? Without lots of university types knowing that Bernie is definitely their guy for getting enrollment and the money train back? What makes the sunrise movement a porky one? What makes you say that people who attend uni are not working class? You realize that anybody who sells their labour for a wage is a worker correct, and that a college education is by no means a free ticket to being petty booj or a PMC? The simple fact of Bernie's support among university educated people does not contradict my argument. >He had to get a core of middle class interested people to boost his campaign, and importantly get the funds to actually run a campaign. Most middle class people are working class Anon. Not only this, but even if Bernie's strongest support came from PMCs (which it doesn't, and you have yet to demonstrate that it does) then that doesn't preclude it from also being a genuine expression of working class anger at neoliberalism, and thus a resurgence of class struggle.
>>278281 Saying "Bernie is an expression of working class anger" is narrative. Within the working class, even members of the middle class and PMCs, there has been outrage against the neoliberal order since it began, people who believed rightly that it was a barbaric act pulled off through a policy coup, because democratic accountability has been slowly chipped away by the money and influence of oligarchs. There have been people angry at this. The only difference is that the material conditions of the lower working class have deteriorated so visibly that it is impossible to gloss over what is happening any more, but at this point it is already too late. The moment Obama turned viciously against the lower classes and found middle class collaborators in the top 10%, America was pretty much done. This is the long decline, and it's only going to get worse.
The important thing is that Sanders breaks and destroys the democratic party, which has been the graveyard of popular and progressive movements since the civil war ended.
>>278474 Hello Libertarian Party vs Republican Party for the next 50 years.
>>277262 >"mom said it was my turn to trigger the Libs"
(21.50 KB 1555x664 PartyVotes.png)
(142.19 KB 678x414 voting methods comparison.png)
>>278474 >which has been the graveyard of popular and progressive movements since the civil war ended. Truth. >The important thing is that Sanders breaks and destroys the democratic party, Not gonna happen, wake the fuck up already. If you wanna displace one of the dominant parties in a Duverger's Law country you need a secessionist crisis. If you really care about ending the duopoly you better become a proportional representation/better voting method activist.
Teddy Roosevelt couldn't do it, Robert la Follette couldn't do it, Henry Wallace couldn't do it. Bernie Sanders is a party stooge compared to any of those. He'll never even have the balls to run third party.
(324.35 KB 1080x1086 1507091489577.jpg)
>>277072 lmao I was wondering for a sec if I wrote this But yea, Obama barely got anything passed from his Affordable Care Act plan, and only then the lamest parts like mandating insurance. Sanders will get nothing done and it will be a glorious opportunity for Americans to become even more disillusioned.
>>277088 Why coup when you can just shoot him and end up with some Elizabeth Warren character barnstorming the next election off the back of his death. Or make it look like he had a heart attack or something. Not hard. First order of business is hiring lifelong communist guerrillas as his security detail
>>278579 Obama was a full lib though, he didn't really want these things
>>277529 >>278008 I don’t understand how there is hope in a bourgeoisie approximation of socialism. Because if you let the people be free therein they work out Darwinism and bam it’s capitalism/fuckass birdcage economic theory.
>>278053 what state are you talking about? (as in location, just curious so I can read more on legislature)
>>278305 What do you plan on doing? I may apply for asylum in Canada if it goes all captain America v. Iron man (marvel fuckin blows I’m just trying not to say the c word)
>>277332 The military has over half a million active duty soldiers. I think you can find twenty or so leftists in such an organization to serve as bodyguards.
>>278646 What good are BGs when he's just going to get sniper'd anyways?
>>278558 >in a Duverger's Law country you need a secessionist crisis. I'm betting there will be during the next recession, there's no more palatable options since both social democracy and quantitative easing have both been exhausted. People join militias when there's no other economic options and they can't leave.
>>278670 >I'm betting there will be during the next recession why
>>278595 Not that guy, I live in Hawaii. Good news is there wouldn't be much fighting here. Bad news is that's because the entire state would likely go under martial law as soon as shit starts to hit the fan.
>long contested primary >all along the way, bernie gets screwed by the DNC and media >no one gets a majority of the delegates, so there is a contested convention >Bernie has the plurality of primary votes but super-delegates vote to hand the nomination to some corporate hack >bernie cucks, endorses the candidate and tells his supporters to stop rioting screenshot this
>>278683 This is most likely what's going to happen. Buttchug is going to be the nominee.
>>278672 For the same reasons anyone becomes a terrorist or a militia member, there's no options left and the government, by not being able to deal with the situation, loses whatever legitimacy it may have had
>>277053 >>277064 sanders has no political clout, he will be continually undermined and railroaded by successful politicians who understand it's about trading votes, and the only thing he will do is form a coalition of idpol wingnuts in the democratic party and deliver center left feel good lipservice and no financial policies because if you thought he cucked to BLM he will cuck harder to the banks.
>>278685 >Buttchug is going to be the nominee. no bloomberg
(233.84 KB 512x268 unnamed.png)
A Sander administration isn't the beginnings of revolution, it's the prerequisite for revolution. Go look up his career. Look up what he's actually done as mayor. Look at what he's saying during this campaign. Bernie's only goal in life seems to be to facilitate class consciousness and an ethic of solidarity. He won't be able to enact any big material changes even if president. But he might possible lay the groundwork for an actual socialist mass movement.
(78.74 KB 800x606 c6c.jpg)
>>278798 no Jeb!
>>279335 Yeah, unless those workers are palestinians who lost their land Bernie "Strongly" supports Israel, so good luck getting your land back, prole Bernie's cousins need it more than you do He has talked against Russia, muh Russian hacking, denounced venezuela, and said Assad must be removed from power As Unruhe-chan says, you don't change the system, the system changes you. I doubt you have ever actually talked to a Sanders supporter People like you are holding back the revolution and will be satisfied with a Sanders presidency, even if there is a recession or depression because you perceive progress without actually putting in any effort yourself.
>>279894 >People like you are holding back the revolution Wrong, the goal of socialism is to elect leaders that will temporarily improve our conditions so as to merely delay the end of capitalism. Haven't you ever read Marx?
>>277593 this is liberalbrain. whether or not he wins doesn't matter if you organize a big enough movement in the process, and even if he wins the election they're not going to let him get shit done. something's gonna give.
>>279918 Okay so when succ dems use fascists to kill you it is okay because it was better than electing the liberals Got it Get off your ass and do something, rather than satiate yourself with the hopes that bernie will do something in your place Complacency is reactionary
>>277107 The evidence.
>>278736 The memes though
Honestly the best thing this year would be for Sanders to narrowly lose the primary, or win it and narrowly lose the general, amidst widespread and blatant attempts by the DNC and various bourgeois figures to run spoiler candidates, tamper with electors, and outright support Trump. It would completely sabotage the post-2016 narrative for supporters of both parties. If at that moment Bernie could break out of his nice-guy compromise schtick for one moment and openly, passionately denounce the DNC and media/capitalist establishment, then call for an independent party of the working class, it would be perfect, or at least a step in the right direction.
>>278305 Every day things get worse for the working class is a day when their anger and militancy rises. This is dialectics 101. You seem to be intent on absolutely refusing to see whats right in front of you, which is that workers are finally rallying behind a credible threat to neoliberalism. It may fail, in fact it almost certainly will, but that will simply be the first chapter in a renewed period of class struggle which will produce an increasingly conscious and capable working class movement.
>>280137 that's the only way he could genuinely win
>>279335 >literally the idpol quote
(149.80 KB 1080x1080 adf.jpeg)
>>280290 It's not even burnie's worst.
>>280137 Bernie is kinda shitty in a certain sense because besides making socialism be a good word some of his programs are just retarded like on marijuana, immigration, abortion and guns. I disagree on all of those. Also he is a pussy and if he didn't have the balls to say why he was screwed last time in 2016 he won't now.
(242.31 KB 1200x884 img.png)
>Bernie when he faces off Trump
>>280429 >some of his programs are just retarded like on marijuana, immigration, abortion Away with you vile /pol/nigger.
>>278595 >I’m just trying not to say the c word America isn't ready for the Cunt Wars.
>>280290 afaik remember, next part of the quote is along the lines of "when we all stand together as working people, there is nothing that can stop us."
>>280290 That's the opposite of idpol actually.
>>278683 the hope by that time is that his supporters won't fucking listen to him. but then again americans are the most cucked people in the history of the world, probably.
>>280451 >listing off 100 identities and just screaming at them to work together but still be divided at the same time
>>277513 it's almost as if electing a politician without doing anything else isn't how socialism works
(56.08 KB 600x600 CoTMwvoWcAARA-K.jpg)
>>280484 >the oligarchs divide us by sexuality, race etc. >we should not be divided by sexuality, race etc. <wtf he said race and sexuality, that's idpol
>>280493 Everything I don’t like is idpol
(61.86 KB 596x693 hmmm.jpg)
(12.08 KB 477x144 1572836370823.jpg)
I expect Obama 2.0
>>280505 >first pic Some anon on /usapol/ pointed out that those spending bills had other important unrelated shit attached to them.(I haven’t looked it up as of now though) Anyways, don’t take any infographs at its face value.
>>280509 Anyways I just looked up HR 1585 mentioned in that pic It also has >EPA funding >salary increases for government employees >Chemical weapons demilitarization And I’m only half way through.
>>280224 i'm not that Anon, and i don't fully agree with them, but you seem to be ignoring every structural/economic argument they try to make. "free college; we'll pay the university with government money" is the middle-class version of "you shouldn't have to go to college to get a decent job". "increase taxes to fund a universal insurance program" is a more middle-class version of "completely change the regressive tax system". and so on. Anon's argument seems to be that these policies help poor people but only in that they also help people richer than them, so fucked by a broken neoliberalism that they all end up nominally on the same side. but even though you acknowledge (correctly) that this is not a true class consciousness, you won't acknowledge that this non-consciousness also means a lack of solidarity. you can analyze a white suburbanite as being just as proletarian as any hispanic walmart worker, and marx would agree with you. but the suburbanite wouldn't. your appeals to small donations and latino voters as signals of working class support, combined with your apparent unawareness of the willingness, historically, for the "middle class" to turn *against* poorer workers, are what put you out of touch with what Anon is trying to get at. (incidentally, bernie's statistic about his top donors being amazon, walmart, and starbucks employees is a better, perhaps more compelling refutation. the genuine extent of bernie's working-class support is something i couldn't say for sure.) the proletariat will not be mobilized by sanders's campaign alone, and left to its own devices his movement would only lift up the middle class until they could comfortably shit on the poors again. i say this as someone who canvasses for him on the weekends. >>277851 are you the exact same catposter? this post says the shit that i just explained. this better be someone else.
>>279894 >People like you are holding back the revolution wew lad, are you trolling or just pretending? You honestly don't think we should support Bernie? What do you think America will wake up one day and overthrow their fascist government just like that? Or is this a demoralization tactic?
>>277363 This attitude is counter-revolutionary. Look Bernie threatens the establishment enough that they are willing to rig elections in plain sight against him. They run narratives against him in the media. You think that's just a coincidence? Take a look at all the people supporting Bernie. Do you think they are not more redpilled because of him? Bernie is the closest thing to a leftist movement in the US right now, it's not like you guys have a real communist movement on the way. There isn't even a strong union presence, there is literally NOTHING ELSE. He's going to do way more for socialism in America than you and your 5 other tankie online friends can.
>>280559 >Do you think they are not more redpilled because of him? no
>>280521 Good post. Bernie's base seems to be workers, I think, and here in Texas it seems disproportionately Latino workers -- but also "downwardly mobile" petit-bourg types from middle-class backgrounds who were trained up to work in the PMC field, but because of the economic recession they were deemed redundant and dumped into the working class. The term I heard once to describe this class (of which I include myself as a member) is the "dumpies." This hasn't really been popularized as a term yet but it almost took off in one thread we had about the PMC. So the contradiction within Bernie's coalition, I guess, is between proletarianized workers and between the dumpies who are seeking to restore their class position. Student-loan forgiveness, federal stimulus programs, etc. is appealing for these folks because they there are job opportunities and the financial burden off their shoulders which has been exerting downward pressure on their class position. AOC was also a dumpie in a way. She was headed straight for the PMC (economist, interned for Ted Kennedy) and then her dad died and the recession hit. Her family was going to lose their house. So she ended up working as a bartender in Manhattan to pay the bills while getting her ass squeezed and being called a cutie by yuppie Wall Street pricks. That would radicalize anyone. I think we're also in an interesting moment because of other structural / economic reasons. We're long into a cycle of expansion, and most people are employed, but they're employed in shitty, part-time jobs. A lot of the economic "recovery" has materialized in an asset bubble, so inequality has soared and the inflation in assets is putting strain on workers. That's why there's this discordant narrative in the press about the economy "doing great!" while people are sharpening pitchforks (metaphorically).
>>277386 The state spends a lot on security, but when talking about the SS I think their usefullness is based on quantity.
>>277399 Focusing on the Overton Window is wrong, think about the dissatisfaction and lack of faith in the government and electoralism when Bernie loses
>>277541 He called Maduro a dictator. That made it pretty clear where he stands on the issue for me
>>280648 My guess it that the dissatisfaction and lack of faith in the government and electorialism will lead to apathy and inertia rather than radicalization.
>>280650 He is still better on foreign policy than the rest of the ghouls. I want an American president who does the least damage possible. Sanders seems to be the best choice there.
(126.80 KB 601x508 1499605610957.png)
>>280554 >wE'rE LivINg UnDeR fASchiSM
>>277731 You've expertly dodged my main point in this and other threads, which is that what the socialist movement needs is independent mass-organization of the working class, not into a bourgeois political party or a Leninist sect but into a broad organization of some type capable of winning concessions for workers while remaining independent of the state. Every successful socialist movement, from European social democracy to the Russian revolution, was preceeded by decades of patient organization of workers into some kind of structure like this. Historical examples would be the SPD, the Socialist Party of America, and I suppose the most recent incarnation was the attempt to build a US labor party in the 90s that died out because of 9/11. This kind of organization is desparately needed, because we have a surfeit of examples of what "spontaneous proletarian movements" look like. Occupy, the Arab Spring, Ukraine, Hong Kong, the Yellow Vests, all had genuine grievances and proletarian participation, but fizzled out or were coopted by the establishment-right becase they had no organizational backbone to keep them alive and channel that sentiment into real change. It's not enough to handwave calls for organization away, even in times of "low class consciousness." > the objective conditions do not exist for the successful independent and radical organization of the working class. Again, I'm not talking about a revolutionary cadre organization. If you're saying we're decades away from even a mild independent labor party capable of fighting for better benefits, shorter working hours, etc. then I'd have to disagree, plenty of people would happily jump ship from the Democrats and the AFL-CIO if a credible alternative existed. If there are legal/structural barriers to this organization taking shape, then we need to change them; if there are divides between "PMC"/middle classes and rank-and-file workers, then we need to bridge them. These tactical issues need to be overcome eventually, and are not a reason to give up and merely accomodate ourselves to the existing political order. IMO almost anything, including voting for Sanders, can be justified tactically if it is connected to this goal of building an independent organization of the working class. It would be great if Sanders and his inner circle believed this and stated it explicitly. But I seriously doubt this is the case, I assume the staffers at Our Revolution are quietly polishing their resumes and eyeing job boards for the DNC/various NGOs once the election is over, and very few would commit to anything outside of pure electoralism.
>>280554 You obviously didn't read the post. Sanders is not a "prerequisite" for revolution - revolutionary potential is, and succdems often kill it or suppress it. And if he loses, it will just be demoralization. If he wins, it will maybe be marginally better for imperialism in the 3rd world, but in reality will just take a more soft-power approach that saves face abroad, won't really do anything for domestic revolution and he is a pro-Israel anti-Assad candidate who isn't a war hawk but has voted to fund the Iraq war, f-35 program, and passes US massive military budgets no problem. When Obama relieved sanctions and revived diplomatic relations with Cuba, leaked cables show that the US wanted to strengthen the private sector in Cuba against the Socialist government, and many hawks are against Trump's sanctions because it causes solidarity amongst Cubans with their government. Wow Obama so based. Build socialism, improve yourself, help others, don't just "vote" and say no revolution is possible without sanders and do essentially nothing. >Inb4 read X canned response
(169.35 KB 960x693 v1jhzf1x8b331.jpg)
>>281428 This is why we need to vore for Bernie Sanders
>>277053 I actually want Bloomberg to win... go full Accel
>>281658 If anything Trump would be the accel candidate while Bloomberg and Biden would be the worst. Trump is a lot more volatile and will help bring about the end of the empire and the economy sooner, while also cutting ties with America's allies.
hmmm >>280650 >'Illegal and Unconstitutional': Sanders Rips Trump Plan to Use US Troops to Exploit Syria's Oil Fields https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/10/23/illegal-and-unconstitutional-sanders-rips-trump-plan-use-us-troops-exploit-syrias >Florida Democrats are denouncing Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders for refusing to call Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro a dictator https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/21/bernie-sanders-venezuela-maduro-1179636 >Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) has doubled down this week on calling the recent ouster of Bolivia’s now-former President Evo Morales a “coup,” but few other U.S. lawmakers or candidates followed suit. https://thehill.com/policy/international/americas/471180-sanders-doubles-down-on-bolivia-coup-few-follow-suit >Flashback: Rep. Bernie Sanders Opposes Iraq War https://www.sanders.senate.gov/video/flashback-rep-bernie-sanders-opposes-iraq-war
>>281677 >Anti-imperialist in the streets, imperialist in the sheets He's just saying whatever he needs to gain support among people and politicians.
>>281732 >He's just saying whatever he needs to gain support even when he says the opposite of the popular opinion...?
>>281859 It's not that unpopular. How unpopular can it be if he's the #1 democratic candidate right now? This is like when Trump fans were going on about Trump being the underdog or whatever.
>>282676 So basically no matter what Sanders does he'll always be an imperialist lapdog according to you, great.
>>281677 >Flashback: Rep. Bernie Sanders Opposes Iraq War And then he voted to fund the occupation multiple times. >refusing to call Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro a dictator Funny how he has no problem calling Chavez a "dead communist dictator".
>>277470 >DSA will gradually dissolve as members either grow disillusioned and leave or get absorbed into the Democratic party >DSA will gradually dissolve as members either grow disillusioned and leave or get absorbed into the Democratic party, and WSWS will yet again be proven correct WSWS aren't the only ones who read history: https://popularresistance.org/from-the-bottom-up-the-case-for-an-independent-left-party/
>>278053 >or the Democrats and Republicans rebooting the HUAC and purging suspected socialists That's already being rebuilt, and guess who help rebuild it?
(38.13 KB 500x375 51fPJ8ShCRL._AC_.jpg)
>>277470 This, Thanks time travel anon for the accurate explanation. I wish he dosen't win.
>>277541 Not direct but the CIA shall opperate in latin america and other regions. Same as we have with Trump.
>>282933 >And then he voted to fund the occupation multiple times. Those funding bills are probably attached to other bills, and it wouldn't matter how Sanders voted anyway since the occupation had already been decided upon. >Funny how he has no problem calling Chavez a "dead communist dictator". I've heard this shit repeated by pseudo-left publications like "The Grayzone" but I've never seen anyone provide the original statements or context. In short, fuck off with your bad faith arguments. I disproved that Sanders called Maduro a dictator by showing that, in fact, he REFUSED to call Maduro a dictator and this was the basis of criticism against him made by other politicians.
>>282982 But he called him an authoritarian regime... Hahahaha he's a burguer rat like the rest of USA fellows imperialist, USA has to be nuked by CHina, is the only movement serious to stop them a real international proletariant movement conducted by comrade Xi jing Ping and Kim Jong un.
>>282730 If he wholly opposes imperialism he will not, it's that simple. Juuuust as soon as he starts to oppose bills sanctioning wars in foreign countries and funding the military.
>I've never seen anyone provide the original statements or context <Search "dead communist dictator" https://www.globalresearch.ca/u-s-senator-bernie-sanders-hugo-chavez-is-just-a-dead-communist-dictator/5512498 >Sanders accused Hillary Clinton supporters of attempting to smear him by linking him with the divisive figure. Clinton is Sanders’s biggest rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, and the comments were allegedly made by pro-Hillary Clinton Super PAC Correct the Record. But in trying to distance himself from Chávez, Sander is making many Venezuelans angry. >“Yesterday, one of Hillary Clinton’s most prominent Super PACs attacked our campaign pretty viciously…They suggested I’d be friendly with Middle East terrorist organizations, and even tried to link me to a dead communist dictator,” Sanders wrote in a fundraising email. Yikes…
>>280521 >Anon's argument seems to be that these policies help poor people but only in that they also help people richer than them, so fucked by a broken neoliberalism that they all end up nominally on the same side. but even though you acknowledge (correctly) that this is not a true class consciousness, you won't acknowledge that this non-consciousness also means a lack of solidarity. I haven't really responded to this because it's irrelevant to the point I'm trying to make. All I'm saying is that at the current juncture, social democratic organizing in alliance with the middle working class is the height of worker consciousness and activity. Therefore it's where we have to engage with the workers. The stability of the alliance between the lower and middle strata of the workers is irrelevant to the question of how communists ought to interact with the working class on the basis of their current consciousness. If that alliance collapses then it will simply be a new chapter in the struggle, which will produce new consciousness and thus a new basis for our engagement with the proletariat. My point is simply that it is absolutely crucial that communists embed themselves in class struggle at every step, through every victory and defeat. That includes the failure of a lower-middle alliance, the failure of a social democratic candidate, etc. We should be engaged with it in order to push the workers towards greater consciousness and militancy. I fail to see why a strong middle class presence (and resulting instability of the coalition) in Bernie's movement would be cause to abandon this strategy. >are you the exact same catposter? this post says the shit that i just explained. It is the same person. I'm perfectly capable of understanding the reactionary tendencies among the middle class. My position is simply that these tendencies have no bearing on the strategy of engaging with workers according to their current levels of consciousness and mobilization. I'm also of the belief that due to the size of the middle class, socialism in America is a non-starter without their support. The middle class in periods of crisis naturally skews towards reaction, however as neoliberalism squeezes more and more people into the lower ranks of the proletariat, and as even more are threatened with this fate, the likeliness of them turning to the left increases. Think of it this way, when left to their own devices, they will turn to the right. And so in attempting to earn their support, we have everything to gain and nothing to lose. If our efforts are even partially successful, we will have strengthened our movement and weakened reaction. If our efforts are entirely unsuccessful, then we will have not lost anything. Focusing entirely on the lower working class is a poor use of resources, since they naturally gravitate to our cause, and they lack the numbers and strength to seriously threaten capitalism on their own.
>>280842 There are independent leftist organizations in the US. DSA, the Green Party, etc. The fact that they haven't been able to grow into truly influential mass organizations yet is proof that such an organization is not viable. You're making it sound like there is no viable independent working class organizations simply because nobody is trying to build them. That isn't the case. The problem is that nobody wants to join them, because their consciousness is so undeveloped that they still think almost entirely within electoralism and worse, within the two party system. Only struggle can shake them out of this stupor.
>>283055 Again, where are the ORIGINAL STATEMENTS? Where are the emails being referred to? >I've heard this shit repeated by pseudo-left publications like "The Grayzone" but I've never seen anyone provide the original statements or context.
>>277624 You've forgotten the absolute worst scenario: Bernie gets the nomination, but looses to Trump. This would set back the left for two decades, you'll hear 24/7 how this was just like Corbyn and how "a far-left candidate" won't win elections, etc. Remember that Trump might appear a weak target but I don't think he is. His base is still there. Looking at the GOP primary results showcases that Trump has the most people coming out for him compared to all other sitting presidents before him in primaries during their re-run. And most importantly, don't forget that the retard Dems have, as foreseen by everybody who doesn't suffer from Trump derangement syndrome, have boosted Trump and have given him gifts after gifts - Russiagate and the impeachment circus first and foremost. I'm wary of people saying that Bernie will 100% win against Trump, he might score better than the other candidates but a win against Trump is far from secure with Bernie being the nominee.
>>283714 I fully agree. Bernie is by far the best candidate to go up against Trump but there is no guarantee that he wins.
>>277053 Neoliberals and conservatives will both have an initial sperg out, but eventually I think they will calm down when they realize they can overpower him in congress. Sure he can get some things through with his power as president, but not everything and they will be vicious about it. Who knows, it might get them to work together more. I'm more concerned about what the reaction will be at that point from radlibs? Will they quiet down or will they push for more victories towards actual socialism? I'm kinda concerned they will just sit on their asses once he's in tbh.
>>280653 >president sanders agrees that X is an evil dictator >president sanders condemns X's frequent human rights abuses >president sanders speaks out against the images of poor children starving in the streets >president sanders calls on the international community to do something about X >after all of this, president sanders refuses to help the poor children or send any (US)aid <president neocon 2024
>>283730 >I'm more concerned about what the reaction will be at that point from radlibs? Will they quiet down or will they push for more victories towards actual socialism? I'm kinda concerned they will just sit on their asses once he's in tbh. If MAGA hats are any indication for this, they've turned into a personality cult around Trump and have settled with him "triggering the libs" but not with any substance. Trump promised healthcare, draining the swamp and ending the endless wars - nothing of that came to pass, in fact, Trump has actually gone into the opposite direction. Yet only a marginal portion of his base actually broke away (the actual fascistic faction around people like Richard Spencer), the rest is just happy with Trump sitting in the Oval Office, tweeting out funny stuff that triggers everybody. Some have even become Neocons and are celebrated his assassination of Souleimani. Could this happen to the Bernie people too, of Bernie becomes a lame duck? Possibly, but not necessarily. The Bernie campaign is much more driven by substance, but in any case, we really ought to go into the Bernie grassroot organisations and radicalise people so they don't ever become complacent. At this point there isn't really another plan for them other than bringing Bernie into the White House, but I believe there is the vague expectation that they have to take it to the streets even if Sanders gets elected considering the gridlock of the American system. I hope this energy will be guided into something useful.
>>283737 He can call people dictators all day, I don't care, as long as he leaves other countries the fuck alone and lifts the sanctions.
>>283742 I agree. We need to keep reminding people if he does get elected. Even before the election we need to try to bring more radicalization. Unlike the fascists attempts at doing it with the right, a lot of radlibs aren't completely married to things like American ideals and there isn't as much of a background (to these people) on what can be considered American "socialism."
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/02/14/sand-f14.html >Question: Would you consider military force to pre-empt an Iranian or North Korean nuclear or missile test? >Answer: Yes. >Question: Would you consider military force for a humanitarian intervention? >Answer: Yes. what did he mean by this
I wonder if the Alt-right will have the balls to riot like their promise if Trump loses.
>>284250 His foreign policy advisor is a literal kulak.
(481.85 KB 1000x709 image-asset.jpeg)
>>283742 >>283756 >>284297 I think Bernie will probably win the primary because the person with the most energized voters usually does. Shitloads of ad buys from Bloomberg get you name recognition, but it doesn't buy enthusiasm. What Bernie will need to overcome will be the full-court press of negative campaign ads from billionaires who want to keep their wealth after he wins the nomination. And if he becomes president, possibly another business plot where these idiots try to recruit some general to launch a fascist military coup like what was tried during FDR's early reign. And before you say that's crazy, we're talking hundreds of billions of dollars per year out of their pockets and this has been attempted before. One thing that's giving me some optimism is that the mainstream media has spent years and years programming basically everyone who doesn't approve of Trump into hating his fucking guts. They were expecting the Democrats to run on beating Trump and give absolutely nothing else, but that narrative is backfiring and less than a year might not be enough time to pivot to "well, maybe Trump is okay" after three fucking years of nonstop outrage at what he's done. They've talked themselves into a narrative corner. I think the alt-right had a different relationship with Trump... I think they were riding parasitic on his movement, probably also being used by it behind the scenes by operators like Steve Bannon. But the moment Trump got in, they tried to advance but misjudged the situation they were in and it backfired. Another possibility though is a "strategy of tension" maneuver from the Trump administration which sought to use the Turd Reich guys to provoke the left into overreacting. Once that happened, the left could be marginalized from the mainstream, allowing for a stable consolidation of center-right political control (the alt-right would also be dispensed with in kind). And before you say THAT'S crazy, that has also been attempted before. As far as what the neo-Nutzis do if Bernie gets elected, I'm guessing the answer will, once again, be "whatever porky wants them to do." If the Trump years have been anything to go by, it's attempting to bait the left into taking actions that would be counter-productive. Otherwise, I dunno. The Republican Party has been hollowed out of anything other than tax cuts and white supremacy, both of which are not liked by the majority of Americans. So if I'm providing advice to the left, it's: (1) sign new voters the fuck up, (2) meet their material needs, (3) give them a voice ... and you have a new base. Once that base is large enough you jettison the libs, and they can go water down the Republicans while also civilizing their worst impulses with constant tut-tutting. And the Republicans will tone it down because they're not getting voters from elsewhere as they spiral towards death from lack of voters. Their base right now will hate this, because their frothing white supremacy will drive off former Democratic voters, but that's not my fucking problem. Let the right wingers try to drag that dead weight and see how they like it. Because when people actually get a taste of socialism, they tend to like it. In fact, they tend to like it a lot and will furiously defend their new rights against people who would water them down.
>>284318 Good take from this anon. Worth noting one thing, should Bernie win the nom I highly expect Bloomberg to make an independent run. That should shake things up to a big degree.
>>283737 Based. The two major empires need to wear each other down to ensure a power vacuum for socialism.
>>277457 Not at this range in Minecraft
>>283266 The problem with DSA and the Greens is a lack of resources (money) and organization more than anything. Both are very decentralized and their connections to unions or workplace struggles are tenuous at best. Neither org really fits the bill for what I'm talking about though, which is why I brought up the 1990s attempt at a US Labor Party as a better example. It took over 10 years for the United Hebrew Trades to organize Jewish immigrants in NYC at the turn of the 20th century. Even in the face of extreme poverty and exploitation, workers would only unionize for immediate goals, then disband once their demands were met. It took a decade of patient organizing to keep their unions going and stitch them together into a permanent labor movement. Activists seem very reluctant to do the same these days; we need a strategy of patience, with people willing to play the long game building up organization and popular support over many years, not chasing quick fixes through top-down electoralism or fantasies of cataclysmic collapse. And if you truly believe that such a strategy couldn't work, that the only thing to do right now is to chase whatever captures the momentary imagination of American workers, then you should be hoping against hope that Trump gains a majority and a second term. Because we've seen what happens when even radical reformists get elected, and are forced to capitulate to the capitalist order. Did Greek workers become more militant and radical when SYRIZA was forced to accept austerity against a popular referendum? Did French workers radicalize when Mitterrand had to roll back social spending and reforms to preserve the economy? No, in these and every other case, workers grow disillusioned and reject the left, leading to a rise in the far-right: Golden Dawn, the Front National, etc. There's value to remaining in opposition, using electoral campaigns for propaganda purposes, but actually taking power without a critical mass of independent worker support has proven disastrous for socialists. The American left has been vacillating between electoral opportunism/entryism and pseudo-leftcom "there's nothing we can do" positions since at least the 1980s. It's time to try something new.
>>284483 >The problem with DSA and the Greens is a lack of resources (money) and organization more than anything. Possibly, but those were just examples. There are literally dozens of socialist organizations in the US. The PSL, IWW, SAlt, CPUSA, SEP, IMT, ISO, etc. Pretty much every conceivable strategy is currently being tried all with equally dismal results. When this happens, it seems to me that the problem isn't incorrect strategy, but a lack of objective conditions necessary for such organizations to succeed. However what we can say for sure is that the conditions are currently ripe for the rebirth of America's social democratic movement, and thus the potential for a real socialist movement. Currently all this energy and potential is focused around Bernie's campaign. What we need to do is ensure that this energy survives his campaign (regardless of the result of the election) and continues to grow in an increasingly radical direction. >Activists seem very reluctant to do the same these days; we need a strategy of patience, with people willing to play the long game building up organization and popular support over many years But that's exactly what I'm advocating for. I'm not saying that we should all canvass for Bernie and leave it at that. I'm saying that the movement which has formed around Bernie is the nucleus of a future worker's movement in the US. The organizational links being formed between those who are volunteering for his campaign can form the basis of exactly the type of organization that you are calling for. It seems nonsensical to me to think that a couple of literally who's can go and start some obscure org and expect to have any success, instead of going where the energy and enthusiasm is, embedding ourselves within it, and going from there. At the very least involvement with Bernie's campaign would allow us to make inroads to the many organizations that are already involved with it, gain organizational experience, and establish a reputation as fighters for the working class. If we do this then we will find ourselves in a far better position, both in terms of our credibility among the workers and our capacity to organize. From there we can assess the potential for forming new organizations, funneling members to already existing ones, or at least creating radical beachheads within other groups. >And if you truly believe that such a strategy couldn't work, that the only thing to do right now is to chase whatever captures the momentary imagination of American workers It's not about momentary imagination, its about going where the workers are, both in terms of their consciousness and their tactics. If the working class possesses a particular level of consciousness, and is organized around a certain set of issues using a certain set of tactics, then it makes no sense to try to engage with them on a totally different level of consciousness, around different issues, using different strategies. Our task is to raise the consciousness and militancy of the workers, but we have to begin where they are, and carry out our work according to conditions. It's not simply a "build it (ie the "right" kind of org with the "correct" line) and they will come" scenario. It's a question of building and consolidating a foundation for further action, by involving ourselves in the current fronts of struggle. Now I will concede that this can and probably should be done with an independent organization already in place. For example if PSL or IWW members started canvassing for Bernie this would probably be a smart move. My point is simply that no group can expect to abstain from this election and also capitalize on the working class energy that it has mobilized. >No, in these and every other case, workers grow disillusioned and reject the left, leading to a rise in the far-right: Golden Dawn, the Front National, etc. The failures of the center left parties did not erase the underlying contradictions of capitalism, which only continue to grow. The utter cowardice and ineptitude of the PS or even the PCF for example has not stemmed the spike in worker militancy in France. It has only continued to grow because the material forces that drive it have only continue to grow. The only thing we can do is the following: >assess the current material conditions >assess the corresponding conditions of class struggle (the level of consciousness/militancy of the workers as well as what demands they are making, and what strategies they using) >engage with that struggle as directly as possible >once embedded work to raise consciousness (ie contextualize the current struggle in the broader issue of capitalism) as well as develop the organizational foundation for further action Now this will obviously vary depending on the conditions in the country. Just to show that I'm not a timid socdem, I'll point out posts I made regarding France and the Yellow Vests. I think given the conditions in that country communists can begin talking about things like building dual power, building a vanguard party, forming militant organizations, general strikes, siezing factories, etc. However the US is simply nowhere near France's level, and so our short term aims must necessarily be more limited.
>>284542 >>284483 Tbh that post went on longer than it needed to. The TLDR is just that if we want to capitalize on the energy that has been kicked up by Bernie's camapaign, we have to be involved with it. Sitting it out and scoffing at the whole thing is squandering a massive opportunity to lay the foundations for exactly the type of independent organizing you're talking about.
>>284553 Involvement is good, but I don't think it's a good idea to go completely within the party line either. We need to be willing to point out the contradictions and where socdem policies eventually fail and encouraging more militant and radical goals, while still providing cautious support for the Bernie campaign. Be willing to provide aid so we can improve peoples lives here, but also point out things like how there is a good opportunity the US capitalist political establishment will do everything in its power to resist Bernie if he gets in office, to even the point where historically they have not been afraid of killing people.
>>284777 I agree with all that. Like I said, I'm not saying lets all just support Bernie and leave it at that. It's a question of embedding ourselves in whatever is currently the most active front of class struggle, and working to not only win victory on that front, but to expand the struggle and nurture class consciousness.
Lmao your guy just conceded Florida by praising Castro No way this clown wins the presidency. You'd have to be delusional to think it's possible.
>>277088 He needs a pretorin guard
>>297268 pretorian*
>>297265 what do you get out of trolling this board? do you have nothing better to do with your life?
>>297265 Castro did nothing wrong Gusano.
>>284414 Considering how Bloomberg has imploded I take this back
guys can you post some of the current Sanders salt/meltdowns? I want to make a collage of it.
>>297265 Florida Gusanos overwhelmingly vote Republican anyway.
>>297265 >Lmao your guy just conceded Florida by praising Castro Not at all. Those who would flip due to his comments would've never voted for him, or, by a small margin, other Trump contender to begin with.
ngl fam squad bernard winning would be pretty epic famsquad
I still support Sanders, but watching r/stupidpol get completely sidetracked by the Democratic primaries has been sad.
>>304207 SUCCED

Delete
Report

no cookies?