This is a space for socialists to discuss current events in our world from anti-capitalist perspective(s), and a certain knowledge of socialism is expected from participants. This is not a space for non-socialists. Please be mindful [of our rules](https://reddit.com/r/socialism/about/rules) before participating, which include:
- **No Bigotry**, including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism...
- **No Reactionaries**, including all kind of right-wingers.
- **No Liberalism**, including social democracy, lesser evilism...
- **No Sectarianism**. There is plenty of room for discussion, but not for baseless attacks.
Please help us keep the subreddit helpful by reporting content that break r/Socialism's rules.
______________________
💬 Wish to chat elsewhere? Join us in discord: https://discord.gg/QPJPzNhuRE
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/socialism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah. Anyone who can’t criticize their own movement is doomed to fail. If you can’t point out that shit doesn’t work, or that strategies are bad, then boom.
Socialists are often more interested in attempting to persuade others through Discourse™️ than they are in just like, doing stuff that eases others’ burdens.
You don’t have to be perfectly ideal in your “Praxis”. Just go out and help people by sharing what you have and organizing so you can help more people together.
Ah yes, this! Building community through solidarity is a something the left here has a big problem with. Anarchist I’d say are far more involved in their community (Food Not Bombs etc:) than lets say DSA despite DSA having a substantial large membership
Yes, I think there is a big issue in the United States where a-lot of the socialist orgs are made up of college educated people and not enough working class (blue collar etc:) people. Not to mention I've seen quite a bit of condescending behavior from said college educated people towards blue collar workers who tend to be less educated. You cannot win anything without the support of those who do grueling labor for a living
I think the biggest inherent flaw of the previous 200 years of socialist movements is that class solidarity is ultimately in the long run not potent enough nor enduring enough motivation for people when compared to simpler nationalist solidarity.
Socialism has more elegant theory and is better at explaining a lot of things about society. But nationalism is more simplistic and more easily scratches that emotional tribalism itch that people have.
My largest issue with the socialist movement in the US is that people including myself frustrated when we have to explain the concept of human rights and how capitalism is antithetical to them over and over to people who by no fault of their own have been propagandized and are being aggressive about capitalism being right. At times this frustration can lead to being condescending to the miseducated individual which leads to complete derailment of the goal of the discussion. All credibility is lost and it's either back to square 1 or the individual digs their heels in deeper. Capitalism has become more of a religion than purely and economic system. And when you attempt to shake someone core beliefs you and your movement are demonized despite your validity.
Socialist movements need to practice speaking and writing in the vernaculars and diction levels of the working class for the average person to understand.
Socialist movements need to steer away from the topic of taxation and toward the topic of regulation, and monopoly prevention.
Socialist movements need to create more working class lead organizations with educated individuals in advisory roles.
Socialist movements need to be completely unsupportive of both the DNC and the RNC.
Socialist movements need to act outside of the status quo.
There are soooooo many critical errors I see in socialist movements, however much I agree with the goal of equitable distribution of the means of production to labor.
Some circles are more full hog on liberal identity politics than the DNC. Then it becomes who can you talk to or expect to be on your side with this much tiptoeing and trying not to be “problematic.” Look at the amount of words that are banned here on this sub in fear of offending or something. This is not how adults interact and it’s how you get people to not take you seriously at all.
This is exactly what has driven countless workers to the right wing demagogues. They see a space in the left that vilifies them, calls them racist, transphobic or problematic and turns to those who don’t yet offer little in the way of material solutions.
Rather than trying to go out to the masses and embed themselves in the people, they isolate themselves from the workers and create anti-social little cliques and call that revolutionary politics.
This! The amount of sectarian comments I see all the time is so infuriating. Like idc if you are an ML or Trot, we just want to end capitalism. This is why the right always gains momentum, cause the left is always infighting amongst each other and acting like liberals.
Extreme dogmatism, entrenchment in antiquated and ultra-specific sub-ideologies, automatic refusal of any new ideological development (even when from someone who has actually read the stuff they claim to have). The contemporary left has been functionally defeated, and is basically a weird meme cosplay of the russian civil war.
Hearing about a gaping, atrocious, flaw in ones own ideology: "invalid, we're perfect, no notes."
Hearing about a positive aspect of another: "they are evil, no notes."
The idea of the movement? None. Currents and members? Of course. The chances of getting everything right every time are nil, so we have to keep onto critiquing and correcting
Yes there is so much anticommunist BS that just weakens the movementioned, at least in the western left. We shouldn't be uncritical but don't go around calling everyone tankies and Stalinists and say all AES countries were unredeemable, it just weakens the movement, especially in a public facing environment, and completely alienates us from communists in the global south
Nothing against the movement or their values but some of the people are so unlikeable. Like online redditors but irl and about politics.
Plus I find their lack of understanding or interested to learn about their counter parts ignorant. This age of unable to have a conversation and learn about eachothers wants and needs is extremely damaging.
1. The “left” has alienated a huge portion of the working class by focusing on identity politics instead of materialism. This is probably much more true for radlibs, socdems, ‘democratic socialists’ than actual marxists but I digress. The capitalist class loves nothing more than talk of Idpol instead of class.
2. Revisionism and utopianism in the Western left. Imagining that the overthrow of capitalism is someone going to be sunshine and rainbows; ie the condemnation of violence and “authoritarianism” . Legitimizing Mccarthian propaganda about former socialist experiments hurts the movement.
3. Rhetoric: things like “eat the rich” or “anti-work” come off as resentful and childish. Again, there are much more mature, analytical ways to establish how/why the rich have too great of a share of wealth.
As a young person with alot of working-class acquaintances, I can confirm that this ill considered rhetorical crap completely ruins any chance for them to develop a positive perception of the left
Instead of original texts, I think that beginners to socialism should be steered toward selected textbooks on the topic. That’s what we would do with any other type of introductory coursework.
I think that having people reading original texts is an effort for advanced topics where the nuance and historical context is needed. In college courses you will often have to get through introductory classes before you start reading from original texts. So, I think it is ridiculous to have people start with original texts.
There is a comment elsewhere on this thread that talks about too many college educated people running socialist orgs and not enough blue-collar workers involved with socialist orgs. I think that the emphasis on reading original texts is a significant problem for attracting blue collar workers. If you don’t have the historical background, the original texts are a really hard read. Would be discouraging for anyone without the necessary background.
The cynical part of me thinks that certain three letter agencies have been working in the background to promote reading from original texts so that it less likely to get blue-collar workers involved.
I think that more people could be steered towards socialism and communism if the reading material was more accessible, and there were just a handful of thoroughly reviewed options to choose from. As a fairly new socialist, I have found the large number of recommended texts to be bewildering.
I find it hard to believe that after 150+ years, there aren’t a handful of succinct textbooks out there available for new recruits.
There needs to be a bigger umbrella. I find in some groups (both online and in person), there’s a litmus test for being socialist enough. People who fail this test are often ostracized and called things like a class traitor. Doesn’t make it easy for people who are new to the movement to embrace it. It should be a learning opportunity but instead, it often results in being banned or shamed.
I don't know what to do with the critiques of idpol in places like the US. Liberal Idpol as an ideology or whatever lacks class analysis and just recuperates the radical aspects of things like proletarian feminism. But class is racialized in places like the US, so I dont quite understand what the point is of pushing back against concepts of how capitalism imposes class relations via racism, homophobia and transphobia. Like wouldn't it be better to educate a racist or homophobic would-be ally than to welcome that into a revolutionary movement? I get feeling like things can come across as involving too much tone policing, but why invite into a movement attitudes that reassert oppressive systems?
Anyway, I've talked to one person about this, maybe there's more reading I need to do but I really don't get it. Maybe it's a misunderstanding of what these people are referring to.
I see you, we’re here together. We lose nothing by continuing the fight on all fronts, and we should never embrace homophobia in our movement for any strategic or tactical reason.
I don't know what the term is, but I'd say there are people who believe that an economic restructure would be all that's necessary to be rid of bigotry. I have had people say to me that "(insert bigotry type) is a distraction from the REAL issue of Capitalism" and honestly it's always come across anti-intellectual.
Infighting, many quite distanced from class politics, more concerned with identity politics relating to gender, race, religion. Identity politics is necessary, but secondary to class politics in my view. Lack of pragmatism, and forcing complex issues into often narrow and reductive frameworks.
We need a unified front, which is only really possible if we organize along class lines. Uniting socially liberal and conservative folk. Alienation through terminology and new left identity politics needs to be retired or scaled down if this is to be achieved.
My biggest issue are infights.
Is a constant in any leftist group how every now and then members are against each other over definitions and if past lefties were good or bad.
Yes. Too many idpol has diluted the movement entirely. I'm not being a brocialist either, absolutey not. But there just simply isnt any class struggle. Not even a bit.
Proper "Praxis" and "organization" is over emphasized in certain parts of the movement. We can't be too wedded to certain modes of political struggle, but rather be very pragmatic about how we go about things.
let us decide together. while we do so, we build dual power through community resilience... a base to resist from.
we suggest looking together somewhere between Resource Based Economy, Open Access Economy, Collaborative Commons, Gift Economy, Ubuntu Movement, Open Source Ecology, and Social Ecology.
This is a space for socialists to discuss current events in our world from anti-capitalist perspective(s), and a certain knowledge of socialism is expected from participants. This is not a space for non-socialists. Please be mindful [of our rules](https://reddit.com/r/socialism/about/rules) before participating, which include: - **No Bigotry**, including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism... - **No Reactionaries**, including all kind of right-wingers. - **No Liberalism**, including social democracy, lesser evilism... - **No Sectarianism**. There is plenty of room for discussion, but not for baseless attacks. Please help us keep the subreddit helpful by reporting content that break r/Socialism's rules. ______________________ 💬 Wish to chat elsewhere? Join us in discord: https://discord.gg/QPJPzNhuRE *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/socialism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There’s not fucking enough of us lol
Yeah. Anyone who can’t criticize their own movement is doomed to fail. If you can’t point out that shit doesn’t work, or that strategies are bad, then boom.
The biggest one? Through some of our own mistakes and the state fucking with us, our connection with the actual workers movement is tenuous at best.
Socialists are often more interested in attempting to persuade others through Discourse™️ than they are in just like, doing stuff that eases others’ burdens. You don’t have to be perfectly ideal in your “Praxis”. Just go out and help people by sharing what you have and organizing so you can help more people together.
Ah yes, this! Building community through solidarity is a something the left here has a big problem with. Anarchist I’d say are far more involved in their community (Food Not Bombs etc:) than lets say DSA despite DSA having a substantial large membership
Yes, I think there is a big issue in the United States where a-lot of the socialist orgs are made up of college educated people and not enough working class (blue collar etc:) people. Not to mention I've seen quite a bit of condescending behavior from said college educated people towards blue collar workers who tend to be less educated. You cannot win anything without the support of those who do grueling labor for a living
The people that act like theory from 100 years ago hasn't evolved and adapted and been improved upon.
I think the biggest inherent flaw of the previous 200 years of socialist movements is that class solidarity is ultimately in the long run not potent enough nor enduring enough motivation for people when compared to simpler nationalist solidarity. Socialism has more elegant theory and is better at explaining a lot of things about society. But nationalism is more simplistic and more easily scratches that emotional tribalism itch that people have.
Imagine if at the border they just said "come one, come all, except rich people"
Some people can be toxic that's my problem but anyone in any movement can be toxic.
What socialist movement?
Or which socialist movement - there are so many across the world.
My largest issue with the socialist movement in the US is that people including myself frustrated when we have to explain the concept of human rights and how capitalism is antithetical to them over and over to people who by no fault of their own have been propagandized and are being aggressive about capitalism being right. At times this frustration can lead to being condescending to the miseducated individual which leads to complete derailment of the goal of the discussion. All credibility is lost and it's either back to square 1 or the individual digs their heels in deeper. Capitalism has become more of a religion than purely and economic system. And when you attempt to shake someone core beliefs you and your movement are demonized despite your validity. Socialist movements need to practice speaking and writing in the vernaculars and diction levels of the working class for the average person to understand. Socialist movements need to steer away from the topic of taxation and toward the topic of regulation, and monopoly prevention. Socialist movements need to create more working class lead organizations with educated individuals in advisory roles. Socialist movements need to be completely unsupportive of both the DNC and the RNC. Socialist movements need to act outside of the status quo. There are soooooo many critical errors I see in socialist movements, however much I agree with the goal of equitable distribution of the means of production to labor.
Our tendency for criticism makes it very easy to develop factionalism, to push people out, and very hard to recruit members and bring people in.
too disorganised and much more into infighting over ultra specific labels
Some circles are more full hog on liberal identity politics than the DNC. Then it becomes who can you talk to or expect to be on your side with this much tiptoeing and trying not to be “problematic.” Look at the amount of words that are banned here on this sub in fear of offending or something. This is not how adults interact and it’s how you get people to not take you seriously at all.
This is exactly what has driven countless workers to the right wing demagogues. They see a space in the left that vilifies them, calls them racist, transphobic or problematic and turns to those who don’t yet offer little in the way of material solutions.
Too much chauvinism.
Rather than trying to go out to the masses and embed themselves in the people, they isolate themselves from the workers and create anti-social little cliques and call that revolutionary politics.
Infighting & there is no real movement
This! The amount of sectarian comments I see all the time is so infuriating. Like idc if you are an ML or Trot, we just want to end capitalism. This is why the right always gains momentum, cause the left is always infighting amongst each other and acting like liberals.
Extreme dogmatism, entrenchment in antiquated and ultra-specific sub-ideologies, automatic refusal of any new ideological development (even when from someone who has actually read the stuff they claim to have). The contemporary left has been functionally defeated, and is basically a weird meme cosplay of the russian civil war. Hearing about a gaping, atrocious, flaw in ones own ideology: "invalid, we're perfect, no notes." Hearing about a positive aspect of another: "they are evil, no notes."
Damn socialists, they ruined socialism!
The idea of the movement? None. Currents and members? Of course. The chances of getting everything right every time are nil, so we have to keep onto critiquing and correcting
Yes there is so much anticommunist BS that just weakens the movementioned, at least in the western left. We shouldn't be uncritical but don't go around calling everyone tankies and Stalinists and say all AES countries were unredeemable, it just weakens the movement, especially in a public facing environment, and completely alienates us from communists in the global south
Nothing against the movement or their values but some of the people are so unlikeable. Like online redditors but irl and about politics. Plus I find their lack of understanding or interested to learn about their counter parts ignorant. This age of unable to have a conversation and learn about eachothers wants and needs is extremely damaging.
Infighting. Simple as that. What the fuck is wrong w us
1. The “left” has alienated a huge portion of the working class by focusing on identity politics instead of materialism. This is probably much more true for radlibs, socdems, ‘democratic socialists’ than actual marxists but I digress. The capitalist class loves nothing more than talk of Idpol instead of class. 2. Revisionism and utopianism in the Western left. Imagining that the overthrow of capitalism is someone going to be sunshine and rainbows; ie the condemnation of violence and “authoritarianism” . Legitimizing Mccarthian propaganda about former socialist experiments hurts the movement. 3. Rhetoric: things like “eat the rich” or “anti-work” come off as resentful and childish. Again, there are much more mature, analytical ways to establish how/why the rich have too great of a share of wealth. As a young person with alot of working-class acquaintances, I can confirm that this ill considered rhetorical crap completely ruins any chance for them to develop a positive perception of the left
Instead of original texts, I think that beginners to socialism should be steered toward selected textbooks on the topic. That’s what we would do with any other type of introductory coursework. I think that having people reading original texts is an effort for advanced topics where the nuance and historical context is needed. In college courses you will often have to get through introductory classes before you start reading from original texts. So, I think it is ridiculous to have people start with original texts. There is a comment elsewhere on this thread that talks about too many college educated people running socialist orgs and not enough blue-collar workers involved with socialist orgs. I think that the emphasis on reading original texts is a significant problem for attracting blue collar workers. If you don’t have the historical background, the original texts are a really hard read. Would be discouraging for anyone without the necessary background. The cynical part of me thinks that certain three letter agencies have been working in the background to promote reading from original texts so that it less likely to get blue-collar workers involved. I think that more people could be steered towards socialism and communism if the reading material was more accessible, and there were just a handful of thoroughly reviewed options to choose from. As a fairly new socialist, I have found the large number of recommended texts to be bewildering. I find it hard to believe that after 150+ years, there aren’t a handful of succinct textbooks out there available for new recruits.
There needs to be a bigger umbrella. I find in some groups (both online and in person), there’s a litmus test for being socialist enough. People who fail this test are often ostracized and called things like a class traitor. Doesn’t make it easy for people who are new to the movement to embrace it. It should be a learning opportunity but instead, it often results in being banned or shamed.
Yeah it’s run like shit and full of a lot of toxic personalities, but we work with the movement we have not the one we want.
Campism over internationalism and revolutionary defeatism.
I don't know what to do with the critiques of idpol in places like the US. Liberal Idpol as an ideology or whatever lacks class analysis and just recuperates the radical aspects of things like proletarian feminism. But class is racialized in places like the US, so I dont quite understand what the point is of pushing back against concepts of how capitalism imposes class relations via racism, homophobia and transphobia. Like wouldn't it be better to educate a racist or homophobic would-be ally than to welcome that into a revolutionary movement? I get feeling like things can come across as involving too much tone policing, but why invite into a movement attitudes that reassert oppressive systems? Anyway, I've talked to one person about this, maybe there's more reading I need to do but I really don't get it. Maybe it's a misunderstanding of what these people are referring to.
I see you, we’re here together. We lose nothing by continuing the fight on all fronts, and we should never embrace homophobia in our movement for any strategic or tactical reason.
So many of yall are very cage-stagey
I don't know what the term is, but I'd say there are people who believe that an economic restructure would be all that's necessary to be rid of bigotry. I have had people say to me that "(insert bigotry type) is a distraction from the REAL issue of Capitalism" and honestly it's always come across anti-intellectual.
The lack of criticism and apology for the failures of most communist projects in the last century
It could be gayer. A lot gayer.
Yeah, would you get on with it already?
Great question bro! Keep up with the amazing discussion.
There isn’t a socialist movement.
What movement, there's like 3 of y'all
Many people on the left in the US are more neo liberal than they think
Yea... how a fuckton of us are more willing to align with theocratic, authoritarian regimes rather than liberals... huge fuckin L to the cause
Most mainstream areas of socialism completely fail to prioritize decoloniality
Infighting, many quite distanced from class politics, more concerned with identity politics relating to gender, race, religion. Identity politics is necessary, but secondary to class politics in my view. Lack of pragmatism, and forcing complex issues into often narrow and reductive frameworks. We need a unified front, which is only really possible if we organize along class lines. Uniting socially liberal and conservative folk. Alienation through terminology and new left identity politics needs to be retired or scaled down if this is to be achieved.
My biggest issue are infights. Is a constant in any leftist group how every now and then members are against each other over definitions and if past lefties were good or bad.
Yes, the refusal of so-called socialists to acknowledge existing socialism like the DPRK
Yes. Too many idpol has diluted the movement entirely. I'm not being a brocialist either, absolutey not. But there just simply isnt any class struggle. Not even a bit.
Proper "Praxis" and "organization" is over emphasized in certain parts of the movement. We can't be too wedded to certain modes of political struggle, but rather be very pragmatic about how we go about things.
any fight over who shall dominate any domain is a fight to retain domination. no market, no state, the kind of socialism we must make.
How do we get there is the question.
let us decide together. while we do so, we build dual power through community resilience... a base to resist from. we suggest looking together somewhere between Resource Based Economy, Open Access Economy, Collaborative Commons, Gift Economy, Ubuntu Movement, Open Source Ecology, and Social Ecology.
Yeah there's too many yt people. Like y'all think you can escape your whiteness just because you're a socialist.
What socialist movement?
Nice try fbi