this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2025
93 points (84.4% liked)

Pragmatic Leftist Theory

147 readers
161 users here now

The neolibs are too far right. The tankies are doing whatever that is. Where's the space for the people who want fully-automated-luxury-gay-space-communism, but realize that it's gonna take a while and there are lots of steps between now and then? Here. This is that space.

Here, people should endeavor to discuss and devise practical, actionable leftist action. Vote lesser evil while you build grassroots coalitions. Unionize your workplace. Participate in SRAs. Build cohesion your local community. Educate the proletariat.

This is a place for practical people to develop practical plans to implement stable, incremental improvement.

If you're dead-set on drumming up all 18,453 True Leftists® into spontaneous Revolution, go somewhere else. The grown ups are talking.

Rules:

-1. Don't be a dick. Racism, sexism, other assorted bigotries, you know the drill. At least try to default to mutually respectful discussion. We're all on the same side here, unless you aren't, in which case kindly leave.

-2. Don't be a tankie. Yes I'm sure you have an extensive knowledge of century-old theory. There's been a century of history since then. Things didn't shake out as expected, maybe consider the possibility that a different angle of attack might be more effective in light of new data.

-3. Be practical. No one on the left benefits from counterproductive actions. This is a space informed by, not enslaved to, ideology. Promoting actions that are fundamentally untenable in the system in question, because they fulfill a sense of ideological purity, is a bad look. Don't do that.

founded 3 weeks ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] stickly@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (14 children)

God bless single issue voters.

Stepping back to an objective human suffering standpoint, the Trump admin is dismantling environmental protections that would soften the coming climate-collapse holocaust. We've whiplashed back 80+ years and lost decades of institutional knowledge; even physical infrastructure in NASA's case.

This is an issue that objectively has only progressed through D efforts and been defended even through R administrations. Millions of people will needlessly die, particularly those oppressed in the global south, from the actions of this admin. But Genocide Joe was an unpalatable humanitarian choice?

There's no rationality to their stance, they just base their politics on visceral emotional reactions. It's the exact same blind moral purity as pro-birthers and they deserve the same derision.

[–] reetmubols@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (3 children)

Ah yes the genocide in gaza is an "issue". A slight inconvenience really

Voting for a genocider was the right choice. War is peace. What is gaslighting? Don't ask me I'm a dumbocrat

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 4 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (2 children)

"Neither was good, so I refuse to participate and willfully allow the worst to happen. Now I get to feel morally superior to those who took action against the worst because the alternative was flawed." Fuck all the way off you absolute asshat. What was and is happening in Gaza is a fucking atrocity. And your lack of vote not only didn't fix a goddamned thing, if anything, it only made it worse and also allowed a myriad of other atrocities happening now and more soon to come. You are a joke and a moron.

[–] dumbocrat69@sh.itjust.works -2 points 43 minutes ago* (last edited 42 minutes ago) (1 children)

If enough dumbocrats had clearly signaled genocide was a dealbreaker, they might have considered the political implications of bombing civilians. But you guys are coward.

You're just looking to deflect the blame because deep down you feel guilty. And you deserve it, you voted for a genocider. You live in a country that commits genocide. It's a heavy karma, you will have a shit afterlife I'm afraid.

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 2 points 33 minutes ago

I have no illusions that American politicians of all parties have actively or complicity committed terrible crimes against other nations. In no way shape or form do I support any of it. But I also live in this country in an area that would never vote me into office of any kind, and so short of a massive paradigm shift or revolution, the most influence I can have on the future of this country is by voting and encouraging others to do the same. And like it or not, sometimes that means voting for the lesser of two evils. If that makes me evil too in your mind, then you can go fuck yourself. I'm doing the best I can. And anyone that can't also do that bare minimum can fuck themselves too.

[–] dumbocrat69@sh.itjust.works -1 points 47 minutes ago (1 children)

What's worse than firebombing beyrouth you asshole? You mean worse FOR YOU?

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 3 points 40 minutes ago

Are you under the delusion that Trump would have Isreal do anything different? That he won't do shit exactly like that himself if he decides it would benefit him to do so? That he won't empower more despots and dictators, arm them, back them, and lead to more mass death of innocents. I mean worse FOR EVERYONE, dick.

[–] stickly@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

Right on cue. And yes it's a political issue, it pretty snugly fits the common definition.

Political issues refer to matters that are of public concern and involve conflicting viewpoints within a society, often requiring governmental action or public policy to address them

Trying to pretend it's something sacrosanct and beyond politics is what makes a single issue voter.

Ah yes the ~~genocide in gaza~~ legal murder of babies is an "issue". A slight inconvenience really

That's you.

If you actually cared about the lives of people in the middle east you should be just as outraged over Trump unilaterally bombing a sovereign state, direct military action that wouldn't have happened with the Democratic candidates.

Or, as I pointed out, the deliberate climate destruction that will literally boil more people alive with wet bulb events.

[–] dumbocrat69@sh.itjust.works -1 points 48 minutes ago (1 children)

I AM outraged you fucktard. Can you people stop bombing civilians? Kthx

[–] stickly@lemmy.world 2 points 24 minutes ago

Damn why so mad, my candidate didn't bomb those people when given the exact same chance. Or are we back to campaigning against hypotheticals instead of reality?

[–] dumbocrat69@sh.itjust.works -1 points 49 minutes ago* (last edited 46 minutes ago) (1 children)

Something sacrosant like the Geneva conventions.

It's really revealing that the average American considers genocide "just another issue". Of course, they're not the ones getting bombed.

It's a double edged sword really. If I ever have to pick between fascism here and genocide in America I'll be sure to gleefully cast a ballot for the later lmao

[–] stickly@lemmy.world 2 points 28 minutes ago* (last edited 1 minute ago)

Projected climate collapse deaths by 2050: 14.5 million, about 250k per year.

Gaza deaths to date: in the range of 80k-100k, hard ceiling of ~2 million.

What could be more sacrosanct than the one and only habitable planet we'll ever get? Certainly not a piece of paper?

I live in a first world country with solid resource access, I can tell you for sure I won't affected as much as the people being cooked to death in India. Why should I care about them?

It's revealing that you weigh one favorite group of starving victims against the millions of others. Just because one is direct human cruelty and the other is direct and malicious social murder?

Don't tell me you care about both equally, because that's clearly not the vote you want to cast.

[–] AlexanderTheDead@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

You can't be a pedant and also be bad at it. You just sound like an idiot.

Oh wait, you think somehow that allowing the Trump regime to take power was the optimal play. Let me correct myself. You are an idiot.

[–] dumbocrat69@sh.itjust.works -1 points 41 minutes ago (1 children)

The optimal play would have been not to bomb civilians. But your whole point is denialism. Tell me again how voting for genocide was unavoidable?

[–] stickly@lemmy.world 2 points 9 minutes ago

Damn, in my hypothetical fantasy land Harris solved the crisis and fostered a perfect two state solution. I guess we'll never know how it would play out now because we elected a fascist. "Couldn't be worse" right?

load more comments (10 replies)