this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2025
96 points (84.8% liked)

Pragmatic Leftist Theory

147 readers
121 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 2 points 3 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 2 hours ago (1 children)

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

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

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?

[–] NantiHanks@sh.itjust.works -2 points 51 minutes ago (1 children)

Your candidate was the Vice-President of the US during the bulk of the genocide, idiot.

[–] stickly@lemmy.world 1 points 41 minutes ago (1 children)

Okie dokie, still didn't bomb Iran

[–] NantiHanks@sh.itjust.works 0 points 25 minutes ago (1 children)

Iran was a squirmish and you know it. They killed 50k.

Beside, you should demand better politicians idiot.

[–] stickly@lemmy.world 1 points 19 minutes ago (1 children)

Ok, here I am demanding it. Now what? Continue to be lambasted by the left for also making the only sane decision in a two box election? How am I going to demand anything now when ICE/National Guard are enforcing curfews to suppress any political gatherings? Come on, tell me what magic wand to wave. You've clearly got the answers

[–] NantiHanks@sh.itjust.works 0 points 15 minutes ago (1 children)

The hell should I know? Maybe ask your loser party for insights, they managed to lose to donald so they can do anything.

[–] stickly@lemmy.world 1 points 6 minutes ago

Ok so you've got nothing to add so your opinion is worthless ✅

Who said it was my party? I'm casting one vote that needed to be cast. If you don't like my strategy but have no viable alternative then keep your mouth shut

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

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.

[–] NantiHanks@sh.itjust.works -1 points 47 minutes ago (2 children)

Straight up sliding into denialism I see. The genocide isn't that bad because of global warming now?

Guess what, you can both care about the environment AND not commit genocide. Usually, those even go hands in hands

[–] Kage520@lemmy.world 1 points 34 minutes ago* (last edited 34 minutes ago) (1 children)

Voting options were not:

A. Genocide

B. No genocide

They were: A. Genocide in Gaza

B: genocide in Gaza + maybe Ukraine + maybe losing democracy + rolling back environmental protections + enabling the best friend of a known pedophile child trafficker... Etc

C. B, but with a side of smug self satisfying moral high ground

You are not more moral for choosing C.

[–] NantiHanks@sh.itjust.works 1 points 28 minutes ago

Yeah well if I'm ever asked to chose between genocide in america and fascism here, I'll gleefully vote for the former.

[–] stickly@lemmy.world 1 points 41 minutes ago (1 children)

Guess what, you can both care about the environment AND not commit genocide.

Oh really? Which candidate on the ballot in 2024 who had that platform? None? Well I guess I'll opt for the one that's at least 1 for 2.

The conversation was always about harm reduction, but keep imagining that one policy is the only thing that matters.

[–] NantiHanks@sh.itjust.works 0 points 27 minutes ago* (last edited 27 minutes ago) (1 children)

You are the only ones whose harm is being reduced you selfish fuck. Quit bombing civilians

[–] stickly@lemmy.world 1 points 24 minutes ago (2 children)

Nah man, plenty of other people all over the world are harmed way more by the Trump administration. Take your head out of the sand if you're going to pretend to actually give a shit about anything

[–] NantiHanks@sh.itjust.works 0 points 20 minutes ago (1 children)

Way more? Last year, my friend in Beyrouth got firebombed. It was american canister of white phosphorus.

What's way more than that, asshole, do you fucking hear yourself? You guys are desperate to compare yourself to the victims of litteral warcrimes lmao. You are not the victims, retard.

[–] stickly@lemmy.world 1 points 16 minutes ago (1 children)

Holy fuck open your goddamn eyes. Way worse is continuing that policy PLUS literally every grift, corruption, destruction, repression, depression and violence of the 2nd Trump term. What the fuck are you even arguing here?

[–] NantiHanks@sh.itjust.works 0 points 13 minutes ago (1 children)

I'm arguing agaisnt your denialist narrative saying the genocide was unavoidable. I am appealed by americans pretending their stupid country bombing people was a fatality.

[–] stickly@lemmy.world 1 points 3 minutes ago

Who said it was unavoidable? What the fuck is denialist about needing to cast the obvious vote on this specific election day? You've got nothing to actually add, your "argument" presents no alternatives, just chastisement about my strategy. Why do you even bother?

[–] NantiHanks@sh.itjust.works 0 points 22 minutes ago* (last edited 21 minutes ago) (1 children)

Yeah if only joey did throw his ass in jail for seddition for the time he literally invaded the white house.

But the dems knew they needed trump as a scarecrow.

[–] stickly@lemmy.world 1 points 10 minutes ago

Ok so they did that. Now what are my new options in the voting booth? Does that actually change my voting strategy in any way?