I'm never all that impressed with this guy's presentation, or ability to make concepts accessible, but he do be making me think.
this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2024
8 points (100.0% liked)
videos
22656 readers
1 users here now
Breadtube if it didn't suck.
Post videos you genuinely enjoy and want to share, duh. Celebrate the diversity of interests shared by chapochatters by posting a deep dive into Venetian kelp farming, I dunno. Also media criticism, bite-sized versions of left-wing theory, all the stuff you expected. But I am curious about that kelp farming thing now that you mentioned it.
Low effort / spam videos might be removed, especially weeb content.
There is a cytube that you can paste videos into and watch with whoever happens to be around. It's open submission unless there's something important to commandeer it with at the time.
A weekly watch party happens every Saturday (Sunday down under), with video nominations Saturday-Monday, voting Monday-Thursday. See the pin for whatever stage it's currently in.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I know. I've watched so many of his videos over the last couple of years. He has many good things to say but, I wish he was better at organizing and condensing arguments on the points of theory he feels he needs to address so that they can be discussed more widely. He should have people clip and catalog his videos like how Cushvlog viewers do with Matt's thoughts.
I unfortunately don't have the time to watch the video, however, hasn't the unity of having one message in the past been a crucial tactic, although flawed in ways, of Socialist parties being able to communicate effectively with the masses of people? Is he directly addressing that or another tendency?
He's more addressing the failures of left wing movements that he sees as arising from a tendency to seek out The One True and Perfect Ideology and assume that when that is reached suddenly everyone will be on board and revolution will happen, when in reality people will always have disagreements, and a perfectly unified movement is a dead movement that has stopped evolving (I'm doing a lot of interpreting tbh, he doesn't phrase it that way, but that's what I got out of it)
I think his point is that yes obviously you need to be aligned enough to have common goals and work towards them in a relatively unified way, but you can't expect to get everyone on the exact same page about your entire body of thought. Dividing lines should be drawn on practical lines, not on lines of ideological purity, because if you cut out everyone who has a disagreement, you will end up with a group too small to be a meaningful political actor (but obviously, some people will never join you or will work with you in bad faith and undermine your goals, sometimes the question is existential and a split or purge is unavoidable, but usually it isn't)
Some anarchists kind of have this tendency as well though it expresses differently. where there's this feeling that you can reach a consensus on everything, when you just can't, and it isn't required to take action.