Most rational accelerationist
this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2025
120 points (84.9% liked)
Pragmatic Leftist Theory
156 readers
4 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 4 weeks ago
MODERATORS
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.
load more comments
(55 replies)
You shouldn't have to vote for evil just because the other side is more evil. Dont get me wrong... I did and will again but I shouldn't have to and I wont fault anyone for not. I have enough people to hate already.
"Shouldn't have to" in a just world, but we don't live in a just world. Imagine advocating, for example, for the USSR to be abandoned to the Nazis, because the USSR was also a bunch of genocidal imperialist scumbags.
Choosing the lesser evil is not morally optional if your choices are reduced to only evils.
I don't have the 'luxury' of feeling neutrally about people who've very quite possibly fucking killed me in the next few years.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
I love that my existence has to be 'earned' according to these people. If Blue Circus isn't entertaining enough to 'earn' their vote, me and everyone else endangered by a fascist administration can go fuck ourselves.
Some of us may die, but that's a sacrifice the Purity Brigade is willing to make.
And what happens when team blue decides your minority group is an acceptable sacrifice, as they're currently doing for trans people? They already threw the Palestinian Americans on the pyre, and they're going for trans folks next.
The problem with looking the other way when some other group is thrown under the bus is that inevitably your ticket will be called. In 2028, it's going to be trans folks and their allies that are being bullied into supporting a conservative democrat like Newsom, even though he would take the Democrats the same direction as British Labor.
I just can't understand this hubris and arrogance. You actually expect people to vote for their own annihilation.
And what happens when team blue decides your minority group is an acceptable sacrifice, as they’re currently doing for trans people?
The vast majority of Dem politicians remain in support of trans issues.
They already threw the Palestinian Americans on the pyre, and they’re going for trans folks next.
The Dems have supported Palestinian genocide for at least the past forty fucking years. In that time, Dems have improved markedly on trans issues.
It's not as simple as you want it to be, but since simplicity would absolve you of your actual, real complicity in both the genocide of Palestinians and the additional crimes and genocides of the Trump administration, you crave simplicity.
The problem with looking the other way when some other group is thrown under the bus is that inevitably your ticket will be called.
You're absolutely right, this is why the civil rights movement should have refused all participation in American politics until LGBT rights were established as well.
By your logic, the Dems should have been throwing an ever-greater number of minorities under the bus since... what, the entire 20th century? Yet demonstrably, they have become more minority-positive, not less. I guess facts don't matter when you have fascists to carry water for, though, huh?
I just can’t understand this hubris and arrogance. You actually expect people to vote for their own annihilation.
"Please vote for less annihilation."
"Actually, I'd prefer more."
Sorry for finding self-destructive behavior that damages others as well both repugnant and strategically idiotic?
But sure, tell me how the Harris admin would have been more-destructive or even simply as-destructive towards Arab and Muslim-American communities than the fucking Trump admin, I'm dying to hear about how opting for the fascist was the real act of self-preservation.
Good ol’ accelerationism.
load more comments
(6 replies)
We shouldn't enable fascism by any means, especially in the information era. But, if fascism is already there, we should organize resistance and defend the people that suffer from it, by that building trust that builds our political capital, so to speak. But not enable it, as it fights more against us than against capitalism.
load more comments
(2 replies)
view more: next ›