I mean, I volunteer with Food Not Bombs, and their politics is well to the left of the DSA. But if you ask them what their accomplishments are, its a pretty straightforward "We feed the homeless people that the police would rather see starved to death". That's it. Every week, getting out and distributing food, even if people get arrested for it.

Now, there's definitely other people who just spend all their days shitposting and doing nothing else of consequence. But they're not typically the people I meet in person when I'm out trying to make my neighborhood a better place.

Lol yeah left is arguing over violence or peace... I see news stories and there isn't that much violence going around from anyone except the government and DSA is only 90,000 members strong after ZOHRAN win.

So it's really the fight is between leftist that do something and the leftist that complain and do nothing

There are a million non-violent ways to oppose authoritarianism such as boycotts, labour strikes, voting blocs, etc. but since they involve at least some amount of effort and inconvenience no one (in the USA, at least) wants to do them.

These economic levers typically need a critical mass of participation. And one way to get that participation is via buy-in from the government (regulation) or capital (BSD). Random people refusing to shop at Starbucks doesn't mean much. But when a location is shut down for violating ordinances or because the landlord kicks them out, that's a material hit to their pocketbook the owners can't ignore.

Rallying that critical mass of support is difficult and frustrating. I've heard more than one organizer describe it as "herding cats". This isn't a trivial issue of inconvenience or effort. It requires an industrial scale of activism.

However, by wanking about a revolution that you know will never come you can claim to be on the right side of history while still taking the path of least resistance in every way that matters.

"The Revolution" is a critical mass of critical mass events. Its something you can only really talk about in hindsight, because it requires a bunch of constantly moving social parts to kinda line up at the right moment and move in the right direction together.

Revolutions aren't uncommon. Large institutional shifts in composition, function, and ideology happen regularly. But they're a lot easier when the people executing them already have a bunch of institutional controls to operate. "Wanking" often feels like the only thing you can do, because you're so cut out of the so-called democratic process.

Every non-violent revolution succeeded because of the violent revolution behind it. The peaceful leaders like Gandhi or MLK make the history books because they make for better propaganda. MLK was seen as easier for government and society to deal with rather than the gun toten' Black Panthers. And Gandhi had bunches of armed and violent small revolutionary groups in the background.

History shows that unless enough people are actually willing to fight and die for social and political change, peaceful marches don't change much.

I'm convinced mass-protest revolutions only happen in developing countries like Nepal.

However, they do happen. We don't need to define who gets violent revolution and who gets a slow crawl towards reform, these things are always conditional.

Plus, it scares billionaires.

So we are literally edging our way towards revolution, lol

Now if only people acted on those ideologies lol

Only 15 would be so nice

Nah, can’t go to a revolution with people who plan to shoot you in the back at first chance.

Too many times anarchists get slaughtered before the war is even won. It’s a lesson learnt in blood.

That would be OK.

We found 'em guys, the most pure leftist. All the other ideologies can go home I want whatever this is.

You want to build a wall to to Oklahomans in Oklahoma

I want to build a wall to keep non Oklahomans out of Oklahoma.

We're not the same

That's why I simply just say "I'm doing something what are you doing?"

Then they're gonna really fold. There won't be any infighting.

Most likely they'll flip the question but just make sure you did something

Not necessarily, they could just adopt the so-called "correct" position from the perspective of the purist too couldn't they?

Gatekeeping that's cute. How does that advance any leftist movements?