Democrats are all upset over Mamdani because he’s a Democratic Socialist? Why? I don’t get it. What’s wrong with being a Democratic Socialist. It seems like a good thing to me. I thought Democrats embraced socialism.

  • sudo@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    First everyone should be reading these works critically and not as absolute doctrine. Any ML who’s actually knows what “scientific socialism” means and isnt a tankie larper should know that.

    Second, all except for the Catalonia examples are false.

    • EZLN is literally a Maoist people’s army started by a Maoist cadre. The people they organized simply didn’t see overthrowing the entire Mexican government as worth it. If you knew anything about Mao you would’ve known that.
    • Lenin and Mao were required readings for for the YPG according to western volunteers. Just look into Occalan their connection with the PKK and understand they were just softening their image to get US support.
    • “original workers councils in Russia” AKA the Soviets. Yeah they didn’t read Mao or State and Revolution because they hadn’t been written yet! But to suggest they weren’t reading early Lenin is obvious baloney given that him and the Bolsheviks were their contemporaries.
    • the_abecedarian@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      EZLN did start out as a more authoritarian-influenced group (in the 80s, that was where USSR influence and support was going!) but they have since evolved away from that in major ways, especially after learning from/integrating with indigenous peoples after some initial contact with Mexican national forces. I am not as up on PKK/AANES history, but Ocalan’s major works are primarily influenced by Murray Bookchin, who was extremely anti-authoritarian.

      The soviets eventually came to be dominated by the Bolsheviks, who were majorly influenced by Lenin, but they were formed and initially populated by several factions. It’s reductive to the point of absurdity to give Lenin the whole credit for the overthrow of capitalism in Russia (which was messy and complex), despite his outsized influence on the country from then on. Capitalism had only begun in Russia when serfdom was abolished in 1861 anyway, so the society that was overthrown was really one that failed during the transition.

      Look, debate on these points in this thread is silly and I kinda regret being baited here. We need an easy intro to what socialism even is at this moment, for people like the OP, and we can talk strategy in another place. I’m glad we’re broadly on the same team! Let’s show others questioning society in this moment what we can offer.