There is a spectrum haunting C-SPAM. I, on the contrary,

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > The Goodmine > There is a spectrum haunting C-SPAM. I, on the contrary,

«‹›1217 »

Terrorist Fistbump: Jan 29, 2009; by Nyc_Tattoo

Rated PG-34 posted:

I heard the DSA is on the wane anyway these days. just start your own sect or join one

The sects need to all go away imo. Replaced with worthwhile organizations, they'd have no purpose for existing. I'm not sure they have much purpose now actually, except as repositories of cranks and old comrades.

# ? Mar 5, 2020 03:47

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 13, 2024 19:57

GalacticAcid: Apr 8, 2013; NEW YORK VALUES

BrutalistMcDonalds posted:

they're about to be back to the bad old days when they were danny fetonte and his bowling team

I would rejoin if that was the case, sounds chill

# ? Mar 5, 2020 03:48

BrutalistMcDonalds: Oct 4, 2012; Lipstick Apathy

gradenko_2000 posted:

https://twitter.com/b_judah/status/1235230772870737920

i heard once that brezhnev's nickname was "brezhlez" or something which is a portmanteau with "lezha" лежа or "lay down"

might have that slightly wrong but it was basically the soviet version of "sleepy joe"

then you had andropov who was nicknamed bystropov, like bystro or "go fast" because cracking down on social parasitism was a big thing under him :backtowork:

# ? Mar 5, 2020 03:50

Rated PG-34: Jul 1, 2004

Terrorist Fistbump posted:

The sects need to all go away imo. Replaced with worthwhile organizations, they'd have no purpose for existing. I'm not sure they have much purpose now actually, except as repositories of cranks and old comrades.

primitive accumulation of cadres is alas another Marxian axiom

# ? Mar 5, 2020 03:56

strange feelings re Daisy: Aug 2, 2000

Can anyone tell me what the deal is with Ramsey Clark? This is a rabbit hole I'm looking down this week. While acting as attorney general he ordered the creation of the Interdivisional Information Unit. It was a clearing house that allowed the FBI to share information and crack down on dissidents. In particular it led directly to the FBI starting COINTELPRO and breaking the back of organized socialism in the US and also destroying or infiltrating civil rights and anti-war groups.

Later in life he started defending some leftist ideas and was welcomed by some socialist groups while being denounced by right wingers as a traitor. He joined the Worker's World Party and attained a position of leadership and has given speeches at PSL events. He claims it was a waste of resources to crack down on communists and Black Panthers and that he never intended that. What the gently caress did he think would happen by directing intelligence agencies to persecute dissidents? That doesn't wash at all. Why did anyone accept his change of heart? It seems like inviting someone into your home after they've shot your comrades in the face. Why not just invite a uniformed cop to join your org?

# ? Mar 5, 2020 04:19

exmarx: Feb 18, 2012; The experience over the years
of nothing getting better
only worse.

exmarx posted:

imo the most worrying thing about bernie's campaign is the assumption it'll bring out non-voters, because that's also been the strategy of a bunch of other social democratic parties over the past decade and it's failed miserably. iowa showed some promise i guess.

oh well lol

# ? Mar 5, 2020 04:46

Dreddout: Oct 1, 2015; You must stay drunk on writing so reality cannot destroy you.

gradenko_2000 posted:

Alexpanders Ocasio-Cortez

# ? Mar 5, 2020 04:54

Prince Myshkin: Jun 17, 2018

# ? Mar 5, 2020 05:48

Homeless Friend: Jul 16, 2007

Prince Myshkin posted:

# ? Mar 5, 2020 05:49

Raskolnikov38: Mar 3, 2007; We were somewhere around Manila when the drugs began to take hold

some day i'll stop smoking weed long enough to get the garand i want

# ? Mar 5, 2020 05:50

exmarx: Feb 18, 2012; The experience over the years
of nothing getting better
only worse.

Prince Myshkin posted:

make the first crest "hillary 2016" though

# ? Mar 5, 2020 06:00

T-man: Aug 22, 2010; Talk shit, get bzzzt.

i will never stop smoking weed

# ? Mar 5, 2020 06:13

Algund Eenboom: May 4, 2014

Weed lol.. 420. Lmao

# ? Mar 5, 2020 06:15

swimsuit: Jan 22, 2009; yeah

T-man posted:

i will never stop smoking weed

you should stop posting instead

# ? Mar 5, 2020 06:21

T-man: Aug 22, 2010; Talk shit, get bzzzt.

swimsuit posted:

you should stop posting instead

never, then my posting enemies win

# ? Mar 5, 2020 06:27

Prince Myshkin: Jun 17, 2018

strange feelings re Daisy posted:

Can anyone tell me what the deal is with Ramsey Clark? This is a rabbit hole I'm looking down this week. While acting as attorney general he ordered the creation of the Interdivisional Information Unit. It was a clearing house that allowed the FBI to share information and crack down on dissidents. In particular it led directly to the FBI starting COINTELPRO and breaking the back of organized socialism in the US and also destroying or infiltrating civil rights and anti-war groups.

Later in life he started defending some leftist ideas and was welcomed by some socialist groups while being denounced by right wingers as a traitor. He joined the Worker's World Party and attained a position of leadership and has given speeches at PSL events. He claims it was a waste of resources to crack down on communists and Black Panthers and that he never intended that. What the gently caress did he think would happen by directing intelligence agencies to persecute dissidents? That doesn't wash at all. Why did anyone accept his change of heart? It seems like inviting someone into your home after they've shot your comrades in the face. Why not just invite a uniformed cop to join your org?

My guess is the parties thought the propaganda value of his public turn away from spookdom outweighed the risks.

# ? Mar 5, 2020 06:37

Homeless Friend: Jul 16, 2007

exmarx posted:

make the first crest "hillary 2016" though

# ? Mar 5, 2020 06:39

Grevling: Dec 18, 2016

I never knew before that Kerensky's dad was Lenin's teacher, they were both from Simbirsk (now Ulyanovsk). Pretty nuts imo.

# ? Mar 5, 2020 07:30

Prince Myshkin: Jun 17, 2018

exmarx posted:

make the first crest "hillary 2016" though

I didn't make it but the Hillary to Bernie converts are few and far between and they weren't talking about revolution post-2016.

# ? Mar 5, 2020 07:37

dex_sda: Oct 11, 2012

Algund Eenboom posted:

Weed lol.. 420. Lmao

# ? Mar 5, 2020 07:46

exmarx: Feb 18, 2012; The experience over the years
of nothing getting better
only worse.

https://means.tv/categories/category-771UIDbtGNU

reeling slightly @ this

# ? Mar 5, 2020 10:16

A Big Fuckin Hornet: Nov 1, 2016; by Nyc_Tattoo

Prince Myshkin posted:

lmao

# ? Mar 5, 2020 16:35

Lightning Knight: Feb 24, 2012; Pray for Answer

Prince Myshkin posted:

these personal attacks on cspam posters go TOO FAR sir

# ? Mar 5, 2020 16:57

Emmideer: Oct 20, 2011; Lovely night, no?; Grimey Drawer

The problem with all leftist organization in the US right now is that it holds the same sense of superiority held by any other organization, though in this case doing so is actively detrimental to its cause. There are no attempts made to reach out to and actively recruit the most harmed members of society. Meetings are held but nobody makes sure the homeless come. Theory is discussed but nobody writes letters to prisoners to share theory.

The importance of local politics is emphasized, but nobody offers support or guidance to new members who want to help but have no idea how.

Whether or not you believe there is a leadership problem, there is most definitely a membership problem. The problem is not and has never been a left that can�t make inroads, its a left that doesn�t even try.

# ? Mar 5, 2020 16:58

GalacticAcid: Apr 8, 2013; NEW YORK VALUES

Grevling posted:

I never knew before that Kerensky's dad was Lenin's teacher, they were both from Simbirsk (now Ulyanovsk). Pretty nuts imo.

And Putin�s grandfather was the chef at Gorki lol

# ? Mar 5, 2020 17:16

uncop: Oct 23, 2010

Jon Joe posted:

The problem with all leftist organization in the US right now is that it holds the same sense of superiority held by any other organization, though in this case doing so is actively detrimental to its cause. There are no attempts made to reach out to and actively recruit the most harmed members of society. Meetings are held but nobody makes sure the homeless come. Theory is discussed but nobody writes letters to prisoners to share theory.

The importance of local politics is emphasized, but nobody offers support or guidance to new members who want to help but have no idea how.

Whether or not you believe there is a leadership problem, there is most definitely a membership problem. The problem is not and has never been a left that can�t make inroads, its a left that doesn�t even try.

I don't think there's any singular problem that no one is seriously attempting to fight. I hear of a lot of things being tried, but they're done by local groups that are unable to find any kind of sweet spot where they'd be able to grow and diversify beyond the couple of tricks they put their pitiful resources in. They are known within some tiny niche of oppressed people but can't leverage connections between people to grow them into actual movements.

That may have something to do with unwillingness to connect with each other due to sectarian concerns, I don't really know. They are no doubt doing many things wrong regarding how to get people to participate. But it's not nearly always because of lack of principles, and often because of a lack of talent and/or resources.

The more broadly successful left doesn't associate so much with the most downtrodden in society because they aren't the ones who have a low bar to give them stuff to expand their operations. The ones who try to start from zero by associating with the most downtrodden largely fail to expand and fail to be seen as contributing meaningfully. When you're small, it's hard to be accommodating to different kinds of people, because there's no room for a complex division of labor to develop. When you've grown big through donations from left-libs, taking in different kinds of people presents challenges to internal unity, like imagine what would happen if the Bernie movement went and started visibly bringing in and empowering ex-convicts and the homeless as genuine activists mingling with all the others.

Also, there's a big difference between e.g. catering to people who want to help the homeless and catering to the actual homeless. The former are the ones who you'd need to have resources to cater to the latter, but they want to see pacification and gratitude, not empowerment and rebellion. The local church or similar is most likely way better at giving them what they want to see than any radleft group can be without submitting to toothless economism and NGO-ification.

# ? Mar 5, 2020 18:23

Emmideer: Oct 20, 2011; Lovely night, no?; Grimey Drawer

uncop posted:

I don't think there's any singular problem that no one is seriously attempting to fight. I hear of a lot of things being tried, but they're done by local groups that are unable to find any kind of sweet spot where they'd be able to grow and diversify beyond the couple of tricks they put their pitiful resources in. They are known within some tiny niche of oppressed people but can't leverage connections between people to grow them into actual movements.

That may have something to do with unwillingness to connect with each other due to sectarian concerns, I don't really know. They are no doubt doing many things wrong regarding how to get people to participate. But it's not nearly always because of lack of principles, and often because of a lack of talent and/or resources.

The more broadly successful left doesn't associate so much with the most downtrodden in society because they aren't the ones who have a low bar to give them stuff to expand their operations. The ones who try to start from zero by associating with the most downtrodden largely fail to expand and fail to be seen as contributing meaningfully. When you're small, it's hard to be accommodating to different kinds of people, because there's no room for a complex division of labor to develop. When you've grown big through donations from left-libs, taking in different kinds of people presents challenges to internal unity, like imagine what would happen if the Bernie movement went and started visibly bringing in and empowering ex-convicts and the homeless as genuine activists mingling with all the others.

Also, there's a big difference between e.g. catering to people who want to help the homeless and catering to the actual homeless. The former are the ones who you'd need to have resources to cater to the latter, but they want to see pacification and gratitude, not empowerment and rebellion. The local church or similar is most likely way better at giving them what they want to see than any radleft group can be without submitting to toothless economism and NGO-ification.

I�m not really sure how anyone expects a movement explicitly opposed to the interests of the current power structure to actually oppose it in function without a large body of membership who have more to gain than lose through their opposition, and giving these members the tools and guidance necessary to take action. Or further how anyone expects a comprehensive movement to develop without indoctrinating members according to common ideas and principles which are meant to guide, though not restrict, action.

You say there�s no lack of principles but so many have started and ended their concerns with �our society, but we get free healthcare� or substitute whatever the flavor they want is. Dramatic reconceptualization are pushed away in favor of vague notions of opposition and defiance, a strategy more closely associated with a spoiled child attempting to convince their parents to hand them a bigger allowance than any real attempt to replace existing power. Perhaps it is due to the popularity of elements of anarchist thought in most circles that people conflate governments so readily without realizing that it is the structure of the thing that matters the most, and not realizing that the question of converting from one structure to another is absurd without major replacement of most nodes of power simultaneously.

Accommodation is as easy as giving people knowledge and purpose and not making assumptions about their inability or unwillingness to assist the movement if you do not have funds. People are hungry to commit meaningful labor to tasks which assist their goals, but there is such a broad unwillingness to utilize this due to theoretical blind spots, wherein concessions are made to capital before thinking even begins.

# ? Mar 5, 2020 19:29

Victory Position: Mar 16, 2004

Raskolnikov38 posted:

some day i'll stop smoking weed long enough to get the garand i want

did the Civilian Marksmanship Program finally run through the one billion surplus Garands

# ? Mar 5, 2020 19:34

Raskolnikov38: Mar 3, 2007; We were somewhere around Manila when the drugs began to take hold

Victory Position posted:

did the Civilian Marksmanship Program finally run through the one billion surplus Garands

i dont think so but smoking weed and owning a gun is a slam dunk felony charge

# ? Mar 5, 2020 19:56

uncop: Oct 23, 2010

Jon Joe posted:

I�m not really sure how anyone expects a movement explicitly opposed to the interests of the current power structure to actually oppose it in function without a large body of membership who have more to gain than lose through their opposition, and giving these members the tools and guidance necessary to take action. Or further how anyone expects a comprehensive movement to develop without indoctrinating members according to common ideas and principles which are meant to guide, though not restrict, action.

You say there�s no lack of principles but so many have started and ended their concerns with �our society, but we get free healthcare� or substitute whatever the flavor they want is. Dramatic reconceptualization are pushed away in favor of vague notions of opposition and defiance, a strategy more closely associated with a spoiled child attempting to convince their parents to hand them a bigger allowance than any real attempt to replace existing power. Perhaps it is due to the popularity of elements of anarchist thought in most circles that people conflate governments so readily without realizing that it is the structure of the thing that matters the most, and not realizing that the question of converting from one structure to another is absurd without major replacement of most nodes of power simultaneously.

Accommodation is as easy as giving people knowledge and purpose and not making assumptions about their inability or unwillingness to assist the movement if you do not have funds. People are hungry to commit meaningful labor to tasks which assist their goals, but there is such a broad unwillingness to utilize this due to theoretical blind spots, wherein concessions are made to capital before thinking even begins.

You look to me like you're rambling incoherently. First off, size and cohesion ("indoctrination") are in contradiction and expecting to just land on both is wishful thinking that ultimately leads to disillusionment and giving up. Expansion necessarily decreases cohesion and ideological consolidation decreases expansion, and lively third world communist movements like that led by the Communist Party of Philippines study hard how to manage that contradiction.

Every person who has the potential to join this sort of movement comes with their own preconceptions and agenda and wants to do things to advance it, and definitely not submit to the demands of some ideologically cohesive organization. They don't want the responsibilities of membership, they want the membership to get things done for them, ideally without them having to expend effort to get it done. They aren't open and eager containers to pour knowledge in and mold into revolutionaries of a certain shape. And they don't respect you before you have shown some promise in that you have the organizational capacity and focus to advance their agenda. They take up responsibilities to help you as a compromise once they can see a compromise that they find worth it, and they need to be progressively reeled into the more cohesive ideology by raising their hopes through engagement and utilizing those hopes by asking for more engagement.

There's a push and pull between a movement and new prospective members that has to start from the prospect believing that the movement has something special to give them and the movement being able to integrate them as a productive member doing something they are willing to do. There are sort of natural activists that behave like you describe, that they deeply desire to contribute anything to a movement that shares their principles and can give them something to do, and they are what fledgling orgs need to start with when they have nothing but hope and promises to give, but they are also a tiny proportion of the population. Growing beyond those initial activists takes progressively more organizational skill, and like no joke skill, you probably aren't going to get any big donors of money and publicity to start you off.

Also, I definitely did not say there's no lack of principles, I said that despite everything, there are lots of principled people committed to doing what you were claiming no one is doing. They just aren't showing enough success to catch anyone's eye because successfully starting anything new from zero is basically pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps. Sudden mass support can lead to explosive growth, but before getting the attention and respect of the masses, they have nothing. And while they have nothing, it's really hard to earn that attention and respect!

# ? Mar 5, 2020 20:21

Homeless Friend: Jul 16, 2007

https://twitter.com/mugrimm/status/1235223378316980231

https://twitter.com/mugrimm/status/1235224279010205698

lol

Homeless Friend fucked around with this message at 21:07 on Mar 5, 2020

# ? Mar 5, 2020 21:04

lumpentroll: Mar 4, 2020

lmao

# ? Mar 5, 2020 21:05

Emmideer: Oct 20, 2011; Lovely night, no?; Grimey Drawer

uncop posted:

You look to me like you're rambling incoherently. First off, size and cohesion ("indoctrination") are in contradiction and expecting to just land on both is wishful thinking that ultimately leads to disillusionment and giving up. Expansion necessarily decreases cohesion and ideological consolidation decreases expansion, and lively third world communist movements like that led by the Communist Party of Philippines study hard how to manage that contradiction.

Every person who has the potential to join this sort of movement comes with their own preconceptions and agenda and wants to do things to advance it, and definitely not submit to the demands of some ideologically cohesive organization. They don't want the responsibilities of membership, they want the membership to get things done for them, ideally without them having to expend effort to get it done. They aren't open and eager containers to pour knowledge in and mold into revolutionaries of a certain shape. And they don't respect you before you have shown some promise in that you have the organizational capacity and focus to advance their agenda. They take up responsibilities to help you as a compromise once they can see a compromise that they find worth it, and they need to be progressively reeled into the more cohesive ideology by raising their hopes through engagement and utilizing those hopes by asking for more engagement.

There's a push and pull between a movement and new prospective members that has to start from the prospect believing that the movement has something special to give them and the movement being able to integrate them as a productive member doing something they are willing to do. There are sort of natural activists that behave like you describe, that they deeply desire to contribute anything to a movement that shares their principles and can give them something to do, and they are what fledgling orgs need to start with when they have nothing but hope and promises to give, but they are also a tiny proportion of the population. Growing beyond those initial activists takes progressively more organizational skill, and like no joke skill, you probably aren't going to get any big donors of money and publicity to start you off.

Also, I definitely did not say there's no lack of principles, I said that despite everything, there are lots of principled people committed to doing what you were claiming no one is doing. They just aren't showing enough success to catch anyone's eye because successfully starting anything new from zero is basically pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps. Sudden mass support can lead to explosive growth, but before getting the attention and respect of the masses, they have nothing. And while they have nothing, it's really hard to earn that attention and respect!

Maybe I am not communicating clearly. Your concerns are valid ones and definitely ones to pay attention to. However, I don�t see such issues being discussed largely, a large lack of such work in leftist movements in the US. If you have more information on the activities and thoughts of the Communist Party of Philippines, I would be interested in hearing them.

Building engagement is of course a necessary strategy with any human interaction, only that a methodology should not be confused with the goal.

I just don�t see current people interested in or in need of action being utilized by leftist organizations, likely because of a lack of focus in direction and theory, not a lack of resources.

# ? Mar 5, 2020 21:48

Emmideer: Oct 20, 2011; Lovely night, no?; Grimey Drawer

Like there may or may not be those who want to dismiss conversations like these as slap fights or meaningless but really I think of them as foundational.

# ? Mar 5, 2020 21:53