indigi posted:

can someone explain the clap thing to me. thanks

Phi230 posted:

dont do it

indigi posted:

can someone explain the clap thing to me. thanks

indigi posted:

can someone explain the clap thing to me. thanks

Dolphin posted:

achillesforever6 posted:

A thing that is stressed at DSA meetings is to do the ASL clapping in order to A) be more inclusive to comrades with audio sensory issues B)Make meetings go much faster; there is a group of people in the DSA that think this is stupid and so they decide to be even more obnoxious about clapping. Cue the 2019 Convention when people decide to clap and had to be told to stop clapping and use ASL clapping. Parts of this group would use that to form their caucus: The Class Unity Caucus (CUC) which made their big opening manifesto titled "Let Them Clap" and their whole deal is that ASL clapping is alienating to the working class and that we need to act "normal" to build power with the masses. It's very stupidpol/class reductionist bullshit. I prefer ASL clapping because first of all regular clapping does feel like nails on chalkboard for me, but more importantly It makes meetings run much faster since people don't have to wait till people stop clapping.

Phi230 posted:

alternatively you could just do what everyone else does and do a 1-clap and move on

MSDOS KAPITAL posted:

electoralism in the context of a bourgeois democracy is fundamentally liberal at the base of it - you can not escape that

so that's not the problem with it unless your beef is that people were doing electoralism at all which, okay fine, but that's not what you've been saying and not been how you've framed your defense - the real problem here was that some people decided that enough success had been achieved via electoralism to extract some results, which you apparently aren't supposed to do. at which point the politicians that some of them had labored on behalf of, scorned this exact tactic which they had championed even months before, (and then, literally the following week, applied to defending the impeachment!) to explain why. and so now they will take a hit to their credibility among certain corners of the left, as they should. you will insist it doesn't matter. for my part I probably agree but I'm not sure that the risk was worth it in the defense of... what? nancy pelosi? decorum? either way only time will actually tell us this and you're just blowing smoke up your own rear end in a top hat if you think you know the answer

and yes, once again, giving the dem establishment a black eye via jeopardizing pelosi's ascension to speakership is results as myself and others have already explained to you the how and why multiple times. I'm not going to do it again. you already know what I'm going to say and you're welcome to just fill it in yourself. you probably need to read more words here than I'm willing to write anyway

finally, the ftv folks weren't "actively opposed" to activism you hare-brained moron. they just see through the tactic of meeting a call to action and results with nebulous appeals to further "organizing" (i.e. for these people, mostly filling my inbox with requests for more cash) before results can be had at some undefined later date

Phi230 posted:

alternatively you could just do what everyone else does and do a 1-clap and move on

Ferrinus posted:

nyehhhh this post is so long... i... i just... can't...

haha, just kidding! thanks for going to the effort. a lot of what you've said here has been covered before but i'll try to hit every point:

first, the actual leverage the squad has thanks to their seats is still pretty small. they can wield that leverage to extract SOME results - and literally, objectively did - but can't actually use it to extract ANY result. for instance, they can't engage in a "force the act" movement wherein they refuse to vote for pelosi as speaker until pelosi actually votes for, and passes, m4a - it just won't work. so it's wrong to pretend that people who oppose the specific parliamentarian maneuver of forcing the vote are ALSO opposed to making use of electoral leverage any way. you are confusing the stunt with a broad strategy.

second, people keep bringing up that this exact tactic had been championed months before, and i keep pointing out that it had been championed much before the democratic primary, which actually constituted a much more public and protracted fight over m4a than a floor vote could ever hope to be. it's why the squad spending literally HUNDREDS of minutes saying that yes they think an impeachment would be a good idea directly after a right-wing riot at the capitol building makes sense, but the squad spending that exact same time calling for an impeachment in the middle of the dem primary would have been stupid. so you really need to let go of this faux-confusion as to why people sometimes do a thing at one time but not at another time.

third, ignoring FTV does not entail a credibility hint with certain corners of the left because the left doesn't actually support FTV. it would in fact have been a big hit to the DSA's credibility to go along with it! so we really dodged a bullet there.

fourth, it's ridiculous for you to pretend that "decorum" is the reason that aoc and co didn't engage in this stunt. her own words have been posted maybe a page ago tops - by someone who agrees with you, no less - in which she explains that she thinks a floor vote would actually confuse rather than clarify the record. like i've mentioned i personally think it is more "useless and redundant" than "harmful", such that it represents an opportunity cost more than a real cost, but this certainly explains why the squad publicized opposition to pelosi while actually trading their votes for something besides FTV

fifth, i staunchly disagree that giving the dem establishment a black eye "is results", and i think this may be at the root of our disagreement. i said very early in this discussion that the basic error being made by good-faith FTV supporters is placing premium on publicity and radical rhetoric over actual organizing. BJG has repeatedly stated that she thinks our failure to pass m4a is a comms issue, so if only we could really and truly show the american people that the dems, especially pelosi, are against m4a then they would rise up against the democrats and help us pass it or something. this is fundamentally wrong and basically the same psychosis that made liberal democrats whoop and holler when nancy pelosi clapped in a seemingly-sarcastic way at donald trump. making clearer and clearer demonstrations that AOC and pelosi are not on the same side will not actually get us any closer to m4a, because the thing stopping us from getting m4a is not the mistaken and easily-cleared-up impression that AOC and pelosi are best buds

sixth and last, FTV's leaders were and made rhetorical distinctions between "organizing" and much looser and more toothless buzzwords like "accountability" or "awareness". filling your inbox with requests for more cash (and, maybe, more social media engagement) is actually the beginning and end of what the FTV coalition can or will ever do. meanwhile, actually being an active member of the DSA rather than a passive, dues-paying supporter involves doing a lot of planning, voting, and administrative grunt work, all of which would of course be totally superfluous to FTV's plans because FTV has no plans but to yell at a small group of politicians

Dolphin posted:

on the other hand
https://mobile.twitter.com/AOC/status/1349186664502087680

but no your weird mental gymnastics is probably the actual reason and not just that the squad is just being expedient

Ferrinus posted:

yes, sometimes one or more of those things are true. to quote a great poster, "you really need to let go of this faux-confusion as to why people sometimes do a thing at one time but not at another time."

Dolphin posted:

yes that "sometimes" being the political expediency of your lovely rep that you have bizarre hero worship for

Ferrinus posted:

i don't have a bizarre hero worship for my lovely rep (actually, she is not my rep). but yes, you are right: that "sometimes" is political expediency. as i have said, i don't think having a floor vote right now would do appreciable damage to the record as AOC seems to. however, i do think it won't help because all the stuff we want on the record is already on the record in much more memorable and public ways. so, insofar as there is a political cost to getting a floor vote, paying that cost is a bad idea

Ferrinus posted:

nyehhhh

Ferrinus posted:

ironically i think aoc is making the same mistake as FTV people in the other direction. she's putting a high value on Putting Things On The Record, Revealing Where People Stand, etc, such that various dem and gop reps getting to use a floor vote to safely pretend they're pro-m4a seems to her to be a real threat

in reality it doesn't really matter that joe democrat can safely vote yes in a floor vote because he knows manchin or whoever will torpedo it anyway, because you can organize around that "yes" as easily as you could organize around a more truthful "no". but this is because the actual vote doesn't really matter to the task of building worker power

achillesforever6 posted:

I don't know why ASL clap is so alienating or weird to people, its loving shaking your hands for one second and is meant for accessibility.

Like another factor in that convention floor was trying to show big your group was on motions (which I'm glad I realized it was better worth my time to give my voting card to my delegate chair and stand outside passing infrastructure reports and talking to people because by that time people in East Bay/Chicago/Philly were hissing like snakes on stuff they disliked)

Dolphin posted:

yeah we didn't elect a bartender so she'd be politically expedient and that "harm" you're mentioning to "the record" is nebulous because it's bullshit. the simplest answer is she likes her cushy health insurance and high paying job and fame and doesn't want to risk that by making too many waves over giving people healthcare during a pandemic

Phi230 posted:

hey man clap however you want just don't be surprised when people see your org as unserious, not that people already don't see dsa as unserious for a wide variety of reasons

MSDOS KAPITAL posted:

I stopped here, and you should have, too

Dolphin posted:

ah yes what really matters isn't congresspeople pushing and pushing and pushing like a squeaky hinge, what really matters is sitting around in a room with a bunch of hippies and having frank discussions

Ferrinus posted:

no, congresspeople aren't what really matter. please read lenin.

Ferrinus posted:

no, congresspeople aren't what really matter. please read lenin.

achillesforever6 posted:

Why is an org seen as unserious for that? I want to know why the ASL clap is seen as unserious?