@aral @hypolite 100%

Then I guess this obviously makes Chrome the Trump of browsers.

Maybe Surf would be some libertarian with good sounding minimal gov policies that just don't work well for anyone in practice.

What's the Bernie browser? Brave could be, in theory, but in practice it does some shady stuff and might not accomplish any of the social goods it claims to be about... I guess that makes it more of a Hillary?

@self @aral @hypolite Shady stuff and failure to deliver is as Bernie as it gets.

@hypolite @aral @self I covered some of it here medium.com/@angdraug/money-for and here medium.com/@angdraug/cant-we-j

I was going to dig deeper into his PACs, but then he dropped out. For the reasons why I have a problem with them see this post on Justice Democrats that applies the same way to the rest of them: medium.com/@angdraug/no-countr

@angdraug @hypolite @aral @self I read your post and it feels to me like unjustified slander.

The Justice Democrats, including Sanders, are in large part controlled by the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), a big-tent socialist organization with many factions, from left-leaning liberals to hardcore Trotskyists and anarchists. However, the dominant faction is clearly Bhaskar Sunkara's Bread & Roses (breadandrosesdsa.org/), which controls the popular Jacobin Magazine (jacobinmag.com/). Bread & Roses explicitly embraces Kautskyist Social Democracy and advocates entryism into the Democratic Party.

The Justice Democrats are not liberals, they are Social Democrats, and they run as Democrats for strategic reasons only, because the U.S. electoral system is biased against third parties. This isn't anything shady or secretive, just go to their websites and you can see their plans.

@jwinnie @hypolite @aral @self Which part of your confirmation that Sanders, JD, DSA, et al engage in hostile and parasitic entryism into the Democratic Party was supposed to demonstrate how my description of that is "like slander"?

Did you miss my explanation of the difference between Social Democrats and Democratic Socialists, or did you deliberately use the name I called out as inaccurate and misleading?

@angdraug @hypolite @aral @self I'm not a Marxist, nor am I a member or supporter of the DSA. Your article seemed like slander to me, not because you described Social Democratic entryism into the Democratic party as parasitic, but because you said several things which simply aren't true and make you sound like a conspiracy theorist.

Bernie Sanders, the Justice Democrats, and Bhaskar Sunkara are not Trotskyists. Bhaskar Sunkara self-identifies as a Marxist Social Democrat, and Marxist Social Democrats have always been critical of Leninism and the Soviet Union, to the point of allying with Conservative Parties rather than Communist Parties (look up Orwell's list).

Follow

@jwinnie I provided references documenting Bernie's involvement with YSPL and SWP, and you don't have to go further than Wikipedia to find evidence of Trotskyism in both. Your accusation of me saying several (?) untrue things is unfounded, and, combined with the "conspiracy theorist" insult, makes your accusation of slander a projection.

@angdraug Sure, but how does this indicate that Sanders is a Trotskyist himself? Sanders has had a long political career and his involvement with Trotskyists has been very little in comparison with his involvement with the more mainstream American left.

And what if he is a Trotskyist? So what? Trotskyism has always been a super obscure minority sect with very few people, so it's not like he's going to lead a Trotskyist revolution in the U.S. The main leftist faction in the U.S. today is the Social Democrats, who are definitely not Trotskyist, and are definitely not out to undermine American democracy.

That's why I said your post seemed like slander and conspiracy theories, because you're cherry-picking these small pieces of evidence and ignoring the bigger picture when it comes to Sanders and the DSA.

@jwinnie Every part of the American left* other than the Democratic Party is an obscure minority sect. And Bernie's occasional tactical pacts with Democrats never went as far as membership. He's not a Democrat.

When you say "Social Democrats", do you mean SDUSA? AFAICT that organization is defunct. Even the more mainstream DSA only counts tens of thousands of members, with 90% having joined in the last few years.

What "main faction" are you talking about? Are you sealioning me now?

@angdraug Sorry, I don't mean to be "sea lioning" you or anything like that. It's just that you wrote an article about the Social Democratic movement in the U.S. that I feel, as a former Social Democrat, doesn't really represent the movement accurately.

By "Social Democrats" I'm referring to the specific global movement by the name of "Social Democracy": "while having socialism as a long-term goal, Social Democracy seeks to humanize capitalism and create the conditions for it to lead to greater democratic, egalitarian and solidaristic outcomes" (more: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_d)

I think it's safe to say that there are millions of young U.S. citizens who identify as Social Democrats, and are not particularly drawn to revolutionary Marxism-Leninism or anything similar but simply want better working conditions, higher taxes on the rich, single-payer healthcare, etc.

The Democratic party has shown that it can't deliver on these goals because Democrats too often put the interests of corporations above the interests of the people. So Social Democrats went out and created their own party.

@angdraug Because the U.S. electoral system is biased against third parties, the Social Democrats decided as a matter of strategy to enter into the Democratic party.

The Social Democrats are just another party. Western European countries like France and Germany have very active Social Democratic parties, and now the U.S. has one. I don't see anything wrong with that. If anything, Social Democracy will help prevent working-class people from becoming radicalized into supporting totalitarian ideologies.

@jwinnie Thank you, if it's just a misunderstanding it's worth trying to clear it up.

Names are important when talking about US politics because of how non-sensical the political terminology has become here. In US, people think that republic and democracy, despite being Latin and Greek versions of the same idea – "rule of people" – are opposites. And even more ridiculously, libertarianism has grown to mean the opposite of liberalism.

@jwinnie The only way to navigate that mess is to qualify whether you're talking about an ideology, an organization, or specific people.

My articles aren't about Social Democrats, especially not in the generic globally applicable sense of the word. They are about specific people in US politics and the importance of evaluating their personal qualities and not just the ideologies they claim to support.

@jwinnie US doesn't have a party of Social Democrats the way this word is used in EU. Closest US party by ideology is the Democratic Party. It's been working to humanize capitalism and advance egalitarian outcomes since at least Jimmy Carter, even though it has never declared socialism as the end goal, primarily because doing so in US would be a political suicide.

@jwinnie "Democratic Socialists", particularly in US, has always been an appropriation of the word "democracy" by Marxists, most notably Trots. It is an appropriation because Marxist version of socialism is fundamentally undemocratic, it can't stop being authoritarian until you completely remove state and arrive at Anarchism. That's why I call that term a misnomer.

@jwinnie Whether Bernie is a Social Democrat or a "Democratic Socialist" is indeed up for debate, and in my articles I offer many reasons to doubt his own self-identification as the former. I can't possibly prove another person's beliefs, but I have every right to question their sincerity when their actions come into conflict with their stated goals.

@jwinnie It is also debatable how many people within Democratic Party identify as Social Democrats, and especially how many of them are new to the party vs how many Democrats have always supported these ideas and have merely become more comfortable saying the "S" word out loud.

@jwinnie My observations of US politics over the past 4 years convinced me that the Democratic Party is the only organization in the world that can stop the ongoing devolution of American small-d democracy into fascism and the subsequent descent of the entire world into klepto-corporate neo-feudalism. I can't see attempts to split that party and (as I have abundantly documented) sabotage its efforts to restore the rule of law in US as anything other than self-serving collaborationism.

@jwinnie To wrap things up for tonight, here's an older article where I criticise whataboutist dismissal of Democratic Party's social agenda: medium.com/@angdraug/agent-of-

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!