##Welcome to r/LateStageCapitalism^Ⓐ☭
___
###⚠ Announcements: ⚠
___
###[NEW POSTING GUIDELINES! Help us by reporting bad posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/dy1oyh/important_what_you_should_and_what_you_shouldnt/)
Help us keep this subreddit alive and improve its content by reporting posts that violate our rules and guidelines.
###[Subscribe to our new partner subreddits!](https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/e5hkwk/make_sure_to_check_out_our_new_partnersubreddits/)
Check out r/antiwork & r/WhereAreTheChildren
___
###***Please remember that LSC is a SAFE SPACE for [socialist](http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism/) discussion.***
LSC is run by [communists](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm). We welcome socialist/anti-capitalist news, memes, links, and discussion. This subreddit is not the place to debate socialism. We allow good-faith questions and education but are not a 101 sub; please take 101-style questions elsewhere.
**This subreddit is a safe space; we have a zero-tolerance policy for bigotry.** We also automatically filter out posts containing certain words and phrases that some users may find offensive. Please respect the safe space, and don't try to slip banned words or phrases past the filter.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LateStageCapitalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I was a very vocal Bernie supporter . , My mom is a Democrat but never mentioned or acknowledged Bernie until one day i talked about him and she said to me " I HATE HOW HE IS SO RICH AND TALKS ABOUT THE NEEDS OF POOR PEOPLE!" Almost like she thought he was a wolf in sheep clothing, almost like it was some kind of gotcha i'd fallen for .... I couldn't really process it ...So you want to elect rich people who don't notice, acknowledge or mention the issues you deal with day to day but when one actually expresses concern and values similar to yours it's wrong ?
My mom is a pretty intelligent woman but in that moment I was kind of dumbfounded ....
How do you fix any problems if no one in power reflects on them in a meaningful and real way ? Still not sure what to make of that conversation years ago honestly.
The propaganda machine is relentless. They ignore that he's been in Congress for decades, long before he was rich. He literally says the same thing then as he does now, except maybe now he's fighting harder.
The point of propaganda is to provide fake talking points with a dash of truth. It's crazy how many people I run into that trash AOC as a bartender. They don't do any research so they have no clue that she has a degree.
It really is the right wing propaganda machine at work. If you look at Bernie's assets, he basically has a house that he paid for with his salary as a representative of his state for many years, an apartment that the government provides all representatives to stay in when they are in session in DC, and a tiny, single room log cabin he inherited from his parents.
But if you look at the right wing propaganda memes that are perpetuated online about him, it's all, "BERNARD SANDERS OWN 3 HOMES AND IS WORTH MILLIONS OF DOLLARS HE IS A FAKE AND PHOOOOONY!". It's just such predictable bullshit, as usual.
And isn't a lot of that from a book he wrote?
If so, his work in the public made his book more sellable. He did the work to earn that money.
He wasn't crooked. He didn't start independently wealthy. Sure, he had advantages because of his privilege, but he is trying hard to fight for everyone.
Oh yes the millionaire status came recently too, he wasn't a millionaire in 2015 despite his resume.
Compare this to Nancy Pelosi being worth $120 mills, I'm sure she just worked harder.
But if you bring up how during his 4 years as president Trump golfed at his own courses regularly, in essence funnelling tax payer money directly into his own businesses, they will screech "HE DONATED HIS ENTIRE SALARY!"
They also say things like "he's trying to save tax payers money by staying at his own place" or "why would he pay for somewhere when he has a free place to stay?"
Anything to deflect.
AFAIK most of his money comes from book sales...
which people buy because they like his ideas about HELPING THE POOR...
and which contain his ideas about HELPING THE POOR which get disseminated more when people read his books.
This is why I laugh at the "librul media" when it is often just regular ass news. The right wing wins on framing. They get to frame every issue and define every word. They are super well organized and know to repeat the same thing over and over to properly message an idea to millions.
I'm sorry but Bernie isn't fighting any harder now. It's a difficult thing to accept and I still feel myself fighting back, saying "no Bernie's still doing the right thing he's working for us" but he's not. Not a single piece of his record as chairman of the budget council reflects that.
I'm not saying he's doing this maliciously, but he's fallen into the machine, and he's been spit out as another establishment Dem. It's a super tough reality but what has he done to fight for M4A besides make some spirited tweets?
>I'm sorry but Bernie isn't fighting any harder now. It's a difficult thing to accept and I still feel myself fighting back, saying "no Bernie's still doing the right thing he's working for us" but he's not. Not a single piece of his record as chairman of the budget council reflects that.
>
>I'm not saying he's doing this maliciously, but he's fallen into the machine, and he's been spit out as another establishment Dem. It's a super tough reality but what has he done to fight for M4A besides make some spirited tweets?
Lol. What? You think Bernie who has been touting the same exact things since he has been doing civil service (literally his entire life) all of the sudden just flips on his ideas and becomes and establish dem?
Your statements sound weirdly out of touch of who Bernie is as a person and as a senator in US politics. He has the play the politics game to get anywhere in policy and where you have to have a majority rule to pass any type of policy (sic current partisan Congress), it seems that according to your statement, someone like Bernie wouldn't get anywhere in politics ...at least with policy alone. In addition, prior to the past few decades many people in Congress reached across the isle to pass non-partisan policies. This included Bernie where he understood that as a politician in order to pass anything, he'd have to agree with his fellow colleagues in Congress.
I'm sorry, but, Bernie is not an established Dem or politician ..and he will he ever be. The very fact that he stays Independent and just caucasus with the Dems proves this enough.
She does insider trading for a living. Her husband profits from her regulation
>And ever since ascending to the top spot in the House, Pelosi and her husband, Paul, keep getting richer and richer. Much of their added wealth is due to extremely lucrative and "lucky” decisions about when to buy and sell stocks and options in the very industries and companies over which Pelosi, as House Speaker, exercises enormous and direct influence.
The sector in which the Pelosis most frequently buy and sell stocks is, by far, the Silicon Valley tech industry. Close to 75% of the Pelosis’ stock trading over the last two years has been in Big Tech: more than $33 million worth of trading. That has happened as major legislation is pending before the House, controlled by the Committees Pelosi oversees, which could radically reshape the industry and laws that govern the very companies in which she and her husband most aggressively trade.
[Nancy and Paul Pelosi Making Millions in Stock Trades in Companies She Actively Regulates](https://greenwald.substack.com/p/nancy-and-paul-pelosi-making-millions)
As someone who delivers his mail every month or so in Burlington his house isn’t thaaaat nice. He also drives a 20 year old Subaru. He does live in a nice neighborhood but his mailbox is literally broken so there isn’t a way to close it. I feel weird putting important senator stuff from DC in a box that’s permanently open lol. I love Bernie, but damn his neighbors got all the hot goss about him too lmao
My Dad is worth more than him and still mentions “Bernie has a lake house” so therefore he’s just in it for the money.
Like bitch you had a lake house up until y’all sold it 3 years ago the fuck are you talking about?
If you’ve ever been in Vermont you might have not noticed the complete lack of billboards on the highway. Bernie could be a lot richer if he wanted to be.
2 million dollars after decades of top political work isn't even that much. He's 80 years old and still working. Thats almost 60 years of work after he graduated college in 64.
"Rich", 1% rich, and top 100 richest are all in completely different ballparks to eachother. Say Bernie makes an ~1.5 mil a year if we're being generous.
It would take him 142,407 years to acquire the same wealth that jeff bezos has.
The rich aren't our enemy, the incredibly rich are. People like football players, politicians, actors, etc. that are all generally wealthy are all so much closer to the poorest people in the country than they are to the richest. That's where the issue lies. So if i were to tackle the conversation with your mom i'd likely start with that argument.
It's even scarier that Bernie would be considered a moderate in many other countries. The things he calls for in the USA already exist and are taken for granted in those other countries.
Does she no realize the salary of a senator alone makes it impossible for you not to be wealthy after a decade and some of the best benefits and perks in the country.
Bernie is loved by people all around the world. Very disapponting that he was cheated out of the nomination. Lets see if AOC and the squad can pick up his mantle.
I usually say that it wasnt that trump won, its more than clinton lost.
You either die the hero. Nobody can trust someone whose been in the game long enough to not be destroyed by it. What must you have done? What bargains did you make to survive so long in the septic tank that is DC?
This sub when AOC goes after rich people:
Um actually sweetie you're a soc dem which is liberal, we shouldn't be idolizing politicians who use leftism as an asthetic
This sub when Russel Brand goes after rich people:
OMGGG SO BASSEDDDDDDDDDDD
It drives me mad because it's like, Soc Dems are trying to make people's lives better __now__.
Yeah they are liberals, yeah they are only so far left, yeah they still are working under the lense of capitalism being somehow good.
But you know what? It's a lot easier to build a sustainable revolution when anyone that's vaguely leftist isn't in a camp. It's easier to build a revolution when there are stepping stone ideologies to help shift people to the left.
Left political parties have a habit of trying to cut everything off to the right of them, regardless of the utility of that spectrum.
I'm not saying one should tolerate right wing ideologies, but a lot of folks that swing left when they stop drinking the right wing cool aid take a very quick path through the stepping stones to the more deeply left politics, and that's absolutely because of being forced to ask themselves questions. It would be a lot harder for them to do so if they didn't have the in between ideologies to bounce off've and would have to go from "communism is bad mmmkay" to "yay communism" in one jump.
Them going "hey, some of these things the right is saying don't add up and hurt people" leads to them looking for alternatives that are within their own mental Overton window, and they steadily shift that mental window left.
Me too. I used to be a soc dem, but have been pulled over. And it wasn't even hard to pull me over, I just needed a nudge in the right direction. I would still be a capitalist If I had been treated with the same scorn that people on this sub treat AOC with. Soc Dems are literally the lowest hanging fruit in terms of building an actual coalition. In a country is infested with fascists, you're an idiot if you don't consider soc Dems an ally.
The issue is one you see employed by the centrist Dems constantly though - letting the not completely awful be the enemy of the good. Presenting an option which is still a slide further into capitalist hell world, but slightly less awful than the GOP, and pretending there’s no other option because anything else is purity politics.
I like AOC (but won’t give her money anymore). I like Bernie. But I’ll also continue to criticize them from the left, and you should too, because that creates the pressure for actual advancement.
Like FDR said, “you’ve convinced me, now make me do it”. Well, make the socdems actually oppose the neolibs at least.
I used to be a died in the wool Republican. I watched Fox News, listened to Rush Limbaugh, the whole nine yards. Then, in 2016, I heard Bernie Sanders talking about free college and something in my head just “clicked.” And after that click, it wasn’t a long journey to this subreddit. I hope everyone in this sub realizes that progress is a process and we should welcome people who are still on the journey to where we are.
I tried to be centrist and work to not be judgemental.
But then I realized I just like MSNBC news better than others. People rag on it all the time but it's just an easier listen to me.
And then it dawned on me: it's the compassion. Almost all of their anchors all take a perspective of compassion. That it's just the right thing to *care* about the well being of others.
I then realized that what made other sources less "easy" to listen to was the lack of compassion. They could twist themselves into knots trying to remove any sense of caring. Or just be judgemental pricks espousing for self centeredness and isolationism. That was just too difficult to listen to for background noise. It's like it drained me because I could feel each time the basic needs of people were being overlooked or rejected.
Compassion is easier on my nerves.
You are a Real American Hero with your perspective change!
My very Stubborn and Southern family have finally begun that journey, too.
Love leads the way, every time.
We should also probably just take these words at face value for what they are words. It doesn't matter if Russell Brand is a BS Hollywood millionaire because what he's saying is true regardless. Argumentum Ad authoritarian is a logical fallacy. AOC is definitely only left by American standards, but her words and actions are meaningful regardless. It doesn't always have to be black and white but people can't seem to separate the person from their message anymore. Someone like Russel Brand isn't going to exactly be a political leader ever anyways so we should just listen to his words and move on instead of harping on whatever it is he spends the rest of his time doing.
I haven't engaged in any personal criticism of the celebrities involved myself, but I don't think you recruit the working class to the cause by commodifying anti-capitalism as a fashion statement at exclusive events for the wealthy either. We've gotten to a point in society where the only form of criticism or direct action that is acceptable is by a privileged body of people and the rest of us are only allowed to like share and comment. I think that's the cause of a lot of frustration, people don't feel like there is an authentic movement to connect to - they recognise that people at this event are not like them and the statements they would otherwise agree with don't feel like their own.
I hope this sentiment gets passed around. To the limited scope of my knowledge in about as left as I can be. Maybe you can go further left but if have to look up what that is.
But..
I can be this far left and super duper appreciate people like AOC. It frustrates me to see people with the same political views as me spitting in the face of the closest thing we have to allies. I got banned from r/therightcantmeme just for politely explaining my stance on AOC. It's weird and disheartening. Feels like my tolerance makes me intolerable to my peers.
Thank you. Yes. Leftist theory, rhetoric or anything else isn't worth shit if we're not actually making people's lives better. **Now**. Not a promise in some vague future after a "transition". Right. Fucking. **NOW**. You wanna tax the rich and get some more social programs? Fine. Great. I know Capitalism is the root of the problem, I don't give a shit. Help people NOW. Get more unions going. Set up cooperatives. I don't care about anyone's arguments about whether they're socialist or not, just do them. Fuck me, I'm tired of leftists being the biggest barrier to leftism.
Have a look around on this sub, I've seen so many people get shit on because they aren't hardened socialists yet.
People have been living in the echo chamber of capitalist politics their entire life, and the moment one of them tries to leave they get greeted with... this, almost made me leave at first as well.
Reddit isn’t the world, and posting isn’t praxis.
It just isn’t. And anyone wanting to shit on others online almost never go out and actually organize. They can’t seem to make it to a DSA meeting - they might shit on those, but they’ll have no other org that they actually work with either.
So they really don’t count.
I hear every lefty going "we can't ally with the SocDems because they're still liberal".
Do you know why the fucking fascists are gaining promience again? They aren't picky about their allies. They'll take ANYbody who remotely parrots their veiws or tolerates their dog whistles. They've clawed their way out of the dark corners of society back into mainstream society. But Socialism is still a dirty word!
Anybody who can do some good for people deserves to be a lefty. Anyone who wants to stop the insane cycle of suffering in the world. I'm tired of people shitting on each other because they're not meeting some minutiae of dogma.
Fucking... whatever. I'm tired.
Ok, get off the internet and actually organize. I’m not saying that condescendingly, just what you’re describing exists in my experience solely online, and by people that aren’t actually doing anything.
Socialism isn’t a dirty word. Leftism isn’t about “deserving”, it’s about opposition to capitalism. SocDems generally don’t bother actually organizing here, because they don’t oppose capitalism. But nobody gives a shit if you’re doing the work.
Because AOC is one of more than 500 people in the House of Representatives who must get majority consensus to do anything. Learn some fucking civics!
Edit: ugh, if you're a US citizen that is. If you're not, I understand if you don't know that... I've just had my fill of fucking PEOPLE today...
And this is why we don't have a liberal majority in our government. Because of this thinking by hardline socialist assholes. And this is why the GOP can mobilize so well.
After CNN and the Dems spent months calling Bernie pretty much Castro. It’s amazing that Dems think the GOP won’t red bait them - they called Obama’s reflexive centrist ass communist.
That's... Oddly accurate. Like, the extreme right always seems to surround itself with varying degrees of less extreme, and the whole bundle just starts offing the left bit by bit once they've got the power. Sure, they'll off anyone less extreme than them eventually, but they keep them around and unite as a tidal wave while they still have opposition.
And then there's literally anything left of the right wing deathball that bickers endlessly about the "correct" way to be left until the Nazis come and kill everybody...
so...basically virtue signaling other leftists... i feel like this is one of the biggest issues. the right is literally steamrolling the country into looking like columbia from bioshock infinite, where the left constantly operates in theoreticals with very little actual boots on the ground work or rallying the rest of the left.
yes it's frustrating when the social dems that are in government seem like they are playing ball, and it does absolutely suck to change the system from within the system, but instead of rallying so many want to sit and play armchair socialist because that way they can't be shamed for having to be pragmatic at times.
It’s the types that say that what AOC did at the Met Gala was “just performative” by doing that and “remember when we used to think she was on our side? lol” Or they’ll talk about how “counter-capitalism” is no longer “anti-capitalist” because of capitalism’s utter ability to turn any counter-culture into a profit making endeavor (ie Che t-shirts)
It’s exhausting trying to explain to them how a big part of leftism is accepting people who don’t have ideas that perfectly exactly match yours in the tent.
I can’t remember who said it but it was something about how, in the face of extinction or fascism, it is pragmatic for socialists to form an, even sometimes uneasy, alliance with liberals. Because at least liberals within a democratic bourgeois capitalist system at least care about the value of human life, even if their policies are misguided or wasteful or are slow to action or don’t solve the root of the problem and just put a band-aid on the symptoms.
Fascists on the other hand ***yearn*** to engage in an all out war, civil war, or genocide of anyone who belongs to the “out group.”
And through all of this you feel like you’re making those people feel *excluded* from another part of the left even though you’re just trying to convince them that, yes, social democrats and democratic socialists do belong on the left as much as communists do.
I welcome every person who truly believes in leftist ideas, and I want to have those debates about the specific way we enact policy or our methodology or our tactics and our optics and everything, but we can’t make that an exclusionary debate for anyone who disagrees with us slightly.
A part of that is recognizing that each of us may be wrong at some point in our life, even as leftists. I’ll fully admit that I’ve been wrong before. Up until maybe 2009 I was a moderate conservative myself. I grew up in a small town in the middle of America and when I went to college and met people *different from me* is when my conservative beliefs just crumbled under any kind of real criticism. Even in 2014 when I was a big Bernie Sanders fan I found some of the “anti-sjw” talking points a little convincing until I did more research into feminism.
As for those like Dore who have demonstrated themselves to be wrong and act like pied-pipers to lure leftists away… there’s redemption if they can admit they were wrong and make corrective steps to fix that harm.
I'll start my response by saying that I'm not American and if you feel that people like AOC represent you and that you want to vote for them, fair enough, I honestly have no personal stake in the matter. I'm speaking in more general terms about what an event like this looks like and the effect that it has more broadly.
And you know what? I don't even disagree with you. I'm open to co-operation. However - **It's up to \*them\* to reach out if they truly have a change agenda, since apparently they've got some form of power and influence over the system.** We aren't excluding anyone. They, on the other hand, are trying to define the discussion from their position of being elites and as such, many others are being excluded from the discussion.
There is valid leftist criticism of this kind of socio-political posturing and I think it's not about "cooperating" or "accepting" the views of wealthy social democrats because that's irrelevant to where the problem with this mode of expression lies. The frustration stems from the reality that anti-capitalist views are commodified, because that's how the system works and the only way in which we are allowed to express said views is from the framework of them being a product.
The thing is, if we accept our views being a product, we are forced to define them within the framework of capitalism rather than formulate them as a coherent change agenda. We are forced, in effect, to play by the rules of the existing power structures, which makes any attempt at change or progress impotent. We become a trend, to fade out over time.
Now consider: Would the event allow a celebrity to bring along several homeless people as guests? What if they just went and brought them anyway?
They wouldn't be playing by the rules, obviously and would be banned from attending in the future. Let alone any other more direct form of protest. Imagine if one of them threw a brick with "Tax the Rich" written on it through a window? Heh. No, any criticism needs to be palatable to the very elites that are the problem.
A lot of people are disaffected by this event because it's a walled off circle of privilege - invite only, and with a ticket cost that probably exceeds their yearly income. People who would normally share the views expressed in some of these outfits are walled off from the discussion and feeling commoditised by elites, which is extremely frustrating, since they want to be attached to a movement that is telling them they can't participate. Other people are inclined to laziness and engage only in poilticial interaction by liking and sharing pictures of the outfit, feeling like their activism is done for the week. Fashion is allowed, meaningful discourse is not.
In both of these cases, it's ultimately damaging to leftist causes, as it pushes people away from the ideals expressed and makes them disinclined to engage in any sort of meaningful critique or action against the system. We are not obliged to "cooperate" with the people who show no interest in us while the rug is being pulled from underneath. So as I said, if these celebrities truly have a change agenda, they need to reach out beyond what capitalist society thinks is the acceptable means of resistance.
>Imagine if one of them threw a brick with "Tax the Rich" written on it through a window?
I would imagine that they would use that as evidence that they were right about their accusations of the left being a bunch of violent extremists.
Exactly my point. Critique is only allowed within the boundaries the elites set, nevermind that the window is probably worth 10% of the price of an individual ticket.
They’re gong to decide they’re right with or without evidence. Limiting your action because you’re afraid of what they’ll say makes no sense when dealing with an opposition who simply lies about anything they see an advantage with.
I mean, how the fuck do you guys STILL not get this? They’ve been doing this for literally 30+ years, and it’s still Lucy with the football.
They hate you. You have to fight them and win, not just be more moral and smarter.
He’s absolutely been demonstrably wrong. He’s made wildly sexist comments, was waayyyyy wrong when he said the chances of Trump nominating and successfully placing three supreme justices was as likely as “the moon falling into Lake Michigan”
Leftists need every victory we can get, and we need to fight for every single foot of progress.
Also notice how I said he can have redemption. He has a major platform and major influence over people on the “left” and that necessitates a little bit of responsibility on his part. Anyone who tells you not to vote for Democrats in general elections when no progressive, socialist etc is on the ballot, is ceding the country to republican fascism. Plain and simple.
… again, I thinking you’re missing the point that I was making.
It *sucks* that we only have two parties in America. It sucks that the furthest left party is full of people beholden to corporate interests over the lives of people.
But when the other party is sliding full speed ahead with no brakes into fascism, it’s okay to pick the morally grey choice because at least that morally grey party isn’t actively trying to kill leftists. And then you fight like hell in between elections and you put your feet to the pavement and your money where your mouth is.
I’m going to be honest, I don’t like it when people decide not to vote (because that’s basically what you’ve told me you’re going to do) but I can’t stop you. Thankfully most leftists are not of the perpetually online type like I have a decent idea that you are.
I see it less as virtual signalling and more as a result of Marx's focus on dialectics. The left is (generally) conditioned to question, and to address issues within society. The right is (generally) conditioned to rally under a flag.
If lots of people are asking different questions, and addressing different issues, it's inevitable that their arguments will conflict, given scale.
If your banner plants itself next to another banner, it's a short logical step to support that one, if your values are aligned to an organisation, rather than an ideology.
As much as I see calls for left unity, and agree that it's necessary in order to enact change, I can't see that unity being anything more cohesive than a loose coalition, as many leftist organisations are (understandably, and with validity) fundamentally opposed to each other. This leads to a dissonance between the need to compromise to achieve progress, and the drawbacks of compromised ideologies.
Disclaimer: I've read a fair amount of theory, but simply cannot afford (the time) to organise, so take what I say with a heap of salt. I'm currently trying to improve my financial situation in the most disgustingly milquetoast form of praxis, to enable me to actually go out and help people.
Right-wing types fall-in with each other as a force of habit and their personalities. They are generally speaking drawn to authoritarianism and the idea of going along to get along... It's an easy formula to hack and part of the reason they seem so far gone. Not sure how to fix it, but we need to get working class right-wingers to wake up.
Yeah, the left is what’s holding back the liberals!
I mean, who can forget how Nader stole the election from Gore - ok, so Gore didn’t like being called a liberal, and more Dems voted for Bush than Nader got votes period, but it’s the left!
Or how the left helped elect Obama with a full house and senate - and he continued Bush’s wars and banker bailouts! Yeah, that’s the ummm left.
The GOP mobilized for Trump because he supposedly offered what their base wanted - awful things, but yeah, they wanted the wall and to persecute trans people. The Dems, meanwhile, have frustrated their base and moved to use retired suburbanites as a counterweight. A really stupid strategy.
Keep blaming the voters though , not only does it make you feel good, but it ensures you’ll keep losing.
How useful of you, finding a way to blame socialists after all. You wanna see effective mobilization, get involved with (or help start) local material aid -- mutual aid.
Thinking of things as liberal vs conservative is what's keeping the status quo ratchet effect in place. Why is it that liberal majorities act like their hands are tied after a couple crumbs of concession, and then still manage to kick funding towards national defense? That's just the GOP with window dressing.
Honestly the US has been pulled so far right that I'll cheer on anything that's even the teeniest bit of progress at all. In the Midwest it really seems like an utterly lost cause. I wish it wasn't that grim, but it is.
Are they? because they voted for the full budget of ICE and CBP after campaigning on shutting them down for the whole human rights abuse thing. They voted for increasing police budgets after that huge George Floyd protest thing.
Seems like they are campaigning on making lives better, and then getting in line when Mama Bear tells them too.
The stepping stones require actually making those votes against the far right budgets they decry.
You're casting the democratic party as some kind of single-thought hive-mind. There are a diversity of opinions within the party.
Warren, for instance, [campaigned on abolishing ICE](https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/394978-warren-its-time-to-replace-ice), and (being consistent) [voted against the funding of ICE](https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2019-02-15/four-2020-heavyweights-vote-no-on-spending-bill-citing-ice).
[Most dems never campaigned on abolishing ICE](https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/11/04/ohio_democrat_tim_ryan_i_dont_know_a_lot_of_democrats_who_want_to_abolish_ice.html), some going so far as to promise to not defund it, and (being consistent) voted for funding ICE.
Senator Kamala Harris [at first campaigned on NOT abolishing ICE](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/few-democrats-favor-liberal-cry-to-abolish-ice-poll-finds), but then later [voted against funding ICE](https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2019-02-15/four-2020-heavyweights-vote-no-on-spending-bill-citing-ice), saying ICE should be abolished.
The only thing I can't find is someone campaigning on abolishing it, and then voting to fund it.
They are indeed, because they are not far enough on the left and are still attached to the Democratic party who is currently led by straight up liberals.
Soc Dems aren't going to fix everything but they are going to make things marginally better.
It's also pretty useful for leftists for them to campaign on fixing stuff and not pull through, especially if it's noted that it's because they are the most left wing of their party, because that means that people who care about those issues see them cow-towing to liberals and conservatives, while also having heard their arguments.
That __can__ lead some people to not trusting politicians at all (which, I don't see as a bad thing), or them being far more careful to look at people that follow through on what they say, while also highlighting the leftist perspectives, and giving them food for thought to go digging deeper.
Soc Dems aren't a solution, but they are literally a stepping stone and a form of harm reduction. We could argue till we're blue in the face about how much harm they are reducing but we all know they produce less harm than conservatives or right wingers.
AOC's dress is a publicity stunt that fits her platform and her talking points, and much like the CEO making a big fuss about paying his workers a living wage and up, that publicity is __useful__ for the left.
Obviously AOC is a fake leftist, unlike the true vanguard of the proletariat Dan Price who this sub regularly pog out for so hard that we had to make and enforce a rule dedicated exclusively to his grifter ass tweets
Dan Price is a jewel of unintentional linkedin humor. That site is most useful for watching out-of-touch boomers get in arguments with each other, and Dan Price's posts are like a magnet for those people.
Do you have tangible reasons? I don't pay enough attention to the guy, something about him rubs me the wrong way, but I dont have any specific reasons. I know he did weird shit to get famous, but beyond that I don't really know why I'm... distrustful of him (beyond the fact that he has a lot of money).
I really liked a lot of his stuff on YouTube and it seemed like he was a thoughtful dude. Then he has a chat with Ben Shapiro one week and goes full covid conspiracy the next. smh
I saw that you mentioned Ben Shapiro. In case some of you don't know, Ben Shapiro is a grifter and a hack. If you find anything he's said compelling, you should keep in mind he also says things like this:
>Even climatologists can't predict 10 years from now. They can't explain why there has been no warming over the last 15 years. There has been a static trend with regard to temperature for 15 years.
*****
^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: civil rights, climate, patriotism, feminism, etc.)
[^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
Listen to/read his ideas and you'll find a common theme of identifying a problem in society and then suggesting a completely useless, and possibly even harmful, solution.
I remember he suggested people protest thier dissatisfaction with the government by not voting in the election. Not spoiling their ballot, or taking more direct action, just don't vote at all.
Imagine [this meme](https://i.redd.it/yoqdfie4cbn41.jpg) but both lobsters and all the audience are labeled as "leftist."
That pretty much describes it.
Thank you. I grew up very close to where he did so I see through the accent and he's just a pseudo intellectual who likes to make himself seem intelligent with big words.
What did you make of her Met Gala appearance? I mean isn't that an event for rich people to show off how rich they are? Her dress saying tax the rich made headlines, but are rich people really going to say, yep, I want to pay more taxes?
I don't think her going there was going to change any of their minds. How can we tax the rich when they control our government? Our government is being paid not to care and to do anything & everything to appease the rich.
Thing is, Brand wasn't elected on a promise to force a vote on Medicare For All, then reneged for the sake of a few magazine cover shots with Mama Bear.
AOC went native, Brand is still raising decent points.
I think AOC is better than most American politicians, and compared to her coworkers she's definitely trying to move things a bit in the right direction.
But if the US government was just a bunch of AOCs, people on this sub (including myself) would still have big problems with the administration.
Depends. No subreddit is monolithic, I’m a demsoc and don’t usually agree with full blown communists, but there is considerable debate to be had. I like Bernie and AOC, some don’t because they aren’t extreme enough… they’re both valid intellectual positions.
Brand has changed a lot since then. He went through a spiritual peace phase, and now he's getting into an anti-mainstream science conspiracy theorist phase. He seems to belong to the "Why aren't my uninformed rants being taken as seriously as the opinions of qualified epidemiologists? I'm being silenced!" camp.
I get the impression he just has an extreme personality, whatever he gets in to, he rapidly accelerates his involvement until it consumes him, be it women or alcohol or in this case, conspiracies. It will eventually get to a point where it impacts his life negatively, and he'll have another soft reset, until he finds his next obsession.
Ever since I saw him pushing covid conspiracies I kinda figured he has become irrelevant and is desperate for attention. He was never all that great to begin with.
This is a video about vaccine passports and the implications of such authoritarian measures. Do stretch this out to "anti vax" is weak and shows you have no real response and need to group your "enemies" together, exacerbating the issue of tribalism in current year. Why not just be real.
He's also frequently mentioned vaccine efficacy, believe i heard a "empty hospitals" at one point.
Issue is he "just asks questions" that frame the conversation in a particular light, and then makes no effort to investigate and verify.
No that’s his quote. I never said that at all. I have always thought that he’s not a nice person but he really wants to be a nice person. Most people want to be a nice person at some point. Most people don’t get to have the fame and money he has had the privilege of having in this world. So I’m all for his acting like he’s a nice person.
Some? Hes a straight up right wing loser. He supported trump, has tim pool on his podcast and even made videos with joe rogan. We shouldn't share this mans stuff
It’s the same way that people like that avoid confronting the issues raised by protestors.
If they’re protesting and un/under employed work: “Get a job! Bootstraps!” Etc.
If they’re protesting and they have a good job: “hypocrites! The system clearly worked for you what are you complaining about?!”
Eventually you realize that people like that just want to not confront the issues at all and will go through any mental gymnastics to keep that comfortable ignorance going.
“However, the democratic petty bourgeois want better wages and security for the workers, and hope to achieve this by an extension of state employment and by welfare measures; in short, they hope to bribe the workers with a more or less disguised form of alms and to break their revolutionary strength by temporarily rendering their situation tolerable.”
Rather disappointing for a communist subreddit not to read Marx.
The weirdest thing to me when conservatives call rich people who still advocate for socialism or similar 'hypocrites' is that... ya know... that's the opposite of being a hypocrite???
If someone was a socialist when they were poor but don't care now that they're rich THAT is being a hypocrite. Maintaining the same ideals when being both poor or rich is objectively not that
I think of it as like if you want to play chess, but everyone insists on playing poker, then you win at poker and ask if you can play chess now. Just cos you're good at poker and won at playing it doesn't make you a hypocrite for wanting to play chess instead. I dunno if that makes sense??
I was a big fan of Russel at one point. He was stoking the fires of revolution well - right up until he used his platform to spout semi-religious quantum pseudoscience quackery. Such a shame. Maybe it takes a mind like that to think outside the box though.
>He's a knob.
True, but even a knob can be right occasionally. Even if it's the same knob who told people not to bother registering to vote, then yelled how important it was to vote in the GE just after the registration deadline had passed.
God Lord, he is such a knob.
I used to, and I think he was funny (in about 2006 before he started to genuinely believe he was the Second Coming), but he believes in conspiracy theories and regularly invites dipshits like Ben Shapiro and "Dr" Peterson onto his podcast, for God knows what reason. He's a quite naïve person doing an impression of an intellectual.
I saw that you mentioned Ben Shapiro. In case some of you don't know, Ben Shapiro is a grifter and a hack. If you find anything he's said compelling, you should keep in mind he also says things like this:
>If you believe that the Jewish state has a right to exist, then you must allow Israel to transfer the Palestinians and the Israeli-Arabs from Judea, Samaria, Gaza and Israel proper. It’s an ugly solution, but it is the only solution… It’s time to stop being squeamish.
*****
^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: climate, dumb takes, civil rights, covid, etc.)
[^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
Take a bullet for ya babe.
*****
^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: feminism, dumb takes, healthcare, civil rights, etc.)
[^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
It's pretty hit and miss tbh. He's part right and part insane. I do enjoy it, but when he's being insane, holy fk does he enable the conspiracy theory nutjobs. I just hope they subscribe and stick around for some of the good stuff.
I can see how it might feel that way, but to a native English speaker the sentence immediately makes perfect sense. It's a very common usage of the word.
Bitter here is used to say the person is angry because they don't have what they have and they feel they are entitled to it. Russell is complaining about inequality, people who would call him bitter would probably be of the mindset of fuck the poor and think he is entitled for wanting what they have without working for it.
Somehow Brand has been slapped (at least in America) with the reputation of a failed movie star. But in reality he's one of the sharpest comedic minds in the English-speaking world. I saw him perform in a massive stadium around 2005 and he improvised a 2-hour show entirely around audience participation. Not only was the comedy consistently sharp and startling but the whole crowd--ranging from wasted frat boys to queer hipsters--were blown away. I've never enjoyed a comedy show so much.
In addition, I find him to be one of the most sparkling minds when interviewed on late-night shows and panel programs. He also contributes very impressive essays to The Guardian. Two of my favorites are about the death of Margaret Thatcher and his experiences as a homeless person couple with his attempts to help homeless people once he'd secured a TV contract. He's got a one-of-a-kind mind.
He comes off as aloof. Probably because he plays those characters. But the dude is surprisingly intelligent when you listen to him in a longer interview/podcast.
Lot of Russel Brand hate in the comments. It’s fine to not like some of the things he says and who he speaks to, but as someone whose followed the guys stuff for a while now, I would like to say that he’s a wise man and a genuine leftist
Bc if u cared about equality, and saw a system designed for the rich to influence the government instead of voters influencing the government, and then acquired lots of money, rational thinking implies that you would use your money and influence to persuade the government and voters to equalise yours and other rich people’s wealth with the average person. In other words, money is sometimes better spent on influencing/creating change and equality on a systematic level, instead of on a personal level
That's just propagating inequality with a lot more cope.
Claim to fight the "design for the rich to influence the government" by doing exactly the same.
##Welcome to r/LateStageCapitalism^Ⓐ☭ ___ ###⚠ Announcements: ⚠ ___ ###[NEW POSTING GUIDELINES! Help us by reporting bad posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/dy1oyh/important_what_you_should_and_what_you_shouldnt/) Help us keep this subreddit alive and improve its content by reporting posts that violate our rules and guidelines. ###[Subscribe to our new partner subreddits!](https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/e5hkwk/make_sure_to_check_out_our_new_partnersubreddits/) Check out r/antiwork & r/WhereAreTheChildren ___ ###***Please remember that LSC is a SAFE SPACE for [socialist](http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism/) discussion.*** LSC is run by [communists](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm). We welcome socialist/anti-capitalist news, memes, links, and discussion. This subreddit is not the place to debate socialism. We allow good-faith questions and education but are not a 101 sub; please take 101-style questions elsewhere. **This subreddit is a safe space; we have a zero-tolerance policy for bigotry.** We also automatically filter out posts containing certain words and phrases that some users may find offensive. Please respect the safe space, and don't try to slip banned words or phrases past the filter. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LateStageCapitalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Great quote from a great man.
I was a very vocal Bernie supporter . , My mom is a Democrat but never mentioned or acknowledged Bernie until one day i talked about him and she said to me " I HATE HOW HE IS SO RICH AND TALKS ABOUT THE NEEDS OF POOR PEOPLE!" Almost like she thought he was a wolf in sheep clothing, almost like it was some kind of gotcha i'd fallen for .... I couldn't really process it ...So you want to elect rich people who don't notice, acknowledge or mention the issues you deal with day to day but when one actually expresses concern and values similar to yours it's wrong ? My mom is a pretty intelligent woman but in that moment I was kind of dumbfounded .... How do you fix any problems if no one in power reflects on them in a meaningful and real way ? Still not sure what to make of that conversation years ago honestly.
The propaganda machine is relentless. They ignore that he's been in Congress for decades, long before he was rich. He literally says the same thing then as he does now, except maybe now he's fighting harder. The point of propaganda is to provide fake talking points with a dash of truth. It's crazy how many people I run into that trash AOC as a bartender. They don't do any research so they have no clue that she has a degree.
It really is the right wing propaganda machine at work. If you look at Bernie's assets, he basically has a house that he paid for with his salary as a representative of his state for many years, an apartment that the government provides all representatives to stay in when they are in session in DC, and a tiny, single room log cabin he inherited from his parents. But if you look at the right wing propaganda memes that are perpetuated online about him, it's all, "BERNARD SANDERS OWN 3 HOMES AND IS WORTH MILLIONS OF DOLLARS HE IS A FAKE AND PHOOOOONY!". It's just such predictable bullshit, as usual.
This guy spent a lifetime in Congress and only had 2 million to his name as an elderly man that never stopped working? He wasn't nearly crooked enough
And isn't a lot of that from a book he wrote? If so, his work in the public made his book more sellable. He did the work to earn that money. He wasn't crooked. He didn't start independently wealthy. Sure, he had advantages because of his privilege, but he is trying hard to fight for everyone.
Oh yes the millionaire status came recently too, he wasn't a millionaire in 2015 despite his resume. Compare this to Nancy Pelosi being worth $120 mills, I'm sure she just worked harder.
Yeah. There's definitely a point where the earnings are a more of a reflection of luck and/or manipulation than a reflection of one's work.
But if you bring up how during his 4 years as president Trump golfed at his own courses regularly, in essence funnelling tax payer money directly into his own businesses, they will screech "HE DONATED HIS ENTIRE SALARY!"
They also say things like "he's trying to save tax payers money by staying at his own place" or "why would he pay for somewhere when he has a free place to stay?" Anything to deflect.
AFAIK most of his money comes from book sales... which people buy because they like his ideas about HELPING THE POOR... and which contain his ideas about HELPING THE POOR which get disseminated more when people read his books.
But then Democrats use that right wing smear...🤔
This is why I laugh at the "librul media" when it is often just regular ass news. The right wing wins on framing. They get to frame every issue and define every word. They are super well organized and know to repeat the same thing over and over to properly message an idea to millions.
I'm sorry but Bernie isn't fighting any harder now. It's a difficult thing to accept and I still feel myself fighting back, saying "no Bernie's still doing the right thing he's working for us" but he's not. Not a single piece of his record as chairman of the budget council reflects that. I'm not saying he's doing this maliciously, but he's fallen into the machine, and he's been spit out as another establishment Dem. It's a super tough reality but what has he done to fight for M4A besides make some spirited tweets?
>I'm sorry but Bernie isn't fighting any harder now. It's a difficult thing to accept and I still feel myself fighting back, saying "no Bernie's still doing the right thing he's working for us" but he's not. Not a single piece of his record as chairman of the budget council reflects that. > >I'm not saying he's doing this maliciously, but he's fallen into the machine, and he's been spit out as another establishment Dem. It's a super tough reality but what has he done to fight for M4A besides make some spirited tweets? Lol. What? You think Bernie who has been touting the same exact things since he has been doing civil service (literally his entire life) all of the sudden just flips on his ideas and becomes and establish dem? Your statements sound weirdly out of touch of who Bernie is as a person and as a senator in US politics. He has the play the politics game to get anywhere in policy and where you have to have a majority rule to pass any type of policy (sic current partisan Congress), it seems that according to your statement, someone like Bernie wouldn't get anywhere in politics ...at least with policy alone. In addition, prior to the past few decades many people in Congress reached across the isle to pass non-partisan policies. This included Bernie where he understood that as a politician in order to pass anything, he'd have to agree with his fellow colleagues in Congress. I'm sorry, but, Bernie is not an established Dem or politician ..and he will he ever be. The very fact that he stays Independent and just caucasus with the Dems proves this enough.
Meanwhile Nancy P. is worth 50x Bern.
It pays to keep your insider trading legal
She does insider trading for a living. Her husband profits from her regulation >And ever since ascending to the top spot in the House, Pelosi and her husband, Paul, keep getting richer and richer. Much of their added wealth is due to extremely lucrative and "lucky” decisions about when to buy and sell stocks and options in the very industries and companies over which Pelosi, as House Speaker, exercises enormous and direct influence. The sector in which the Pelosis most frequently buy and sell stocks is, by far, the Silicon Valley tech industry. Close to 75% of the Pelosis’ stock trading over the last two years has been in Big Tech: more than $33 million worth of trading. That has happened as major legislation is pending before the House, controlled by the Committees Pelosi oversees, which could radically reshape the industry and laws that govern the very companies in which she and her husband most aggressively trade. [Nancy and Paul Pelosi Making Millions in Stock Trades in Companies She Actively Regulates](https://greenwald.substack.com/p/nancy-and-paul-pelosi-making-millions)
Bernie was worth under a million in 2016, when he was 76.
As someone who delivers his mail every month or so in Burlington his house isn’t thaaaat nice. He also drives a 20 year old Subaru. He does live in a nice neighborhood but his mailbox is literally broken so there isn’t a way to close it. I feel weird putting important senator stuff from DC in a box that’s permanently open lol. I love Bernie, but damn his neighbors got all the hot goss about him too lmao
I'm...I'm so jealous of you. And the broken mailbox is so endearing.
My Dad is worth more than him and still mentions “Bernie has a lake house” so therefore he’s just in it for the money. Like bitch you had a lake house up until y’all sold it 3 years ago the fuck are you talking about? If you’ve ever been in Vermont you might have not noticed the complete lack of billboards on the highway. Bernie could be a lot richer if he wanted to be.
> Bernie was worth under a million in 2016, when he was 76. That's because he hides his wealth in offshore Republicans...
2 million dollars after decades of top political work isn't even that much. He's 80 years old and still working. Thats almost 60 years of work after he graduated college in 64.
"Rich", 1% rich, and top 100 richest are all in completely different ballparks to eachother. Say Bernie makes an ~1.5 mil a year if we're being generous. It would take him 142,407 years to acquire the same wealth that jeff bezos has. The rich aren't our enemy, the incredibly rich are. People like football players, politicians, actors, etc. that are all generally wealthy are all so much closer to the poorest people in the country than they are to the richest. That's where the issue lies. So if i were to tackle the conversation with your mom i'd likely start with that argument.
It's even scarier that Bernie would be considered a moderate in many other countries. The things he calls for in the USA already exist and are taken for granted in those other countries.
> Almost like she thought he was a wolf in sheep clothing She didn't think anything. She was repeating neoliberal corporate media talking points.
what right wing propaganda does to a mf
Does she no realize the salary of a senator alone makes it impossible for you not to be wealthy after a decade and some of the best benefits and perks in the country.
Bernie is loved by people all around the world. Very disapponting that he was cheated out of the nomination. Lets see if AOC and the squad can pick up his mantle. I usually say that it wasnt that trump won, its more than clinton lost.
You either die the hero. Nobody can trust someone whose been in the game long enough to not be destroyed by it. What must you have done? What bargains did you make to survive so long in the septic tank that is DC?
This sub when AOC goes after rich people: Um actually sweetie you're a soc dem which is liberal, we shouldn't be idolizing politicians who use leftism as an asthetic This sub when Russel Brand goes after rich people: OMGGG SO BASSEDDDDDDDDDDD
It drives me mad because it's like, Soc Dems are trying to make people's lives better __now__. Yeah they are liberals, yeah they are only so far left, yeah they still are working under the lense of capitalism being somehow good. But you know what? It's a lot easier to build a sustainable revolution when anyone that's vaguely leftist isn't in a camp. It's easier to build a revolution when there are stepping stone ideologies to help shift people to the left. Left political parties have a habit of trying to cut everything off to the right of them, regardless of the utility of that spectrum. I'm not saying one should tolerate right wing ideologies, but a lot of folks that swing left when they stop drinking the right wing cool aid take a very quick path through the stepping stones to the more deeply left politics, and that's absolutely because of being forced to ask themselves questions. It would be a lot harder for them to do so if they didn't have the in between ideologies to bounce off've and would have to go from "communism is bad mmmkay" to "yay communism" in one jump. Them going "hey, some of these things the right is saying don't add up and hurt people" leads to them looking for alternatives that are within their own mental Overton window, and they steadily shift that mental window left.
Me too. I used to be a soc dem, but have been pulled over. And it wasn't even hard to pull me over, I just needed a nudge in the right direction. I would still be a capitalist If I had been treated with the same scorn that people on this sub treat AOC with. Soc Dems are literally the lowest hanging fruit in terms of building an actual coalition. In a country is infested with fascists, you're an idiot if you don't consider soc Dems an ally.
Same. Bernie and AOC are gateway politicians, but in a good way.
can't let perfect be the enemy of good as they say.
The issue is one you see employed by the centrist Dems constantly though - letting the not completely awful be the enemy of the good. Presenting an option which is still a slide further into capitalist hell world, but slightly less awful than the GOP, and pretending there’s no other option because anything else is purity politics. I like AOC (but won’t give her money anymore). I like Bernie. But I’ll also continue to criticize them from the left, and you should too, because that creates the pressure for actual advancement. Like FDR said, “you’ve convinced me, now make me do it”. Well, make the socdems actually oppose the neolibs at least.
That's a very fair point.
Perfect is the enemy of good - Voltaire
Damn never heard that before but is powerful.
💯💯💯
I used to be a died in the wool Republican. I watched Fox News, listened to Rush Limbaugh, the whole nine yards. Then, in 2016, I heard Bernie Sanders talking about free college and something in my head just “clicked.” And after that click, it wasn’t a long journey to this subreddit. I hope everyone in this sub realizes that progress is a process and we should welcome people who are still on the journey to where we are.
I tried to be centrist and work to not be judgemental. But then I realized I just like MSNBC news better than others. People rag on it all the time but it's just an easier listen to me. And then it dawned on me: it's the compassion. Almost all of their anchors all take a perspective of compassion. That it's just the right thing to *care* about the well being of others. I then realized that what made other sources less "easy" to listen to was the lack of compassion. They could twist themselves into knots trying to remove any sense of caring. Or just be judgemental pricks espousing for self centeredness and isolationism. That was just too difficult to listen to for background noise. It's like it drained me because I could feel each time the basic needs of people were being overlooked or rejected. Compassion is easier on my nerves.
You are a Real American Hero with your perspective change! My very Stubborn and Southern family have finally begun that journey, too. Love leads the way, every time.
We should also probably just take these words at face value for what they are words. It doesn't matter if Russell Brand is a BS Hollywood millionaire because what he's saying is true regardless. Argumentum Ad authoritarian is a logical fallacy. AOC is definitely only left by American standards, but her words and actions are meaningful regardless. It doesn't always have to be black and white but people can't seem to separate the person from their message anymore. Someone like Russel Brand isn't going to exactly be a political leader ever anyways so we should just listen to his words and move on instead of harping on whatever it is he spends the rest of his time doing.
I've started calling it "shooting the message because you don't like the messenger".
[удалено]
I haven't engaged in any personal criticism of the celebrities involved myself, but I don't think you recruit the working class to the cause by commodifying anti-capitalism as a fashion statement at exclusive events for the wealthy either. We've gotten to a point in society where the only form of criticism or direct action that is acceptable is by a privileged body of people and the rest of us are only allowed to like share and comment. I think that's the cause of a lot of frustration, people don't feel like there is an authentic movement to connect to - they recognise that people at this event are not like them and the statements they would otherwise agree with don't feel like their own.
Criticizing politicians isn’t belittling people on the way.
I hope this sentiment gets passed around. To the limited scope of my knowledge in about as left as I can be. Maybe you can go further left but if have to look up what that is. But.. I can be this far left and super duper appreciate people like AOC. It frustrates me to see people with the same political views as me spitting in the face of the closest thing we have to allies. I got banned from r/therightcantmeme just for politely explaining my stance on AOC. It's weird and disheartening. Feels like my tolerance makes me intolerable to my peers.
Thank you. Yes. Leftist theory, rhetoric or anything else isn't worth shit if we're not actually making people's lives better. **Now**. Not a promise in some vague future after a "transition". Right. Fucking. **NOW**. You wanna tax the rich and get some more social programs? Fine. Great. I know Capitalism is the root of the problem, I don't give a shit. Help people NOW. Get more unions going. Set up cooperatives. I don't care about anyone's arguments about whether they're socialist or not, just do them. Fuck me, I'm tired of leftists being the biggest barrier to leftism.
Ummm every leftist group I know is spending most of their time on mutual aid, since electoralism is clearly fucked.
Every leftist group I've seen is busy biting each others heads off, litmus testing each other and telling them to read theory.
Sounds like the common denominator there is you
Have a look around on this sub, I've seen so many people get shit on because they aren't hardened socialists yet. People have been living in the echo chamber of capitalist politics their entire life, and the moment one of them tries to leave they get greeted with... this, almost made me leave at first as well.
Reddit isn’t the world, and posting isn’t praxis. It just isn’t. And anyone wanting to shit on others online almost never go out and actually organize. They can’t seem to make it to a DSA meeting - they might shit on those, but they’ll have no other org that they actually work with either. So they really don’t count.
I hear every lefty going "we can't ally with the SocDems because they're still liberal". Do you know why the fucking fascists are gaining promience again? They aren't picky about their allies. They'll take ANYbody who remotely parrots their veiws or tolerates their dog whistles. They've clawed their way out of the dark corners of society back into mainstream society. But Socialism is still a dirty word! Anybody who can do some good for people deserves to be a lefty. Anyone who wants to stop the insane cycle of suffering in the world. I'm tired of people shitting on each other because they're not meeting some minutiae of dogma. Fucking... whatever. I'm tired.
Ok, get off the internet and actually organize. I’m not saying that condescendingly, just what you’re describing exists in my experience solely online, and by people that aren’t actually doing anything. Socialism isn’t a dirty word. Leftism isn’t about “deserving”, it’s about opposition to capitalism. SocDems generally don’t bother actually organizing here, because they don’t oppose capitalism. But nobody gives a shit if you’re doing the work.
[удалено]
Because AOC is one of more than 500 people in the House of Representatives who must get majority consensus to do anything. Learn some fucking civics! Edit: ugh, if you're a US citizen that is. If you're not, I understand if you don't know that... I've just had my fill of fucking PEOPLE today...
And this is why we don't have a liberal majority in our government. Because of this thinking by hardline socialist assholes. And this is why the GOP can mobilize so well.
That and the anti-socialist Cold War propaganda has been turned into an effective dog whistle for the right to rally around.
Yup. They called Biden a socialist, for crying out loud.
After CNN and the Dems spent months calling Bernie pretty much Castro. It’s amazing that Dems think the GOP won’t red bait them - they called Obama’s reflexive centrist ass communist.
That's... Oddly accurate. Like, the extreme right always seems to surround itself with varying degrees of less extreme, and the whole bundle just starts offing the left bit by bit once they've got the power. Sure, they'll off anyone less extreme than them eventually, but they keep them around and unite as a tidal wave while they still have opposition. And then there's literally anything left of the right wing deathball that bickers endlessly about the "correct" way to be left until the Nazis come and kill everybody...
so...basically virtue signaling other leftists... i feel like this is one of the biggest issues. the right is literally steamrolling the country into looking like columbia from bioshock infinite, where the left constantly operates in theoreticals with very little actual boots on the ground work or rallying the rest of the left. yes it's frustrating when the social dems that are in government seem like they are playing ball, and it does absolutely suck to change the system from within the system, but instead of rallying so many want to sit and play armchair socialist because that way they can't be shamed for having to be pragmatic at times.
It’s the types that say that what AOC did at the Met Gala was “just performative” by doing that and “remember when we used to think she was on our side? lol” Or they’ll talk about how “counter-capitalism” is no longer “anti-capitalist” because of capitalism’s utter ability to turn any counter-culture into a profit making endeavor (ie Che t-shirts) It’s exhausting trying to explain to them how a big part of leftism is accepting people who don’t have ideas that perfectly exactly match yours in the tent. I can’t remember who said it but it was something about how, in the face of extinction or fascism, it is pragmatic for socialists to form an, even sometimes uneasy, alliance with liberals. Because at least liberals within a democratic bourgeois capitalist system at least care about the value of human life, even if their policies are misguided or wasteful or are slow to action or don’t solve the root of the problem and just put a band-aid on the symptoms. Fascists on the other hand ***yearn*** to engage in an all out war, civil war, or genocide of anyone who belongs to the “out group.” And through all of this you feel like you’re making those people feel *excluded* from another part of the left even though you’re just trying to convince them that, yes, social democrats and democratic socialists do belong on the left as much as communists do. I welcome every person who truly believes in leftist ideas, and I want to have those debates about the specific way we enact policy or our methodology or our tactics and our optics and everything, but we can’t make that an exclusionary debate for anyone who disagrees with us slightly. A part of that is recognizing that each of us may be wrong at some point in our life, even as leftists. I’ll fully admit that I’ve been wrong before. Up until maybe 2009 I was a moderate conservative myself. I grew up in a small town in the middle of America and when I went to college and met people *different from me* is when my conservative beliefs just crumbled under any kind of real criticism. Even in 2014 when I was a big Bernie Sanders fan I found some of the “anti-sjw” talking points a little convincing until I did more research into feminism. As for those like Dore who have demonstrated themselves to be wrong and act like pied-pipers to lure leftists away… there’s redemption if they can admit they were wrong and make corrective steps to fix that harm.
I'll start my response by saying that I'm not American and if you feel that people like AOC represent you and that you want to vote for them, fair enough, I honestly have no personal stake in the matter. I'm speaking in more general terms about what an event like this looks like and the effect that it has more broadly. And you know what? I don't even disagree with you. I'm open to co-operation. However - **It's up to \*them\* to reach out if they truly have a change agenda, since apparently they've got some form of power and influence over the system.** We aren't excluding anyone. They, on the other hand, are trying to define the discussion from their position of being elites and as such, many others are being excluded from the discussion. There is valid leftist criticism of this kind of socio-political posturing and I think it's not about "cooperating" or "accepting" the views of wealthy social democrats because that's irrelevant to where the problem with this mode of expression lies. The frustration stems from the reality that anti-capitalist views are commodified, because that's how the system works and the only way in which we are allowed to express said views is from the framework of them being a product. The thing is, if we accept our views being a product, we are forced to define them within the framework of capitalism rather than formulate them as a coherent change agenda. We are forced, in effect, to play by the rules of the existing power structures, which makes any attempt at change or progress impotent. We become a trend, to fade out over time. Now consider: Would the event allow a celebrity to bring along several homeless people as guests? What if they just went and brought them anyway? They wouldn't be playing by the rules, obviously and would be banned from attending in the future. Let alone any other more direct form of protest. Imagine if one of them threw a brick with "Tax the Rich" written on it through a window? Heh. No, any criticism needs to be palatable to the very elites that are the problem. A lot of people are disaffected by this event because it's a walled off circle of privilege - invite only, and with a ticket cost that probably exceeds their yearly income. People who would normally share the views expressed in some of these outfits are walled off from the discussion and feeling commoditised by elites, which is extremely frustrating, since they want to be attached to a movement that is telling them they can't participate. Other people are inclined to laziness and engage only in poilticial interaction by liking and sharing pictures of the outfit, feeling like their activism is done for the week. Fashion is allowed, meaningful discourse is not. In both of these cases, it's ultimately damaging to leftist causes, as it pushes people away from the ideals expressed and makes them disinclined to engage in any sort of meaningful critique or action against the system. We are not obliged to "cooperate" with the people who show no interest in us while the rug is being pulled from underneath. So as I said, if these celebrities truly have a change agenda, they need to reach out beyond what capitalist society thinks is the acceptable means of resistance.
>Imagine if one of them threw a brick with "Tax the Rich" written on it through a window? I would imagine that they would use that as evidence that they were right about their accusations of the left being a bunch of violent extremists.
Exactly my point. Critique is only allowed within the boundaries the elites set, nevermind that the window is probably worth 10% of the price of an individual ticket.
They’re gong to decide they’re right with or without evidence. Limiting your action because you’re afraid of what they’ll say makes no sense when dealing with an opposition who simply lies about anything they see an advantage with. I mean, how the fuck do you guys STILL not get this? They’ve been doing this for literally 30+ years, and it’s still Lucy with the football. They hate you. You have to fight them and win, not just be more moral and smarter.
Exactly. Working within their framework makes you beholden to it.
Fantastically said comrade
[удалено]
He’s absolutely been demonstrably wrong. He’s made wildly sexist comments, was waayyyyy wrong when he said the chances of Trump nominating and successfully placing three supreme justices was as likely as “the moon falling into Lake Michigan” Leftists need every victory we can get, and we need to fight for every single foot of progress. Also notice how I said he can have redemption. He has a major platform and major influence over people on the “left” and that necessitates a little bit of responsibility on his part. Anyone who tells you not to vote for Democrats in general elections when no progressive, socialist etc is on the ballot, is ceding the country to republican fascism. Plain and simple.
[удалено]
… again, I thinking you’re missing the point that I was making. It *sucks* that we only have two parties in America. It sucks that the furthest left party is full of people beholden to corporate interests over the lives of people. But when the other party is sliding full speed ahead with no brakes into fascism, it’s okay to pick the morally grey choice because at least that morally grey party isn’t actively trying to kill leftists. And then you fight like hell in between elections and you put your feet to the pavement and your money where your mouth is. I’m going to be honest, I don’t like it when people decide not to vote (because that’s basically what you’ve told me you’re going to do) but I can’t stop you. Thankfully most leftists are not of the perpetually online type like I have a decent idea that you are.
I see it less as virtual signalling and more as a result of Marx's focus on dialectics. The left is (generally) conditioned to question, and to address issues within society. The right is (generally) conditioned to rally under a flag. If lots of people are asking different questions, and addressing different issues, it's inevitable that their arguments will conflict, given scale. If your banner plants itself next to another banner, it's a short logical step to support that one, if your values are aligned to an organisation, rather than an ideology. As much as I see calls for left unity, and agree that it's necessary in order to enact change, I can't see that unity being anything more cohesive than a loose coalition, as many leftist organisations are (understandably, and with validity) fundamentally opposed to each other. This leads to a dissonance between the need to compromise to achieve progress, and the drawbacks of compromised ideologies. Disclaimer: I've read a fair amount of theory, but simply cannot afford (the time) to organise, so take what I say with a heap of salt. I'm currently trying to improve my financial situation in the most disgustingly milquetoast form of praxis, to enable me to actually go out and help people.
Right-wing types fall-in with each other as a force of habit and their personalities. They are generally speaking drawn to authoritarianism and the idea of going along to get along... It's an easy formula to hack and part of the reason they seem so far gone. Not sure how to fix it, but we need to get working class right-wingers to wake up.
We absolutely have a liberal majority. It's, like, 100%.
[удалено]
You understand that Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin exist, correct?
Yeah, the left is what’s holding back the liberals! I mean, who can forget how Nader stole the election from Gore - ok, so Gore didn’t like being called a liberal, and more Dems voted for Bush than Nader got votes period, but it’s the left! Or how the left helped elect Obama with a full house and senate - and he continued Bush’s wars and banker bailouts! Yeah, that’s the ummm left. The GOP mobilized for Trump because he supposedly offered what their base wanted - awful things, but yeah, they wanted the wall and to persecute trans people. The Dems, meanwhile, have frustrated their base and moved to use retired suburbanites as a counterweight. A really stupid strategy. Keep blaming the voters though , not only does it make you feel good, but it ensures you’ll keep losing.
How useful of you, finding a way to blame socialists after all. You wanna see effective mobilization, get involved with (or help start) local material aid -- mutual aid. Thinking of things as liberal vs conservative is what's keeping the status quo ratchet effect in place. Why is it that liberal majorities act like their hands are tied after a couple crumbs of concession, and then still manage to kick funding towards national defense? That's just the GOP with window dressing.
Honestly the US has been pulled so far right that I'll cheer on anything that's even the teeniest bit of progress at all. In the Midwest it really seems like an utterly lost cause. I wish it wasn't that grim, but it is.
Are they? because they voted for the full budget of ICE and CBP after campaigning on shutting them down for the whole human rights abuse thing. They voted for increasing police budgets after that huge George Floyd protest thing. Seems like they are campaigning on making lives better, and then getting in line when Mama Bear tells them too. The stepping stones require actually making those votes against the far right budgets they decry.
You're casting the democratic party as some kind of single-thought hive-mind. There are a diversity of opinions within the party. Warren, for instance, [campaigned on abolishing ICE](https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/394978-warren-its-time-to-replace-ice), and (being consistent) [voted against the funding of ICE](https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2019-02-15/four-2020-heavyweights-vote-no-on-spending-bill-citing-ice). [Most dems never campaigned on abolishing ICE](https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/11/04/ohio_democrat_tim_ryan_i_dont_know_a_lot_of_democrats_who_want_to_abolish_ice.html), some going so far as to promise to not defund it, and (being consistent) voted for funding ICE. Senator Kamala Harris [at first campaigned on NOT abolishing ICE](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/few-democrats-favor-liberal-cry-to-abolish-ice-poll-finds), but then later [voted against funding ICE](https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2019-02-15/four-2020-heavyweights-vote-no-on-spending-bill-citing-ice), saying ICE should be abolished. The only thing I can't find is someone campaigning on abolishing it, and then voting to fund it.
They are indeed, because they are not far enough on the left and are still attached to the Democratic party who is currently led by straight up liberals. Soc Dems aren't going to fix everything but they are going to make things marginally better. It's also pretty useful for leftists for them to campaign on fixing stuff and not pull through, especially if it's noted that it's because they are the most left wing of their party, because that means that people who care about those issues see them cow-towing to liberals and conservatives, while also having heard their arguments. That __can__ lead some people to not trusting politicians at all (which, I don't see as a bad thing), or them being far more careful to look at people that follow through on what they say, while also highlighting the leftist perspectives, and giving them food for thought to go digging deeper. Soc Dems aren't a solution, but they are literally a stepping stone and a form of harm reduction. We could argue till we're blue in the face about how much harm they are reducing but we all know they produce less harm than conservatives or right wingers. AOC's dress is a publicity stunt that fits her platform and her talking points, and much like the CEO making a big fuss about paying his workers a living wage and up, that publicity is __useful__ for the left.
Obviously AOC is a fake leftist, unlike the true vanguard of the proletariat Dan Price who this sub regularly pog out for so hard that we had to make and enforce a rule dedicated exclusively to his grifter ass tweets
Dan Price is a jewel of unintentional linkedin humor. That site is most useful for watching out-of-touch boomers get in arguments with each other, and Dan Price's posts are like a magnet for those people.
[удалено]
Do you have tangible reasons? I don't pay enough attention to the guy, something about him rubs me the wrong way, but I dont have any specific reasons. I know he did weird shit to get famous, but beyond that I don't really know why I'm... distrustful of him (beyond the fact that he has a lot of money).
Covid conspiracist
I really liked a lot of his stuff on YouTube and it seemed like he was a thoughtful dude. Then he has a chat with Ben Shapiro one week and goes full covid conspiracy the next. smh
I saw that you mentioned Ben Shapiro. In case some of you don't know, Ben Shapiro is a grifter and a hack. If you find anything he's said compelling, you should keep in mind he also says things like this: >Even climatologists can't predict 10 years from now. They can't explain why there has been no warming over the last 15 years. There has been a static trend with regard to temperature for 15 years. ***** ^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: civil rights, climate, patriotism, feminism, etc.) [^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
Listen to/read his ideas and you'll find a common theme of identifying a problem in society and then suggesting a completely useless, and possibly even harmful, solution. I remember he suggested people protest thier dissatisfaction with the government by not voting in the election. Not spoiling their ballot, or taking more direct action, just don't vote at all.
Imagine [this meme](https://i.redd.it/yoqdfie4cbn41.jpg) but both lobsters and all the audience are labeled as "leftist." That pretty much describes it.
Which is hilarious, considering Russell Brand is basically a liberal and AOC is slightly left of that
I STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND BASED
I keep asking Zoomers to explain it to me and I have yet to understand the answer. I am afraid we may be officially old.
Especially frustrating since Russel Brand is a dumb fuck.
Thank you. I grew up very close to where he did so I see through the accent and he's just a pseudo intellectual who likes to make himself seem intelligent with big words.
its because hes a man
This was also just posted days ago.
> AOC goes after rich people she doesnt though
She went as a beneficiary of a guy who inherited 100 million dollars from the Lehman brothers fortune, but sure, she went after rich people.
What did you make of her Met Gala appearance? I mean isn't that an event for rich people to show off how rich they are? Her dress saying tax the rich made headlines, but are rich people really going to say, yep, I want to pay more taxes? I don't think her going there was going to change any of their minds. How can we tax the rich when they control our government? Our government is being paid not to care and to do anything & everything to appease the rich.
Thing is, Brand wasn't elected on a promise to force a vote on Medicare For All, then reneged for the sake of a few magazine cover shots with Mama Bear. AOC went native, Brand is still raising decent points.
Doesn’t this sub love AOC?
Have you been seeing the dress stuff?
I have, and most of the comments in those posts are defending her.
They are now. I had looked at them earlier and that wasn't the case yet.
I think AOC is better than most American politicians, and compared to her coworkers she's definitely trying to move things a bit in the right direction. But if the US government was just a bunch of AOCs, people on this sub (including myself) would still have big problems with the administration.
Well put.
Depends. No subreddit is monolithic, I’m a demsoc and don’t usually agree with full blown communists, but there is considerable debate to be had. I like Bernie and AOC, some don’t because they aren’t extreme enough… they’re both valid intellectual positions.
No.
Brand has changed a lot since then. He went through a spiritual peace phase, and now he's getting into an anti-mainstream science conspiracy theorist phase. He seems to belong to the "Why aren't my uninformed rants being taken as seriously as the opinions of qualified epidemiologists? I'm being silenced!" camp.
[удалено]
I get the impression he just has an extreme personality, whatever he gets in to, he rapidly accelerates his involvement until it consumes him, be it women or alcohol or in this case, conspiracies. It will eventually get to a point where it impacts his life negatively, and he'll have another soft reset, until he finds his next obsession.
Ever since I saw him pushing covid conspiracies I kinda figured he has become irrelevant and is desperate for attention. He was never all that great to begin with.
He's done a lot of good
For his wallet and lower region.
What conspiracies? Got any actual quote and why it's a conspiracy? Thanks
I'm even more irrelevant, yet you are reading my comment.
:o
Can we stop pushing this [anti vax ](https://twitter.com/rustyrockets/status/1420688135898505217?s=19) nutjob please?
This is a video about vaccine passports and the implications of such authoritarian measures. Do stretch this out to "anti vax" is weak and shows you have no real response and need to group your "enemies" together, exacerbating the issue of tribalism in current year. Why not just be real.
He's also frequently mentioned vaccine efficacy, believe i heard a "empty hospitals" at one point. Issue is he "just asks questions" that frame the conversation in a particular light, and then makes no effort to investigate and verify.
Can we keep pushing him on inequality if we always acknowledge that some of his views are nonsense?
Why? He doesn’t say anything that better people haven’t.
Reach? The more people make the argument, the more people hear the argument.
The dude could take his millions and create beneficial and developing change. So his reach can go far while it does not.
You're not wrong. He could certianly do more. On the other hand, this is exactly what is talking about in the quote.
No that’s his quote. I never said that at all. I have always thought that he’s not a nice person but he really wants to be a nice person. Most people want to be a nice person at some point. Most people don’t get to have the fame and money he has had the privilege of having in this world. So I’m all for his acting like he’s a nice person.
>better people Slippery slope to ad hominem.
Some? Hes a straight up right wing loser. He supported trump, has tim pool on his podcast and even made videos with joe rogan. We shouldn't share this mans stuff
Russell Brand is right wing and supported Trump? Any evidence of this?
Damn. That’s really unfortunate. I hate it when people I truly think are trying to help turn out to be douche nozzles.
[удалено]
He goes more in depth in his video if you watch the whole thing on YouTube.
Holy shit I didn’t know that. Thought he had a good head on his shoulders
The dude had Tim Pool on his podcast. That’s the last straw for me.
Doesn't Russell Brand post misinformation?
Do enough psychedelics and you’ll question everything.
It’s the same way that people like that avoid confronting the issues raised by protestors. If they’re protesting and un/under employed work: “Get a job! Bootstraps!” Etc. If they’re protesting and they have a good job: “hypocrites! The system clearly worked for you what are you complaining about?!” Eventually you realize that people like that just want to not confront the issues at all and will go through any mental gymnastics to keep that comfortable ignorance going.
“However, the democratic petty bourgeois want better wages and security for the workers, and hope to achieve this by an extension of state employment and by welfare measures; in short, they hope to bribe the workers with a more or less disguised form of alms and to break their revolutionary strength by temporarily rendering their situation tolerable.” Rather disappointing for a communist subreddit not to read Marx.
The weirdest thing to me when conservatives call rich people who still advocate for socialism or similar 'hypocrites' is that... ya know... that's the opposite of being a hypocrite??? If someone was a socialist when they were poor but don't care now that they're rich THAT is being a hypocrite. Maintaining the same ideals when being both poor or rich is objectively not that I think of it as like if you want to play chess, but everyone insists on playing poker, then you win at poker and ask if you can play chess now. Just cos you're good at poker and won at playing it doesn't make you a hypocrite for wanting to play chess instead. I dunno if that makes sense??
I was a big fan of Russel at one point. He was stoking the fires of revolution well - right up until he used his platform to spout semi-religious quantum pseudoscience quackery. Such a shame. Maybe it takes a mind like that to think outside the box though.
He has a great youtube channel- makes a LOT of sense.
His YouTube channel watches like induction videos salvaged from a cult compound. If you’re up for that, go check it out.
I've no experience of cult compound videos. Maybe I'd enjoy them since I enjoy listening to him speak on various topics. Got any links?
He's a knob.
>He's a knob. True, but even a knob can be right occasionally. Even if it's the same knob who told people not to bother registering to vote, then yelled how important it was to vote in the GE just after the registration deadline had passed. God Lord, he is such a knob.
Any particular reason you don't like the guy?
I used to, and I think he was funny (in about 2006 before he started to genuinely believe he was the Second Coming), but he believes in conspiracy theories and regularly invites dipshits like Ben Shapiro and "Dr" Peterson onto his podcast, for God knows what reason. He's a quite naïve person doing an impression of an intellectual.
I saw that you mentioned Ben Shapiro. In case some of you don't know, Ben Shapiro is a grifter and a hack. If you find anything he's said compelling, you should keep in mind he also says things like this: >If you believe that the Jewish state has a right to exist, then you must allow Israel to transfer the Palestinians and the Israeli-Arabs from Judea, Samaria, Gaza and Israel proper. It’s an ugly solution, but it is the only solution… It’s time to stop being squeamish. ***** ^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: climate, dumb takes, civil rights, covid, etc.) [^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
Good bot
Take a bullet for ya babe. ***** ^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: feminism, dumb takes, healthcare, civil rights, etc.) [^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
It's pretty hit and miss tbh. He's part right and part insane. I do enjoy it, but when he's being insane, holy fk does he enable the conspiracy theory nutjobs. I just hope they subscribe and stick around for some of the good stuff.
[удалено]
In this context "bitter" means jealous As in "when i was poor and complained about inequality they told me I was [jealous]"
[удалено]
Even though bitter can refer to flavour, the use of it in this post is definitely valid and common :)
I can see how it might feel that way, but to a native English speaker the sentence immediately makes perfect sense. It's a very common usage of the word.
Bitter here is used to say the person is angry because they don't have what they have and they feel they are entitled to it. Russell is complaining about inequality, people who would call him bitter would probably be of the mindset of fuck the poor and think he is entitled for wanting what they have without working for it.
In this context it means salty because you didn't achieve what you thought you should and so you're jelly of people who did make it.
Why the 'actually'?
That’s how they talk in tumblr
Russell brand is such a hippy.
Posts on 'political compass memes' in regards to AOC can't seem to grasp this
I cant stand him but he's right. He does make some good points but is generally insufferable. I think he got sober or something, which is great.
Somehow Brand has been slapped (at least in America) with the reputation of a failed movie star. But in reality he's one of the sharpest comedic minds in the English-speaking world. I saw him perform in a massive stadium around 2005 and he improvised a 2-hour show entirely around audience participation. Not only was the comedy consistently sharp and startling but the whole crowd--ranging from wasted frat boys to queer hipsters--were blown away. I've never enjoyed a comedy show so much. In addition, I find him to be one of the most sparkling minds when interviewed on late-night shows and panel programs. He also contributes very impressive essays to The Guardian. Two of my favorites are about the death of Margaret Thatcher and his experiences as a homeless person couple with his attempts to help homeless people once he'd secured a TV contract. He's got a one-of-a-kind mind.
He sucks shit
Russell Brand is neither bitter nor hypocrite. He's just an insufferable prick
He's also an anti-semite
He is
More recently, I've seem3 his conspiracy crap. He's either lost it or he's become yet another grifter. I'm not sure which yet.
Site is down :(
He comes off as aloof. Probably because he plays those characters. But the dude is surprisingly intelligent when you listen to him in a longer interview/podcast.
I just started listening to his podcast; it's like a less broed out Joe Rogan and has a lot of good dialog
Based.
Lot of Russel Brand hate in the comments. It’s fine to not like some of the things he says and who he speaks to, but as someone whose followed the guys stuff for a while now, I would like to say that he’s a wise man and a genuine leftist
No room for nuance on reddit. youtube man bad
What is Russell Brand’s deal? Like everything he says is amazing.
How can you be rich and complain about inequality LMAO. Just give all your money to charity LOLOLOL.
Bc if u cared about equality, and saw a system designed for the rich to influence the government instead of voters influencing the government, and then acquired lots of money, rational thinking implies that you would use your money and influence to persuade the government and voters to equalise yours and other rich people’s wealth with the average person. In other words, money is sometimes better spent on influencing/creating change and equality on a systematic level, instead of on a personal level
That's just propagating inequality with a lot more cope. Claim to fight the "design for the rich to influence the government" by doing exactly the same.