Essentially do you see any big modern marxist public figures coming in as the “old guard” ages out? Who?
There are other decent figures who are younger. Vijay Prishad is only 55. We’ve got everyone in the revleft podcast family. In addition, more zoomer centered figures like the deprogram people and hasan.
Came here to say Vijay as well even tho he’s not that young he should have a good 20+ years in him still, hopefully.
There’s cracks all over those contents, you’re looking too closely from the looks of it.
Nevertheless a small saying that I use whenever I hit a dead end & they’re one of them, just don’t get stuck in the comfort zone if that’s all t it.
They’re bought by corrupt institutions & industries.Just gonna copy the link to my comment in this thread to reduce redundancy: https://lemmygrad.ml/comment/545060
For anticapitalist content from Turtle Island, I think we need to start looking for and platforming more Black and Indigenous decolonial content creators. Ones who can take the lessons from the past and apply them to the conditions of the here and now. There are already many people like this on TikTok. Personally I wouldn’t put too much trust in big Twitch streamers, but that’s just my take.
I really like this take. I’d love to see members of The Red Nation or other content creators who have experienced the worst of Capitalism and Imperialism(whether because of race, nationality, sexuality, etc.) become more mainstream.
These are big shoes to fill and they will of course be filled by Bad Empanada and Vaush.
If Vaush becomes the new Parenti I am going to [REDACTED]
Hi comrade, is something wrong with bad empanada? I watched a few of his and thought it was pretty neat. I am asking because you mention him together with vaush.
He doesn’t acknowledge PRC’s achievements, doesn’t support AES except Cuba (I think) and doesn’t align himself with other anti-imperialists. He attacks journalists critical of the west, I faintly recall a bona fide NED spook quote tweeting BE to attack the Greyzone.
Insofar as he limits himself to attacking rightists, especially the ones claiming to be socialists, he’s fine.
He calls himself socialist, supports LatAm social democracy, and defended Stalin from holodomor lies, but he constantly has bad China takes, and his streaming channel is toxic.
Any chance you could tell me what those initialisms mean? Thanks.
Not OP but I believe:
PRC - People’s Republic of China. Self explanatory.
AES - Actually Existing Socialism. Countries that are now operating under at least a form of socialist government.
NED - National Endowment for Democracy. A front for US operations abroad, such as the Hong Kong protests.
BE - Bad Empanada, obviously.
Thank you!
I don’t think he’s particularly well versed on politics. iirc he has a bachelors in Latin American history but otherwise he’s essentially just a shitposter with common sense like most of us here and admits as much. Not an intellectual by any means.
As streamers go he’s far from the worst. He is not in the same league as Vaush in the slightest. But he’s not in the same league as Parenti either.
I’ve never seen him apologise for furthering the Uighur genocide hoax.
Glory to Bad Empanada Thought!
Zizek! I’m kidding, but maybe the answer is not in the West, but elsewhere, and maybe the media just doesn’t pay attention to them because it is in their best interest.
Lemmygradians
Marxism is doomed 😔
Comrade, get a hold of yourself. A hundred generations live in us, waiting for the final victory of socialism. And if it won’t be us, it’s going to be our sons and daughters
Oh, I was just joking
me too kinda
Lmao nice
@Navaryn @Navaryn @ComradeSalad
That works for @Andytimbo too.
I call it “leftist schizoposting”
Brian Becker gives pretty good material analysis on the socialist program… also man I sure do love Norman Finkelstein but he’s not pushing M/L as much. One thing for sure Richard Wolff has brought a ton of new folks into the light. And there will always be the king Yellow Parenti…
IIRC Finkelstein had some dog shit takes about trans people recently, when he misses he misses hard.
No one mentioned our second habibi, HasanAbi🤤. What Iam seeing is more like stochastic forms of learning among people which lackes centre public figures. I do not think this is bad but moving forward figures who can put theory in to practice should emerge and it will.
Hasan was my gateway in and here’s hoping there’s more people to follow
I never watched his streams btw. Hakim is my only habibi.
Listening to Hakim on the Deprogram right now ❤️
Who comes next in terms of dying?
Chomsky probably, but he’s a leftcom pedo so, who cares?
Wait, Chomsky is a pedophile? I’m not necessarily doubting, but what do you have to support this?
It recently came out that he was affiliated with Jeffrey Epstein.
I remembered as soon as I typed that. And he was oddly and concerningly defensive of Epstein.
Two people in this thread say that with the internet, we can move away from “big public figures”/“big thinkers”. While I appreciate this optimism, it just sounds very anti-authoritarian, and I quote from Engels On Authority:
Why do the anti-authoritarians not confine themselves to crying out against political authority, the state? All Socialists are agreed that the political state, and with it political authority, will disappear as a result of the coming social revolution, that is, that public functions will lose their political character and will be transformed into the simple administrative functions of watching over the true interests of society. But the anti-authoritarians demand that the political state be abolished at one stroke, even before the social conditions that gave birth to it have been destroyed. They demand that the first act of the social revolution shall be the abolition of authority.
There are anti-government and anti-“big corp/business” tendencies in the US/West, which I will call “anti-authority” for now. The essense of “anti-authority” in capitalist countries is anti-capitalism, or anti-“dictatorship of the bourgeoisie”, but there is a gap in this logic that stops people from turning into marxists right away, as they might instead become anarchists. This gap in logic will not be closed just by having everyone have access to free information through the internet, as there is too much information to digest, and imperialists will also interfere with the propagation of marxist ideology.
“Anti-authoritarian” sentiments do have positive outcomes, like decentralized technologies (think internet, bittorrent, p2p, fediverse etc.), the open source software movement, but these only serve as tools, they are the means and not the end.
In addition to this, one of the selling points of Parenti, Woolf, Hudson, Furr(?) is that they’re accredited professionals. This isn’t to take an elitist stance on my part. But it counts to the audience that must be reached.
There is an alternative, which is to develop working class education. For us and by us. Reading groups are good, but I’d argue that a fuller program and curriculum is needed. Some examples exist. But we need to get to the stage where they’re in all our communities, wide-ranging, and not just online. Many people don’t have basic literacy or numeracy skills, nevermind a theoretical understanding of political economy.
This goes back to my first point. It’s not just that being well regarded academics means that people will listen. It’s that well regarded academics are good at explaining things and teaching. I think that’s why e.g. Parenti and Woolf are so effective.
I don’t think simply making knowledge accessible in a bourgeois world will make people radical. The bourgeoisie control the means of distribution as well as production. Most people never encounter (1) counter narratives, or (2) encouragement to learn to think critically beyond a shallow liberal sense of the phrase.
Without these, most people aren’t even aware (i) that a Marxist critique exists or (ii) what a Marxist critique can offer. This is that intellectual titans like parenti and Woolf provide. There are others, though, and more coming through every day.
I want to note that English-speaking people might be comfortable with applying “anti-authority” to everything due to their imperalist environment, but this causes a lack of awareness of socialist authorities that are in power, such as China. That is why it is important to move away from “anti-authority” to anti-capitalism.
I don’t think my perspective on it is related to “anti-authorianism” but rather accessibility and the new media landscape. Parenti and Wolff are good writers and very useful too, but at the end of the day they write only in English and their target audience is mostly North American or European. They also have to work within the constraints of capitalist academia and publishing which makes it difficult for many worldwide to even read what they have to say (i.e. copyright laws). The old forms of media (books, newspapers, TV, radio) have a very high barrier for entry and are costly to propagate whereas on the Internet getting the points across is borderline free. That is not to say that there should be no authority, but rather that in a society that is now so dependent on crowd-sourced websites like Wikipedia, that authority can be less dependent on publishing deals and available for those who would otherwise not be able to read a book from an North American economist.
For instance, I had never heard of Parenti until 2 years ago due to him only writing in English, and that is similar for most of my third world colleagues, so I wouldn’t say his authority extends that far into the world out there. This is why I jokingly said that Prolewiki is the next Marx, as most people now are on average actually literate enough to have reading binges on places like that and the MIA, if we put in the effort to develop and moderate it properly.
To be fair, I have no clue to who these people are, I don’t read the writings of any non-Chinese marxist besides Marx, Engels, Lenin (and maybe Stalin). I also don’t like the idea of linking increased literacy to willingness to learn.
Crowd-sourcing information is not a new idea, that’s how humanity has advanced, the internet does make it much easier, and with better translators it’ll be even better in future. The main issue is moderation as you mentioned, which goes back to having an authoritative person or group that most people can trust to delegate the tedious work of moderating to.
I also don’t like the idea of linking increased literacy to willingness to learn.
And never would I. But without literacy one is almost unable to educate themself independently. We’re not that far removed from a time where huge most colonised countries had less than half of their population able to read their own language. Now being able to read is basically compulsory for most professions or just living in urban areas in general. I see no point in propping up “big Marxists” if their resources don’t even have Spanish editions and people have to rely on those grifting translation editors with huge prefaces and postfaces that read like “but remember kids, communism is just a theory!”.
Again my issue is not with the concept of authority, but with conflating modern “English-language popularity” with it. Specially considering how inaccessible the “popular ones” actually are to the average world proletarian when compared to how developed the native-language capitalist propaganda machines have become. It just seems off to me to take the argument that “we should be careful about trusting individual self-proclaimed Marxists and instead should work more to propagate and organise the material that already exists” and make it about “anti-authority that leads to anarchism”.
Crowd-sourcing is not a new idea, but crowd-sourced encyclopaedias that fit on your pocket are. And there are many already-written books and articles (some written by Parenti and others) to get in there in an organised fashion, with other new resources such as hyperlinks, rather than hoping that yet another Ivy League economist (or worse, a Breadtuber) figures out new ways to say to Unitedstadians that Capitalism is a terrible system. That is work basically anyone here can do given enough free time. Capitalists have this obsession with making “the next big thing” when what we need is already there, and I don’t think we should fall for that trap too.
No ill will here, just thought my argument was being misunderstood there.
we should be careful about trusting individual self-proclaimed Marxists
I agree with this, which is why I don’t read or quote from them, but their work might be relevant to others which is why they seem popular.
and instead should work more to propagate and organise the material that already exists
marxists.org is a great resource but doesn’t actually have Xi Jinping’s work on it, or any of the past 3 Chinese leaders for that matter, even though they are available in Chinese and English from official sources. ProleWiki is what this site promotes, though more work is definitely needed.
I think with mass literacy, bilingual normalcy and now the internet that we’re reaching a point where “big public figures” are less desirable. There is even some problems with trying too hard to have some, as we all know a couple internet celebrities who might as well be astroturfed feds co-opting these roles. Maybe the prolewiki is the next big Marxist.
More of just barks & make beliefs, the US system is doomed to no avail but here we are watching it all crumble.
It will only get worse with the economic warfare, Repression/Regression/Chaos/Divide/Disorder.The 4th Reich is a fitting name, they keep destroying progressive movements from the inside anyway.
To What End really, honestly don’t want to know the answer to this question but you gotta ask yourself was it worth it?Check out Ben Norton & Radhika Desai’s work and a recently discovered one for more context:
- https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/
- https://geopoliticaleconomy.org/
- https://youtube.com/@GeopoliticalEconomyReport
- https://youtube.com/@InternationalManifesto
- https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/geopolitical-economy-report/id1621947548
- https://podcastaddict.com/podcast/geopolitical-economy-report/3024316
- https://realprogressives.org/macro-n-cheese-podcast/
- https://youtube.com/@RealProgressives
- https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/macro-n-cheese/id1453085489
- https://podcastaddict.com/podcast/macro-n-cheese/3759825
Decolonised history by Historicly & Deep-State by Aaron Good:
- https://www.historicly.net/
- https://youtube.com/@Historicly
- https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/historicly/id1435086194
- https://podcastaddict.com/podcast/4013392
- https://americanexception.com/
- https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/american-exception/id1617469345
- https://podcastaddict.com/podcast/american-exception/3905903
Edit:
Added links & more contentfor others who were confused, “Historic.ly” is the name of a podcast, not its URL (which is this)
I actually think that with the internet and everything, we will gradually move away from “big thinkers”. Sure, there will still be people producing decent theory, but i just can’t see in the current world a russian revolution like scenario when whole shifts at factories would meet up to read Marx.
I believe we will move towards a sort of “crowdsourced” theory where the main theoretical line is born organically out of continuos communication and discussion until we eventually get to a point where most contradictions and disagreements are solved. At that point the “big thinker” and his work will be one of many inputs, and not some sort of ideological hegemon.
Sort of like it is happening on here. We didn’t read the same stuff, but with time the community shaped itself to a point where we substantially agree with each other on pretty much everything.
I believe we will move towards a sort of “crowdsourced” theory where the main theoretical line is born organically out of continuos communication and discussion until we eventually get to a point where most contradictions and disagreements are solved.
Not if the CIA or FBI have anything to say about it. Hell not if Maoists and Trots still exist. Hell not if grifters still exist and wield enormous influence that trickles into and infects even those who condemn them on the whole.
This feels kind of like thinking along anarchist lines. That if we only allow everyone to do their thing, people will just arrive at the right conclusions. Even if all institutions sabotaging Marxism magically vanished tomorrow and everyone forgot they existed and their methods, there would still be problems with this. With them existing and those who benefit from them and replicate their suppression and division, this is a pipedream. There’s a reason parties adopt a party line, and that’s because you’ll never get 100% agreement. The point of that of course being, disagree behind closed doors, discuss, debate, but then present a united front once dem-cent process is done whether you lose or win. However you’ll always have haters, power-mongers, fed-plants, and people high on their own fumes.
We need a party, a real movement and leadership within that movement to begin to write down any worthwhile theory in the west. Moreover that movement has to have some sort of success beyond just being mildly popular as CPUSA was in the 30s. Theory without practical, proven application is just spitballing hypotheticals into the void and not necessarily worth a lot.
Also I’ll offer a lot of the western left is infected, deeply with idealism, western nonsense thinking, etc. I think the worthwhile theory of our era is going to come out of China and be translated. At least until the west begins to crumble and a real movement that begins notching successes forms in the west. Until that point it’s largely naval-gazing. The one thing we can try and do right now is solidarity, solidarity, solidarity with other nations and peoples. Anti-imperialism is the one litmus test, wishing for the defeat of the west to which we must hold ourselves and all who would call themselves Marxists who are not in fact vulgar perverters of that term. Ukraine has been helpful in this, weeding out those still clinging to the propaganda of empire and the bourgeoisie who benefit from it.
I am also hopeful for translations of Chinese theory. The west will still need theorists analysing local conditions, though, so revolutionary parties should be cultivating that analysis. Otherwise, I agree with you.
We need to make sure people without a “higher education” understand socialism and communism.
I agree the world has changed a lot with modern tech. And we should be utilising that. It does provide opportunities and it must be theorised, starting with analysis like yours. I do have some criticisms, though.
i just can’t see in the current world a russian revolution like scenario when whole shifts at factories would meet up to read Marx.
This is one of our tasks. It must be built. Reading and discussing key texts regularly and in a careful order must be part of a revolutionary organisation.
I believe we will move towards a sort of “crowdsourced” theory where the main theoretical line is born organically out of continuos communication and discussion until we eventually get to a point where most contradictions and disagreements are solved.
I agree but this is the task of a revolutionary party working with the people to develop a mass line. I’m unsure if it can arise spontaneously.
One of the key benefits of people like Parenti or Woolf is that due to their careers, they have the time to think, write, and publicise their ideas. That’s hard for people with unrelated full time jobs. Although there is some good work by groups like Notes From Below (I’ll get a link).
with time the community shaped itself to a point where we substantially agree with each other on pretty much everything.
That might be more because the patsocs, Hoxhaist, and liberals we’re all expelled lol. (I’m joking, here. I agree with you though as I’ve changed my views on many topics since joining here. So the agreement isn’t because there’s no room for dissent.)
Maybe Gloria La Riva.
I’ve read that just like PSL, Gloria La Riva is unfortunately a plant that is CIA-controlled opposition. I’m still shocked.
Edit: Why the downvotes? I can provide a link to what I read.
You got those links? Interested in the psl claims
Does the paranoid “fleawar” person support any actual organizations (besides maybe Hezbollah)? Sure any leftist movement is gonna have feds, but where are we supposed to organize?
That’s a fair point, but aside from reading their articles, I don’t know much about them.
I would argue that its not paranoia if there really are people after us, working visibly and in the shadows.
I don’t have an answer, but I hope the point fleawar is making is that we have to build something on our own.
Ok, after like 6 hours of going through some of this stuff… There’s not really a lot of convincing arguments. Claiming Gloria LaRiva is a plant is a stretch.
The author basically denounces anything other than armed resistance; times are different and the PSL is seemingly adopting a coalition effort (although still Marxist oriented).
Now I do agree that some of these figures that have been invited to podcasts or delivered speeches may be problematic, but those people are neither part of the leadership nor even part of the PSL.
Whether the PSL has been co-opted, I think only time will tell. Until then still seems to me like a positive force actually organizing and tackling the challenges therein.
Fair points
Look at the roster of writers at Verso Books, Haymarket Books, Pluto Press. There are lots of great left thinkers working right now.
I agree they have some good writers but all three publish so much anti-communist literature that it can be hard to sift the good from the bad. And it takes time reading the founding thinkers just to know what to look out for in left anti-communist literature.
Yeah, you’re absolutely right. As much great stuff as I find from those presses, I’m horrified at times, too.
Luckily, their good stuff is top notch, so I can’t complain too much. Three quite big, leftist publishers in this world isn’t to be sniffed at, either!
Breht, Allison, and you, Comrade.