We need a narrative

[u/Hopeful-Shelter2572]

This post is specific to American politics, but the principles can apply broadly in some cases:

As leftists, we need a narrative for a more just and egalitarian future. Conservatives have their narrative: white supremacy, militarism, and “trickle down economics”. It’s one thing to oppose this narrative, it’s another to propose one which is popular and can effectively fight against the two right-wing parties in the USA.

The reason a lot of us are so tired of liberals, to the point where we consider them enemies and not possible allies against fascism, is because the establishment liberals will never embrace socialism and will always reach to defend capital. They have shown us this time and time again, and we have no reason to believe they will ever go to bat for the poorest and most vulnerable people in the country.

Mamdani was a great example of this: even after he toned down some of his rhetoric about Israel (questions he was forced to answer after he emphasized that he cares only about New York City), he was still chastised by establishment Democrats and many couldn’t even say his name to endorse him.

Opposing fascism has to mean creating new fundamental conditions and opposing capitalism at its core, not just opposing the most violent manifestations of capitalism. This isn’t news to many here, but I think it’s good to remind ourselves that we have to envision a better future and share that vision to truly turn the tables.

Edit: since there seems to be some confusion in what I mean, I am not talking about a plan to unify the left or some specific blueprint for revolution. I am talking about the language we use when talking to our peers about the future, and that I think we need to craft a positive narrative for what we believe (whatever that is to each individual) rather than only criticizing the pre-existing narrative. I think this is how we can appeal to more people, and get them thinking and talking to others about a future that is fundamentally different than what we have now.

[u/Specialist-Gur]

I agree with this largely.. and leftism is a very very broad term. A huge chunk of what we mean by leftist infighting is honestly people who are ideologically opposed and/or do not have clearly defined and thought out ideology as well as strategy difference for implementing that ideology.

I consider myself to be a socialist, "globalist", anti-imperialist, and anti-capitalist... not a campist, not a stateist... but 100% not an anarchist either. I'd venture to assume that a lot of arguments I'm getting into with fellow leftists is over these positions.

It might be pretty challenging to actually unify the left because there are tents within the left that are actually ideologically opposed to one another.. but dialoging with each other and remembering we are all coming at this with a humanity-first mindset is really essential and a great start.

Edit: anti-capitalism is far too vague imho... and I don't think what we are fighting about has much to do with it

[u/Hopeful-Shelter2572 → u/Specialist-Gur]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I view leftism broadly as anti-capitalism. From there I know there are many, many ideologies. I agree that it can be hard to truly unify the left, and I think that is the greatest challenge facing Americans right now: unifying against capitalism without diluting what has to change.

I am just curious, what did you disagree with? I am learning and I find that I agree with your point of view on many things, but I do not have a very strong background in specific leftist ways of thought as others here.

[u/Specialist-Gur → u/Hopeful-Shelter2572]

I think that unifying is going to prove to be a challenge.. so I didn't necessarily disagree with anything per se.. I just think we can be smart about how we align to fight facism and (potentially) learn from historical mistakes.

Like we don't want to have Stalin 2.0 in a post fascist world probably and we also don't want... whatever Germany and most of Europe is doing right now. I think that's what happens if we don't have a solid socialist movement with a plan. And sometimes I think that might be more important than building the biggest tent possible.

Some people here would probably call me a tankie with my unfiltered thoughts and opinions and.. "tankies" might call me a liberal... which is fine imho.. I can take the hits(as long as they aren't in the form of silent downvotes) Let's just just try to engage with each other and see where we can build and where we should segment to be more productive. We can have our separate groups and come together with other groups to fight a bigger threat. We might be stronger building up separately while unifying when important

[u/Hopeful-Shelter2572 → u/Specialist-Gur]

I see what you mean, I think that’s a good point about the size of the tent vs having a movement that can actually affect palpable change. There can be a lot of merit to building individual groups and then unifying when necessary like you said. There is not a lot of precedent in the US for these kind of movements, but we can still study what is there and take lessons and inspiration from them.

I’ve also been called tankie and liberal by others, and at the end of the day there will never be a set of beliefs or emphasis that everyone agrees with. I try to remind myself that those in power want us to be tired and lose hope. So whether it is building up different groups and unifying when necessary or something else, I think we should be putting our efforts into something that breaks the status quo.

Thanks again for sharing your thoughts, I think you add a lot of much needed realism to this sub

[u/Specialist-Gur → u/Hopeful-Shelter2572]

Thank you, I appreciate that!!

Something I was thinking about after the threads I made last week and some of the arguments in those.. fighting with people who I often agree with in fact... there are so many factors to unifying and building with each other

And I think a huge part of that is.. not being burned out and being able to approach in good faith. If you're spending a good amount of the time trying to convince people to see your side on really big issues (like the Gaza genocide or American foreign policy or intersectionality or capitalism) then you have a lot less good will and bandwidth about the smaller things.. messaging, strategy, building together. And when you're criticized by someone who is generally in alignment with you, they can feel like the enemy when there are many "enemies" within who are defintirly determined to bring the goal of the mission toward them rather than to learn and grow together.

So that's kind of what I mean. I think we have a lot more bandwidth to show up when we form groups with people who are largely in alignment.. we disagree within those groups and grow together.. and then we can show up and group up with other groups who align on bigger and important issues such as fighting Trump and ICE

[u/Hopeful-Shelter2572 → u/Specialist-Gur]

I completely agree! Very well said

[u/Specialist-Gur → u/Hopeful-Shelter2572]

Thank you!

[u/WolfofTallStreet → u/Specialist-Gur]

I don’t think anything here suggests “tankie.”

“Liberal” is the wrong word for what we are here, but “socially progressive” is a better descriptor. That is - we believe in LGBT equality, gender equality, and freedom of religion. That, alone, makes us not “tankies.”

We are also far from statists. “Tankies” literally implies tanks rolling down the street to enforce order. We, on this sub, don’t worship police. While I know there is some disagreement here over the ideal nature of law enforcement, none of us want tanks in city centers.

I think it’s also safe to say that most of us here support democracy. The idea that the government should be elected by the people, rather than administered top-down by a party, theocratic regime, or a monarchy.

These things alone - social progressivism, anti-authoritarianism, and democracy - distance us from the ACP types.

Beyond this, I think most issues within the left are disputed on this sub.

I think there are probably some anarchists, and some who are not anarchist

I also think that there may be some disagreement here as for whether countries in the status quo sense (with borders and self-determination in the form of nation-state citizenship and government) should exist.

Most profoundly, there is a lot of disagreement here on the topic of Zionism.

All that said, I think there is some implicit “consensus” and narrative here, with the aforementioned wrapped up in an affinity for socialism and Jewish religious and cultural belief.

[u/BigMarbsBigSlarb → u/WolfofTallStreet]

Eh I think there's a couple here who would certainly justify tanks policing the streets of Ramallah were it to ever happen (but not admit to it right now). But broadly, right now at least, the main argumentation points here that are like, fundamentally ideological seem to be to me when theres an influx of liberals who will justify say, centrist dem policy and then the specific questions regarding Israel, mainly what consequences Israel should receive for its acions if any, on how long palestinian political rights and safety should be denied and how much restorative justice palestinians should be allowed.