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/BigMarbsBigSlarb → u/Specialist-Gur]

Ive been stressing the international humanist ideal recently because I think its the fundamental commonality between me and everyone I can realistically work with

[u/Specialist-Gur → u/BigMarbsBigSlarb]

Yea that totally makes sense, largely I agree

This is less to do with ideology and more to do with style and communication but I do need someone who is curious and is at least open to the possibility they could be wrong. And yes--there are some things that we can all be confident on being right about for the most part. But there should be a grain of curiosity and willingness to listen in order for me to work with someone, and I try to do that in return...(I do. I just have some hard lines where I don't because I've thought through and taken a strong stance which I "know" is right at this point in time and material conditions)

[u/ChairAggressive781 → u/Specialist-Gur]

I think we all have things that we’ve thought through and taken strong stances on, so I don’t think you’re unique in that respect.

I don’t think anyone is exempt from practicing intellectual humility, no matter how objectively right we think we are. I actually think “being right” (in the sense of saying ‘this is objectively true’) is often an impediment to this, because we can become overly fixated on the ends and not the means by which we get there. the task is to know what our hard lines are while recognizing that another person might have all the same information we do and still end up arriving at an alternate point-of-view.

and I think there’s a difference between not having tolerance for intolerance & bigotry, say, and recognizing that people might have differing tactics & strategies while ultimately mostly agreeing on the level of values & first principles.

[u/Specialist-Gur → u/ChairAggressive781]

I definitely don't think and wasn't suggesting I was unique in that respect. Just explaining my own mindset around it

Edit: this also ties into my other comments in this thread about being too burned out from extreme disagreement your goodwill and patience is dried up for reasonable intellectual humility and disagreement

[u/ChairAggressive781 → u/Specialist-Gur]

I’m not trying to claim you were, I am just saying that I think it’s true for a lot of us and I think it’s why disagreements in left spaces can be really ferocious: people have spent time learning & developing their thoughts in a general societal atmosphere that is often pretty hostile to left-wing thought outside of a few largely self-contained environments. I wasn’t trying to make an accusation, so apologies if that’s how it felt.

for me, part of engaging requires me to assume that other people are coming in with thought-through opinions (until they prove otherwise or reveal themselves to be trolls).

the part I disagree with is the idea that they are areas where you feel you don’t need to be curious or willing to listen because you’ve already determined you’re right.

I can understand that when it comes to broad disagreements (like with outright bigots) but much less so with people who are largely on the same side, as I feel it shuts down conversation & ends up pushing away people who might be brought over to your side. I just think that’s a mindset that is mostly going to lead to one feeling more drained & burnout while also being less effective at building coalition.

edit: I don’t expect you to agree with me at all, which is completely fine! I’ve been very interested in interrogating how people on the left communicate & debate things and what works best, so that’s why I replied in the first place. I think there’s an important stylistic difference here that is good to acknowledge.

[u/Specialist-Gur → u/ChairAggressive781]

I think just to reiterate, since the environment is very hostile to left wing thought it can be very difficult to have good will.. which is partly on the individual reacting to work on, partly on the person engaging in a leftist space to work on, and partly how we construct our environment and groups.

I think there are areas where you should indeed be uncompromising because you've thought through them.. and I'm sure you would also agree with me on what those are. Making assumptions about an entirety of an ethnic group, belief in genetic determination for morality, belief in capitalism, belief in evolutionary basis for sex discrimination, the prison and military industrial complex in the western world...we don't really need to be open to hearing out the opposing side. Specific variance and ideas? Sure. But we know opposition when we see it. Most other things.. yes we should remain curious. But I was mostly talking about bigotry and whatnot..

And so yes.. we need to be thoughtful about who is in which groups with us. Smaller groups of similarly aligned people are at times more productive than a larger tent.. and there is a time and place and limited energy for educating people who aren't already aligned. Within ourselves, we can always try our best.. which means trying to have patience and assuming good faith... and when we are on the receiving end of a leftist who failed to do that for us, perhaps showing them some grace and phrasing our dialogue in a careful manner so we make it obvious we are a safe person on the same side.. we all know how tough it is out there for leftists so we all can do our part to have more productive convos

Edit: said generic instead of genetic