Socialism isn’t a set of static policies, it is the real struggle for the liberation of all people from the oppression of a few. That struggle has taken many different forms and character throughout history. It isn’t a set of policy goals we suddenly reach and then we are socialist. The struggle never ends, even when we reach that point, we will still struggle to make sure the liberation we win doesn’t harden into some soulless bureaucracy that develops and sustains power for itself.
It is possible to look at Mamdani’s history as an organizer, his historic win for mayor and say that he is someone who is struggling for socialism. We can be critically supportive of him, and unfortunately there already is much to be critical about. But there is also much to support.
But categorical objectivism, which you are espousing, is not socialist either. Identity is not static, socialism defies categorization since it represents a historically contingent dynamic relation between the masses of people, the means of production, political power, cultural development, and much more. Anything that delivers verifiable, material, sustained improvement in the lives of the growing mass of people is socialist.
Zohran isnt even mayor yet and he has grown our movement by a considerable amount.
If Mamdani is able to deliver on any of his promises that will be a kind of socialism. But in order to be successful he will need support from not just New Yorkers but from all of us in the struggle, all over the country and the world.
Distilling socialism into a set of policies rather than an active practical movement of the working class organizing for our best interests commits the same dehumanizing contextualizing as any soulless neoliberal. Stop thinking statically and start thinking dynamically so you can join our movement rather than sitting on the sidelines poo-pooing actual progress.
I’d ask you what in this gives you the impression that it’s an AI answer, but I don’t see there as being any point because the comment you’re replying to is patently obviously writing that themselves — you’re just not willing to meaningfully engage in a conversation.
I would really encourage you to go back and reread the comment you replied to, because I think that person wrote something that was quite thoughtful and insightful. If you disagree with their points, then that’s your prerogative, but maybe that could lead to some productive discussion.
I get why your instinct was to disregard the comment — there’s so much AI slop around nowadays clamouring for our attention that it’s easy to become guarded against the potential of wasting our time reading something that no-one even bothered to write. It’s an inevitable (and unfortunately often necessary) defense mechanism in our current information ecosystem. In this case though, I am confident that this is a false positive, and that the comment you’re replying to isn’t AI. I’m writing this because I would find it a shame if someone spent the time to write a thoughtful reply to you and you didn’t spend the time to actually try to hear what they’re saying.
Socialism isn’t a set of static policies, it is the real struggle for the liberation of all people from the oppression of a few. That struggle has taken many different forms and character throughout history. It isn’t a set of policy goals we suddenly reach and then we are socialist. The struggle never ends, even when we reach that point, we will still struggle to make sure the liberation we win doesn’t harden into some soulless bureaucracy that develops and sustains power for itself.
It is possible to look at Mamdani’s history as an organizer, his historic win for mayor and say that he is someone who is struggling for socialism. We can be critically supportive of him, and unfortunately there already is much to be critical about. But there is also much to support.
But categorical objectivism, which you are espousing, is not socialist either. Identity is not static, socialism defies categorization since it represents a historically contingent dynamic relation between the masses of people, the means of production, political power, cultural development, and much more. Anything that delivers verifiable, material, sustained improvement in the lives of the growing mass of people is socialist.
Zohran isnt even mayor yet and he has grown our movement by a considerable amount.
If Mamdani is able to deliver on any of his promises that will be a kind of socialism. But in order to be successful he will need support from not just New Yorkers but from all of us in the struggle, all over the country and the world.
Distilling socialism into a set of policies rather than an active practical movement of the working class organizing for our best interests commits the same dehumanizing contextualizing as any soulless neoliberal. Stop thinking statically and start thinking dynamically so you can join our movement rather than sitting on the sidelines poo-pooing actual progress.
Thanks ai for the generic answer
I’d ask you what in this gives you the impression that it’s an AI answer, but I don’t see there as being any point because the comment you’re replying to is patently obviously writing that themselves — you’re just not willing to meaningfully engage in a conversation.
I would really encourage you to go back and reread the comment you replied to, because I think that person wrote something that was quite thoughtful and insightful. If you disagree with their points, then that’s your prerogative, but maybe that could lead to some productive discussion.
I get why your instinct was to disregard the comment — there’s so much AI slop around nowadays clamouring for our attention that it’s easy to become guarded against the potential of wasting our time reading something that no-one even bothered to write. It’s an inevitable (and unfortunately often necessary) defense mechanism in our current information ecosystem. In this case though, I am confident that this is a false positive, and that the comment you’re replying to isn’t AI. I’m writing this because I would find it a shame if someone spent the time to write a thoughtful reply to you and you didn’t spend the time to actually try to hear what they’re saying.