Anya Parampil: Ocasio-Cortez is a Progressive Fraud

Rand Paul thread is dead because his idea of anti-imperialist action is "write your congressman".

Literally your logic rn. Individualist grass roots insurrection or bust. Besides, Putin is a neolib tool and china is mixed economy meme.

RT would want everyone to believe that the real leftist is Steve Bannon or one of his goons

Pelosi is also in the center of the party. AOC backed her but the challenge to her was coming from the Democratic Party's right wing

Last post: Rep. Beto O'Rourke when he was running for Senate in my state (Texas), would like to remind people that he was at odds with Pelosi and voted against her at one point. That's because he's a conservative Democrat and she is to his left. Now you'll see shitty centrist media now talking about Beto as a potential "progressive" candidate in 2020. It is complete nonsense.

You are confusing RT coverage of Europe with their coverage of America.

No, more like "we need to team up with the serial killers to get rid of the omnicidal death beast that threatens to extinct all of humanity". It's like when the heroes team up with the lesser recurring villains to defeat the REAL big bad.

Nobody is teaming up with anyone. We cheer for imperialists to slaughter each other and suggest ideas that result in maximum carnage of reactionaries and destruction of empires.

jungle music is good

Attached: R-42019-1184795647.jpeg.jpg (600x600, 98.48K)

I mean I don't disagree but are they like actually to use what they did as evidence and not who she associate with?

I thought RT is alright with their news stories.

Fuck off, Unruhe

hola reddit

If you don't think this right wing challenge was controlled opposition, you need your head examined. Oldest trick in the book to guilt gullible freshmen.

Reality isn’t a Saturday morning cartoon you schizoid

Based and baboonpilled

What's with all the radlibs ITT? Drink bleach you redditscum.

Did ANYONE here actually have hope for Cortez? How many times must you idiots be fooled?

...

"turn the imperialist war into a civil war"

AOC is not a complicated person to understand. I feel like anyone who has been a socialistic for a reasonable amount of time can come to a conclusion about her in a few minutes. She's a social democrats: not the worst of burger politicians, but no the solution either, although the actual solution doesn't rely on electoral politics in general. An attitude of "well, she's a lot better than most democrats, and preferable to Crowley" is all you would think needs to be said. but now my board has endless comments along the lines of "shwes ebil", from people who I'm sure are more than willing to accept severe compromises on socialist economic and social policy in various corners of the world doesn't explain the constant hate boner and conspiracy crafting people engage in. caveat that I'm gonna start pathologizing, but the people working to hard to discredit her seem seem like they're threatened that their own social position in the pathetic american socialist community and commentary is threatened by the broader appeal AOC brings.

revolutionary politics in America is a joke at this point. people are such reactionary churchcucks any "revolution" will ultimately end in totalitarianism inevitably from the sheer amount of ideology.

...

Pretty much. She has a big media profile because she's an uncharacteristically young, attractive Hispanic woman who knocked out a long-time and powerful incumbent while running on the Bernie platform. But she's just one congresswoman. She's not revolutionary but who was claiming she ever was?

I don't live in her district so I didn't vote for her. I dunno what you want from me dude

...

Revolutionary potential is here in America. The problem is that there are so many fake leftists that divert the working class that it seems impossible. However, in times of crisis Americans will lash out violently. The betrayals of the labor unions, democrats, Democrat Cops of America, ISO, etc, have led to conditions where people are just fucking angry. This anger is bound to explode and in a population wheres theres more guns than people and a tendency towards violence….it means that revolution is infact a huge possibility.

Radlibs are also infact the greatest threat to socialism because their job is to divert the working class. They dont "legitimize" socialism, they lead people away from it. Socialists have a task in the USA of smashing not only liberals and conservatives, but also social democrats, labor unions, and fake leftist organizations and rally them around a true vanguard party. This is why I highly suggest any true socialist in the USA to join the SEP or the IYSSE because this is the only genuine marxist group left and they are in desperate need of young leaders.

You all might say that Americans are too "cucked" by religion and conservatism. However, the greatest strikes of this past year happened in the heartland of the South. The working class has an inherent disposition to revolt and they desperately want to but the labor unions have kept them tied down. The teachers strike should have gone on and the vast majority of teachers wanted it to and even expanded into a national strike….but they were betrayed. Don't hate on the American worker, hate on the organizations that are keeping them in chains.

What is the IYSSE?

Its the youth section of the SEP. It's essentially a training ground for students to get educated in marxist literature and workers struggles. We regularly visit strikes, write up articles, and study marxist literature at our meetings as well as discuss contemporary developments. We are rapidly expanding right now and have sections in almost every major city in the USA. Here's our website: iysse.com/ and our daily news publication, wsws.org. If any of you are students, please contact the SEP and start an IYSSE at your university.

That's cool.

$$Wait, i'm new, can we actually Trust the russian news?$$

Every socialist party declares itself the only genuine Marxist group and dedicates itself to smashing all the other groups. They're all also splinter groups of each other because not only do they dedicate themselves to smashing other parties, but also smashing themselves.

This all seems extremely stupid.

Why is RT so relatively left-wing while Russian politics aren't that leftist at all?

Because RT is russian state propaganda meant for foreign consumption.

? Why would a capitalist state with a right-wing government want to spread leftist propaganda "for foreign consumption"?

Russia is allied with Cuba and the Bolivarian nations so it is usually favorable to their cause. Same with Assad and Palestine.

They're dedicated to spreading anti-capitalist/anti-imperialist propaganda. The fact that this LOOKS left-wing is only because America is right-wing.

gd autocorrect "capitalist" should be Am*rican

I don't watch RT very much unless Richard Wolff is on there or something, but they seemed to have gone left a bit yeah? During the 2016 election the channel was not necessarily pro-Trump but extremely anti-Hillary, and there were obvious reasons why the Kremlin would not want a Hillary presidency compared to rolling the dice on Trump, but my feeling is that Trump is not so beneficial to Russia despite all the handwringing in the U.S. press as "interference."

If a revolution were to happen in the US it would benefit them by weakening their strongest competitor. Its the same as Germany sneaking Lenin back to Russia in WW1

Thats why it's essential to look at the history of such organizations. The splintering of the SEP was essential because it turned out that there were CIA and GPU infiltrators that were actively working to dismantle the fourth international. A detailed analysis can be read here.
wsws.org/en/articles/2018/11/14/scfi-n14.html

The capitalist state has also gotten increasingly sophisticated in its manipulation of marxism and what socialism means due to the dominance of college campuses by postmoderism and its rejection of the idea of "totalitarian" theories like marxism. This essentially means that many tendencies reject the working class as a revolutionary force and focus on identity politics and also it means rejection of historical fact proving the inherent tendencies of labor unions to become arms of the capitalist state. All you need to do is look at all of the supposed marxist organizations that supported fake leftists like Syriza, Sanders, Ocasio-Cortez, etc in order to realize that "splintering" is necessary because the "socialist" organizations are supporting forces that will betray the working class.

That's why marxist organizations need to principled and fight against forces that betray the proletariat. If they are unable to do so, then we are all truly fucked. The SEP has called out and consistently been validated in its analysis. Their problem is that not nearly enough socialists are rallied behind them and for that we need a strong online presence and ways to reaching out to young people.

This is your brain on Trotskyism. Well, I agree with a lot of that tbh. But I don't think you can chock up idpol to just a CIA infiltration when there were a lot of people who weren't having their concerns addressed by doctrinaire Marxist orgs once the working class "diversified" so to speak. Go to any major American airport like ATL or DFW and you'll see this vast workforce that is predominantly black and brown, and a lot of women, but the old socialist party presses which have been chugging along since the 1960s are still run by old white guys from Michigan.

Nothing wrong with old white guys of course, but there's a language barrier, and the SEP's failures can't just be explained away because all the other socialists are too stupid to wake up and grasp the brilliant insights of the SEP's central committee. Anyways, I wish you the best.

...

That's the fundamental contradiction that we're faced with. Yes, it is far easier to build a mass movement by simply aligning yourself with capitalist forces and shilling for petty-bourgeois politicians. However that would mean a betrayal of marxism and ultimately a failure of the movement. Ideological purity is therefore necessary to ensure that whatever movement is built becomes successful in its goals.

I recently joined the IYSSE and am trying to make it expand on my campus. From my contact with the SEP, there is definitely a generational gap. However, these people are extremely knowledgeable and engaged with me on debates sometimes spanning hours on issues that I was confused about. Its been a small group for a while but I think its telling that the people that are in it have been with the SEP for decades because it indicates that the ideology was so strong that despite stagnancy, its members were retained. However, there's an increasing amount of young people joining the organization and I think there's a lot that can be taken from that as many of our members now were previously affiliated with the Democrat Cops of America(like I was). The infusion of youth means greater knowledge of advances in technology and marketing. This is being currently used to expand our website: wsws.org, and trying to reach out through online spaces. Our younger members are far more diverse(not that it should matter) and are a lot more dedicated to expanding our reach. Ideological purity is a good thing, its just that the ideology needs to be broadcast much more loudly so that everyone can be exposed to it.

When I have time, I'll try to make a detailed post on this site explaining why its essential that socialists join the SEP and IYSSE. If you guys have any suggestions as to how we could reach out to more people, please let me know.

What kind of working-class organizing does the SEP do?

The SEP is currently organizing workers within the UAW and the Teamster's unions to form rank and file committees independent of the unions, due to the union bureaucracy's blatant corruption and capitulation to the capitalists. We hold emergency conference meetings with workers, pushing them towards creating rank and file committes.
wsws.org/en/articles/2018/11/28/lear-n28.html

These measures are essential because the moment significant portions of workers disassociate themselves from the unions and instead fall towards the vanguard party for guidance, it becomes the moment that a multi-industry, national strike becomes possible. These rank and file committees are currently focused in the Detroit area, which is why its pertinent to build up the SEP and IYSSE in other areas so that we can get in touch with workers throughout the nation and push them towards breaking from the union and forming true socialist workers committees.

That's cool actually

It's not "they". Some of their hosts/reporters are openly socialist, like Anya Parampil, Caleb Maupin, Rania Khalek, Lee Camp (kind of, he's more of a utopian hippie), Chris Hedges (of a naive "non-violence" Christian anarchist bent). The other main ones are social democrats (Mike Papantonio, Hollande Cooke, Bart Chilton, Jesse Ventura), right-libertarian (Lionel, Max Keiser, Peter Lavelle, Rick Sanchez).

I get that, and I understand Abby Martin had a show on there a few years ago, but I wonder if they've hired more from the left recently. When did Anya Parampil get hired on? The way I look at it, the Kremlin calls the shots in terms of the broader alignment the network is going to take, though they grant a lot of leeway to the hosts and so on. It seemed to be much more of a right-libertarian network early on.

Attached: spencer.jpg (863x627, 55.16K)

I think the point of RT is to sow dissent, I don't doubt it would have shifted leftward as the left has become more prominent as an anti-establishment force in western politics. Of course a decade ago right wing libertarians filled that role, so they appealed to them.

They basically hold a line of "If it isn't against Russia, it is accepted". This is why UK RT has Alex Salmond (renowned Scottish nationalist) host a show, but also takes on figures like Nigel Farage, George Galloway, members of Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet: despite their political varied nature. As they take an oppositionist stance to the establishment when they can. Now the UK has laws about political bias on telly, which puts a damper on a lot of what they can do (since misreporting facts can get you fined) but still. I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years, they started letting far more "hard remainers" on it to push their voice. I would honestly avoid them like I would avoid most foreign television established in a country purely because it is inherently seeking to do so with an agenda (CNN, Al-Jazeera, Press TV, ect.) of spreading their domestic worldview. Also there's no real need: nobody really watches them, you'd be better off speaking in other places. Regardless, the best method is always to establish alternative media sources to spread your message then rely on existing terrestrial television or print media: purely because then you don't have to contend with the biases that exist within those organisations and you can reach the people you are trying to speak to more directly. Also approaching local media is also a lot more important that people take, because they tend to have higher readership rates in their areas (especially if it is a free weekly for example) and they tend to have a harder time of creating political narrative.

Damn she's so ugly

But I like merengue and salsa

Wait a second…

reddit.com/r/TheTrotskyists/comments/9knuuo/why_is_there_no_discussion_of_the_icfi_and_the/

Hmm

Ocasio-Cortez isn't a true leftist, and she's really led the charge in getting people mixed up on social democracy and democratic socialism. The possibility she could sell out is concerning to everyone, and she is playing the political game. For one thing, her speeches are very mechanical and calculated.

That said, I'm still hopeful, and I honestly like her. I am concerned that she could sell out, but I think most likely she is pretty much what people think - a Bernie Sanders-style progressive liberal.

The key issue that will define her, and that we can use to gauge how successful and real she is, is "money out of politics." If she starts taking money from corporate donors, she is fake. If she doesn't, and continues to advocate for people against corporate interests, then she deserves her base.

Also, take RT with a grain of salt. They've done good work, especially a decade ago. But they have more than their fair share of hacks, and the Russian government clearly has an influence on what they choose to cover, so they're about a step away from a propaganda arm. The only reason that doesn't mean they should be disregarded, is that most major American news media is effectively propaganda for American corporatism anyway.

lol no she isn't. She's no supermodel, but she's objectively attractive. Get off the computer, go outside and talk to people.

They hate her because she is pro Palestinian. All other claims are subterfuge.

nah

She looks ugly for a 29 year old. Woman looks damn near 40. She was a bartender so almost certain to be a former high functioning alcoholic. And alcohol murders your skin. Oh and she has crazy eyes.

this is a bigger factor than all those other things you mentioned

No reddit, leave please.

...