Hey so I'm doing a radio show tomorrow, gonna talk about socialism/communism and wanted to farm suggestions

Hey so I'm doing a radio show tomorrow, gonna talk about socialism/communism and wanted to farm suggestions.

My main idea is to talk a little about christian communism, since this is more relatable to normie Americans (it's a progressive station tho so the audience is mostly receptive).

Otherwise, I wanna focus on challenging property rights and arguments for that, while addressing philosophical (economic reductionism) and moral critiques (muh starving, muh purges) of communism. I myself am a Baudrillardian (sorry?) but I hade that extent of my power level on air. Just to say I'm sympathetic to critiques of Marxist metaphysics and think it's a productive thing to work on to help make communism more possible.

So, other than hating pomo BS, what do you think about the show? I really think the Xian angle is good (won't dwell, and I'm in the south so..), but lmk what you think.

Attached: images.png (235x215, 5.23K)

Other urls found in this thread:

medium.com/@discomfiting/debunking-communism-killed-more-people-than-naziism-7a9880696f67)
youtube.com/watch?v=LpoydJn9ECQ
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Oh god please only delete one

I think it's a good idea OP

dont talk about muh purges and shit, dont try to talk about the ussr at all, just allude that the socialism of the 21st century will be different

keep it about explaining marxism, explaining how for example christian values are being corrupted in capitalism and that socialism offers a more just society, just moral spooks like that

you cant go full ☭TANKIE☭ when you deal with normie american

t. marxist leninist

Thanks!

Yeah I feel you, let people call in and talk about the USSR since they inevitably will (forgot to mention it's a call in show). It's bad politics to be defending your side, you wanna just lay out your positive ideas.

That said my stance is that I'm open to the idea that problems with Marxist theory led to the problems with the USSR. I first learned about this by reading Camus' The Rebel, but obviously Baudrillard talks about this as well. Even for a standard ML, I think this angle may be a good way to deal with this kind of critique. We give up any idea of a rock solid Marxist theory existing at this stage, but we also open up to ideas from all parties. Building communism obviously is a group effort.

To this end my criticism of Marxism would mainly be as a representation of Western rationalism. Many people get carried away with the idea that Marxism provides an unbreakable eternal truth, even if this is not what Marx intended. Still, my criticism of Marx would go together with a general critique of modern Western political thought so it doesn't open the door to capitalism.

Assuming you've done your homework on the subject, I would strongly recommend not only talking about theory, but also about the history of the movement in the u.s, especially the IWW, Black Panthers, (and how they weren't retarded black nazis, and viewed unity with all working class people as a necessity) and the many american leftists that existed, like Lucy Parsons, Eugene Debs etc, and how unions tie into all of it

I think it may still be useful to ground any reference to perceived failures of 20th century socialist states in a vague historical materialism. For instance, in only so many words saying the political conditions of the USSR were not ideal but a product of being birthed from Tsarist russia, that the socialists there throughout their whole lives only knew oppression and autocracy and so when they came to power they implemented similar mechanisms of control to suppress enemies. By contrast, western states are coming from traditions of democracy and so the idea that socialism will be all secret police and unaccountable commissars is not grounded in anything.

You can simply dismiss it, but I think it still leaves room for the listener to think that you didn't even give a reason as to why this time is different. It seems common to fundamentally believe that socialism is inextricable from a repressive state apparatus. So personally I'd rather make the common radlib talking point that a society with socialist values which arose out of democratic conditions would be something like the scandinavian countries, or the labor party under Atlee and its nationalizations, creation of the health service, housing initiatives etc.

We may say they never went far enough, that they should have a more radical project, but I think it's useful to recontextualize the way people think of political development away from a core idea resulting in a particular political expression, and more towards a particular idea finding its development rooted in what conditions it came out of.

Optics
Hit them with syndicalism, it's not as insane as talking about Jesus coming down from the heavens, to guillotine Jeff Bezos.
You can also appeal to them with folk music, and talk about how the IWW is inherently American, so they can't go "muh Russia"
Purges, and Starvation
Stalin was an immensely flawed character, (definitely purged unnecessarily, sometimes) but Socialism in one country was the the best he could do, as the German revolution was lost to Fascists, and there were a great number of forces already acting against the union. This could segway nicely into the points about starvation in the radio show.
The Holdomor is greatly exaggerated to bring down the USSR (source here medium.com/@discomfiting/debunking-communism-killed-more-people-than-naziism-7a9880696f67) it was mostly the weather, and kulaks (Ukrainian farmer, landlords) burning their own stuff, in order to resist resist equal, and good, food distribution.
What's the show, btw

Yes you're 100% right, I had been thinking that (US history of socialism). Mentioning May Day here might be worth doing, since it's kinda funny that there's a labor holiday celebrated everywhere but the US based on an event in the US.

Yes, the Russian Rev not lining up with Marx's ideas is a core talking point. This does also open up to revisiting Marx's assumptions though. It doesn't just give a reason why the SU didn't work out. But teaching people about the failed Geeman rev, I agree, is very important (and helps blame capitalism for Nazism which it of course completely deserves).

Also, I don't think I will use the talking point about socialism from a democray because I think the US isn't all that democratic. Don't wanna say something I don't believe just to fool people into opening up to socialism. Confronting military intelligence is arguably the greatest obstacle to socialism so it's important not to minimize it as an issue.

I agree that talking about Christianity is mostly a waste of time but I'm gonna use it to feel like I'm getting off the hotseat when I go what's up let's talk about communism.

On theme musical interludes are a great idea. Any suggestions? Solidarity forever is overplayed. SU national anthem would be nice and edgy plus it's awesome.

Thanks for the medium article that's a great source. Addressing the black book directly is a good look i think.

I want to tell you the name of the show but is it a terrible idea? Dont want leftypol tards to ruin my life it's pretty dece

Don't talk about Christian communism unless you're actually a Christian

Reposting because the other one will probably be deleted
The only good angle is appealing to rational self-interest. Because it's the only thing that cuts through all the BS ideology.

You're not going to convince a bunch of petite-bourgeois evangelists to embrace communism because "Jesus was socialist".
If the audience in any way has a vested interests in maintaining the system, they're just going to dismiss you outright. But if they don't, then merely remind them of their own material self-interest.
Don't just point out that they're being robbed, make them feel it.

Inspire envy and righteous indignation. Appeal to emotion. Crush peoples faith in the ability of capitalism to solve their problems, as hope in the system is one of the things that keeps people from lashing out; Remind them of how their retirement plans will go unfunded, and their debts will remain unpaid, while the rich make off with billions and spend millions on luxuries they will never have.
If you're pushing for higher taxes, remind them that all ill-gotten wealth of the rich simply comes from them living on the workers dime. That all profits come from exploiting workers. And that there's no way that an executive or shareholder somehow works ten-thousand times as hard as their average employee.
It's not theft, because everything the rich have originally belonged to them; the workers.

If you're attacking landlords remind them that landlords do nothing. That they offer no useful service in turn for rent. Their "private property" be damned.
Denounce them as blood-sucking parasites, and point out that it's workers paid for by rents that maintain properties, while neo-feudal leeches make off with the profits.
If they then whine about how "no one will be allowed to be succesful!" remind them how all these tech billionaires weren't actually involved in the inventions that made them rich; be it Steve Jobs, or Zuckerberg, or Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and others. And that most engineers and scientists get scraps compared to what the executives and shareholders make.
Sure it's hyperbole. But when you have the soapbox there's no room for nuance and compromise. This isn't just about capitalism; you need to make it feel as a battle between good and evil.

If you're confronted with Best Korea/Vuvuzela/Whatever; bluster and redirect. Cherry pick instead of getting caught up in Marxist jargon and theoretical specifics; most won't care. And at best it will make you forgettable, at worst you will embarrass yourself on air.
Mention the successes of the Soviet Union (Space Race, elimination of famine, winning WW2), or just point at Sweden and Norway as "Socialist" countries. Hell, throw in China and how it's beating the west in various fields. Do not get pulled into this "not real socialism" crap.
Don't worry about sources - because who cares; it's all spectacle, and most anti-communist propaganda is based on feels >reals anyway. It's not like the interviewer is going to be knowledgeable enough to challenge you on it anyway.

And don't bother with culture wars nonsense; this is something primarily petite-bourgeois reactionaries care about. And that stuff is never a gateway to actually addressing the struggles of the working classes under capitalism. Don't even fall into the trap of engaging with it. It's irrelevant to (most) people's bottomline, and that's the only thing that should matter.

Attached: 1d44468128652402c02ecc69d7f440d7b6746986133faa26d259a5b2b2399d69.png (496x231, 60.08K)

...

Why? I'm mainly trying to remove the idea that you have to be atheist to be a communist. Just because Im not Xian doesn't mean I cant be overt about be open to christians. I think folks have an idea of "godless communism" but it doesn't have to be that way.

Why do you think I shouldnt talk about it, because I dont think the US is democratic so I wont say it? It's different because im not claiming to be Xian, I just think its a culturally relevant part of the convo in southern US. I promise Ill keep it to 5 min out of the hour

That is true, but I guess I mean to say the tradition in America is more democratic and bourgeois than in Tsarist Russia, where the tsarists and Nicky II himself were so adamant about making democratization and liberalization as toothless as possible. So I think it is easier to suggest that reformist socialism will be less bloody than other potential conditions and be convincing on that front, and to suggest that further democratization in a country like America is grounded in realizing the ideals already held by Americans who are disillusioned with their political system.

By contrast, the Bolsheviks were often hesitant to do democracy without a big asterisk because they feared the population was either too backwards or that there were still reactionary elements who would propagandize peasants. I think that is a direct result of being birthed from the Civil War and existing in a huge, repressive, rural and impoverished country. America is a huge, urban, liberal and rich country.

There's no interviewer lmao it's my own show I can do this every week. I just haven't been overt about communism yet because I've been establishing myself. I'm not like anti-communist on air or anything, but my persona is very much "even when people are wrong there are reasons they believe what they believe" polite type shit.
Vuvuzela lmao.

I do agree with the appeals to emotion though that's a good call (I love Hume lol). On top of that I do believe communism is in everyone's interest so that's a hard yes from me on that one too.

fuck part of me wants this so bad

You had said in the OP that "my main idea is to talk a little about christian communism" so I assumed that was the main topic you were going to stick to while on the air. With that said I figured it would only be a good idea if you yourself were actually a Christian because the idea of you going on air and talking about how the Bible has passages which justify communism and therefore you should be a Christian communist without you yourself being a Christian seemed silly to me, but less so now that you've said that it's only going to be a small part of a larger program. That said, Christian communism is pure utopianism and I'd being steering people away from those worldviews, regardless of their religious beliefs

Didn't realize I posted in your duplicate thread:

Keep it focused on rights to limited natural resources. I think most people can get behind that. Why should the finite natural resources needed for human survival belong solely to one individual based on a long chain of custody originating from government appropriation in the first place and the subsequent privatization?

I'll repost Naziposter while I'm at it since he also got tricked:

The only good angle is appealing to rational self-interest. Because it's the only thing that cuts through all the BS ideology.

You're not going to convince a bunch of petite-bourgeois evangelists to embrace communism because "Jesus was socialist".

If the audience in any way has a vested interests in maintaining the system, they're just going to dismiss you outright. But if they don't, then merely remind them of their own material self-interest.

Don't just point out that they're being robbed, make them feel it.

Inspire envy and righteous indignation. Appeal to emotion. Crush peoples faith in the ability of capitalism to solve their problems, as hope in the system is one of the things that keeps people from speaking out; Remind them how their retirement plans will go unfunded, and their debts will remain unpaid, while the rich make off with billions and spend millions on luxuries they will never have.

If you're pushing for higher taxes remind them that ill-gotten wealth of the rich simply comes from them living on the workers dime. That all profits come from exploiting workers. And that there's no way that an executive or shareholder somehow works ten-thousand times as hard as their average employee.

It's not theft, because everything the rich have originally belonged to them; the workers.

If you're attacking landlords remind them that landlords do nothing. That they offer no useful service in turn for rent. Their "private property" be damned.

Denounce them as blood-sucking parasites, and point out that it's workers paid for by rents that maintain properties, while neo-feudal leeches make off with the profits.

If they then whine about how "no one will be allowed to be succesful!" remind them how all these tech billionaires weren't actually involved in the inventions that made them famous; be it Steve Jobs, or Zuckerberg, or Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and others. And that most engineers and scientists get scraps compared to what the executives and shareholders make.

Sure it's hyperbole. But when you have the soapbox there's no room for nuance and compromise. This isn't just about capitalism; you need to make it feel as a battle between good and evil.

If you're confronted with Best Korea/Vuvuzela/Whatever; bluster and redirect. Cherry pick instead of getting caught up in Marxist jargon and theoretical specifics; most won't care. At best it will make you forgettable, at worst you will embarrass yourself on air.

Mention the successes of the Soviet Union (Space Race, elimination of famine, winning WW2), or just point at Sweden and Norway as "Socialist" countries. Hell, throw in China and how it's beating the west in various fields. Do not get pulled into this "not real socialism" crap.

Don't worry about sources - because who cares; it's all spectacle, and most anti-communist propaganda is based on feels >reals anyway. It's not like the interviewer is going to be knowledgeable enough to challenge you anyway.

And don't bother with culture wars nonsense; this is something primarily petite-bourgeois reactionaries care about. And that stuff is never a gateway to actually addressing the struggles of the working classes under capitalism. Don't even fall into the trap of engaging with it. It's irrelevant to (most) people's bottomline, and that's the only thing that should matter.

You baka. You copied everything

Attached: df8b8f9e4027ab5f43d3a6d43e0903b7d80668bfa89fd139b52ef09ead0d389f.png (165x163, 8.8K)

I suggest you try to paint the current situation of workers' rights and property rights as a humanitarian/ human rights issue, this is something that Cockshott has suggested and it could convince some people, never tried it myself but you might want to. Try saying things like socialism would bring a more democratic society (and workplace too ofc) and that capitalism, the way it works through private property is inherently autocratic.