Socialists in the US pander to radlibs because America is the most liberal fucking country on the planet. It's a survival strategy. Unions/workers in general have no power in the US.

it's opportunism

It's called realpolitik.

Being retarded isn’t realpolitik. If you want to recruit people with the bread and butter reforms that’s fine but you mainly use it to draw them into the revolutionary movement and make it easier for them to participate in it. That’s leninism 101, which has always been hated by utopians for allegedly veering too much towards realpolitik.

But here’s the thing, 15 dollars an hour is not socialism. Socialism isn’t just doing more of what the democrats and the yellow trade unions are doing. The article does perfectly high-light the confused thinking of these liberals masquerading as socialists. Reforms grow out of the revolutionary movement and not vice-versa.

Sewer socialists should really look into reviving the corpse of LBJ because his Texas-sized cock pushed through more substantial reforms than all the Kashama Sawants put together in history. And he was merely a savvy bourgeois politician serving an openly pro-capitalist party.

I guess what you just posted isn't realpolitik then

Start arguing anytime, kid

That is built on the wrong assumption that any of those parties consider a raise in the minimum wage "socialism", which is obviously not true. But Socialism is a stage as much as it is a movement, and a Socialist movement must deal with present conditions and the empowerment of the proletarian class inside of it, within the economic structures of capitalism.

If you check Marx writings after he gained some degree of influence over socialist policy-making you'll find countless of similar examples. Higher wages, unions, shorter working hours, all because he thought they could benefit the working-class on the long-term one way or another, not because they, per se, represent the transformation from capitalism to socialism. I mean, you can actually just read the Manifesto for many of those.

Once again, asking for something under a capitalist system is not the same as suggesting this is something we should have under Socialism, and the First International had unemployment as one of its chief concerns. Wheover wrote this sounds very confused about what Socialism is, and quoting Lenin out of context is characteristic of people like that.

OP if you think this guy "gets" socialism I have bad news: the problem is not Socialist Alternative being ignorant of socialist aims, it's you being ignorant of socialist aims.

Liberals are bigger gravediggers of socialism than fascists could ever hope to be.

Not really. When the German socialist movement was reborn in the 60s it began with social-liberal worker's organizations, and you'll see in history countless liberal politicians and parties defending our civil and human rights, while Fascists just want to kill you.

< Marx would argue that socialism guarantees nobody is unemployed if executed properly, thus eliminating the need for unemployment benefits
That's wrong and also literally what

I like him quoting a desperate order issued by Lenin probably during a moment of crisis in the civil war and saying this is some type of official policy for the socialist future. It's literally the equivalent of us quoting some brutal order issued by capitalist governments during wartime and saying this is liberal-capitalist dogma.


lol, "How come Japanese Americans are free to live wherever they want when one of the tenets of liberal capitalism is putting them in internment camps?"

It's close to the mark imo Engels did write that work would become man's prime want under communism. Although you can argue their ideas are compatible with NEETmunism or whatever I wouldn't say their vision of communism did away with work completely. Rather it would be essentially voluntary and done for individual and social satisfaction and not a mere burden undertaken for economic need. He did see the need for a fund for those who can't work in Critique of the Gotha Program too.

I don't think the writer is too far off the mark there won't be any unemployment under the first stage of communism. NEETs and Hikis certainly aren't going to be given the freedom to live at the expense of working people and I don't think it will even be an option until a higher phase of communism.

Also maybe the US today and Lenin's Russia are not the same but most of the world is extremely poor and much of it is closer to Tsarist Russia in terms of living conditions then S[weed]en.

Liberals are only "ok with the idea of communism" up to the point of it actually being a thing.


It's called a transitional program you fuckwits

He's right on the money. Of course, were they to have a properly socialist program, he would attack them twice as hard because of it.


Survival of what exactly? Once you compromise every issue you've successfully killed yourself and not survived.

It's mostly buying time before things go to shit. Surprise surprise, most people who feel the impact of America's terrible, fucking god awful record on worker's rights that's slowly decaying into the primordial ooze of the Industrial Revolution; voters aren't accelerationists.

This lack of worker's rights and strong focus on individuality has made the average American worker also splinter.

The problem is we need to break this, but, I don't blame people for making mistakes at the same time.

Stop calling everything that isn't your special brand of leftism/socialism "liberal".

Mad SAlter/DSA member detected

Actually, that's Lenin quoting Paul the Apostle.


What a load of Lassallean bullshit. He obviously hasn't read Critique of the Gotha Program.

This. Please read Trotsky before you attack him.

That being said, SAlt is indeed an opportunist and sectarian organization that genuine Trotskyists should stay away from.