Hồ Chí Minh (1890-1969) was a Vietnamese Marxist-Leninist revolutionary who led the resistance against French colonialism, and subsequently against the US invasion, until his death from heart failure six years before the liberation of Vietnam.^(PW)^
Welcome again to everybody. Make yourself at home. In the time-honoured tradition of our group, here is the weekly discussion thread.
☭ Matrix homeserver and space
☭ Theory discussion group on /c/theory@lemmygrad.ml
☭ Find theory on ProleWiki, marxists.org, Anna's Archive, libgen
If you have money to spare, consider supporting Lemmy development
I don't see how it would reasonably be used against PSL unless there were documented party organizing of the act (unlikely: if the manifesto published by Klippenstein is indeed the shooter's, he seems to have been acting alone and in no way affiliated with any particular party or group).
Of course, they could try to unreasonably go after PSL, but I'm not sure that's much different than what socialist/communist types have been facing in the US for decades. Lest we forget the Black Panther Party got vilified over such "horrible" acts as trying to feed schoolchildren. It has long been a grim tightrope for communists in the US, and going back even more than that, liberation efforts in general, marked by the state using misinformation, harassment, intimidation, infiltration, imprisonment, and assassination.
Those in the capitalist west in general should take the usual precautions with regards to the law and be prepared for the possibility that it will be used against you anyway. It can be understandably scary, but it is a marathon struggle going back a long time, don't forget that.
"Of course, they could try to unreasonably go after PSL, but I’m not sure that’s much different than what socialist/communist types have been facing in the US for decades."
No.
Stop.
This is bad thinking.
It may not necessarily be different in quality, but it will be different in quantity which can eventually result in a full-on qualitative change to the repression.
A Third Red Scare.
That is why we should be careful, to be clear.
Sorry, I don't mean to be mean, but I think people should take this possibility seriously. They could literally bake a speech for Trump where he outlines several "incidents" (along with false flags thrown in) regarding the socialist or communist movements in America. He could give it on TV to a national audience and really bring on a Red Scare.
I don't think you're being mean, but I think you're wrong here and generally misunderstand what I said. If anything is "bad thinking", it's being anxious about things that are out of your control and having no action to take against them; I have chronic anxiety, I grapple with this shit on a regular basis, and trying to justify unproven anxieties is not helpful.
As I said:
What more is there to say? I'm encouraging people to be prepared, which is far more important than looping on fretting about what could happen.
My general point in what you quoted is simply that the history of repression of communists is not going to start tomorrow or something. This shit has been ongoing for decades and communists in the US already have to walk on eggshells as watered down mostly electoral groups. As it is, there isn't that much for them to repress via another Red Scare. The west already sucks pretty hard on the communist front, if we're being real with ourselves. Furthermore, the Red Scare didn't end. It's still so embedded there are politically illiterate people who call democrats like Biden a communist.
Could it get worse? Yeah, that's generally how the world works, is things can get worse. They can also get better. The action we take, especially in an organized fashion, is a significant part of that. If you want to focus on the possibility of Trump cracking down even more, then start thinking about what an organized response to that would look like.
Doesn't matter. If we can prevent it from getting worse, then we should take measures to do so.
??? Yeah, that's what I said, to think about action and be prepared rather than wallowing in anxiety and you reply as if you're arguing with me.
Oh fair.
Yes, I misread what you said in a hurry.
Alright, gotcha, but I think the anxiety is fine so long as it's not paralyzing, is all I'll say.
I'm not saying we should "wallow" in it, but I think the danger is real, and we should move accordingly. It's okay to "retreat," as Lenin said.
I think fixating on defending anxiety on the internet, while implying the situation is bad enough that it's a kind of crisis warranting anxiety, is contradictory and it shows in your haste here. If it's really that bad, there are far better things to be doing than meta-arguing about it on the internet. If it's not that bad, it can be addressed with a calm mind and a clear head instead. People's feelings are their feelings, no one is going to take them away. But it is one thing to take a situation seriously and it is another thing to be stuck in high cortisol for extended periods of time long past when it was supposed to drop normally; that is what prolonged anxiety is, it is not simply motivation or something.
As my therapist has probably explained to me multiple times, in a literal in-the-moment crisis, anxiety serves a purpose. The fight/flight/freeze style response kicks in and you act before reflecting. Outside of crisis, it is a drain on one's health for them to be stuck in that mode with high cortisol levels. So, to reiterate, if it's at the point of actual crisis, the last priority is arguing on the internet. If it's not, take a breather and then tackle it with a clear head.
That said, if you read this and decide you still want to insist on anxiety in some way, then please leave me alone about it. I'm never going to agree that anxiety is a healthy response outside of actual crisis. It is a crippling and exhausting thing to deal with that I'm trying to unlearn for years now and I don't want to hear more rationalizations that I've dealt with in my own head for much of my life.
Okay, I think I see. I agree with you.
And I don't believe I'm "meta-arguing" but yes, I think you're right about anxiety. I won't press that on you or anyone.
My position is that I'm against paranoia, yes, but I'm also against the complete absence of fear and I suppose that it's best to be "weary" of what we're up against. But honestly, you're right, you and your therapist.
I'll just say that the PSL and other orgs like it are a movement, first and foremost. They're a social movement which may turn into a revolution one day. They're not a secretive organization that will commence a coup or uprising through violence. Leave that to other groups that attempt such a thing (at their possible peril).
Using legal and sometimes extra-legal things is the best way forward for the communist movement; we're too weak otherwise. We need to grow. I suppose that's where I was coming from. And that means not acting out just to "push boundaries" on what's acceptable, if you catch my drift.
I'm not saying you have to be anxious... just... know the possible pitfalls and dangers.
lol idk
It's true that I'm in haste, and usually am, and that I can't sit still because I'm always doing something (due to trauma and certain things in my life).
Right now, I'm studying to be a nurse, but venting out on the Internet; I enjoy both (the studying and expressing my thoughts), but obviously, what I say betrays my state-of-mind, I suppose.