this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2025
80 points (95.5% liked)
US News
2422 readers
31 users here now
News from within the empire - From a leftist perspective
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You have to wonder why one would think it is a viable political strategy to maintain anti-communism as a means of validating his "left-wingness" ie capitulation to murderous colonial and fascist paradigms; I suspect his rhetoric reflects how reactionary most of the USAmerican population as he did not appear to be worried about any significant backlash in what he said.
American elite on the world stage comprises more than just the billionaire class, it contains the reactionary majority population. This is partly why we consider Marxism is not populism.
I get that but that's not why it is not populism.
Science to a scientifically literate society maybe popular but it is not science because it is populist.
The point of a vanguard is to have social scientists guide the masses; the proletariat may hold reactionary ideals, residuals from capitalism/feudalism/slavery, but they are liberated through science.
Marxism is a science.
Social scientists cannot liberate the masses, the error of the Narodniks, only the masses can liberate themselves - the vanguard is just the tool used to achieve this.
Understanding this significance is partly how marxists can avoid tailism - Marxism is neither workerism nor populism though it may be popular amongst the proletariat, especially of the global south.