this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2026
81 points (95.5% liked)

The Deprogram

1771 readers
68 users here now

"As revolutionaries, we don't have the right to say that we're tired of explaining. We must never stop explaining. We also know that when the people understand, they cannot but follow us. In any case, we, the people, have no enemies when it comes to peoples. Our only enemies are the imperialist regimes and organizations." Thomas Sankara, 1985

International Anti-Capitalist podcast run by an American, a Slav and an Arab.

Rules:

  1. No capitalist apologia / anti-communism.
  2. No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
  3. Be respectful. This is a safe space where all comrades should feel welcome; this includes a warning against uncritical sectarianism.
  4. No porn or sexually explicit content (even if marked NSFW).
  5. No right-deviationists (patsocs, nazbols, Strasserists, Duginists, etc).
  6. Use c/mutual_aid for mutual aid requests.

Resources:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
airbusairnet@lemmygrad.ml
Ancient_Egg_57@lemmygrad.ml
81
BadEmpanada takes are becoming even worse. (lemmygrad.ml)
submitted 5 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) by Coco0330@lemmygrad.ml to c/thedeprogram@lemmygrad.ml
167 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Edit: Damn already so many replies.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] DonLongSchlong@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

but they could unquestionably move the needle.

Source? Jk, but you can't just make that assumption. What does "move the needle" even mean? And what is the cost of moving it?

I assure you that our comrades over there have already thought about those things.

If they did, you'd support it, right? If so, how could you defend them doing basically NOTHING about it?

Sure, but only because them "doing something about it" would also mean that they have the material conditions to do so, which is the only reason they would make that decision.

That also means that them not doing something about it is based on their material analysis and I trust them when they say that they can't do much more than they already are. Who am I to disagree? I simply don't have the hubris to assume that I know better than the most successful socialist experiment of humanity.

They know more about their geopolitical standing than I do. I am just gonna refer to the experts and the experts in this case is the CPC

The alternative to critical support is uncritical support, and I'd hope no Marxist gives uncritical support to literally anything.

That would mean that everything we support, we support critically, which then removes the meaning of critical support imo.

I believe it is more so that it is critical for us to support something even if it hurts us. At least, again, that's how I understood it.

[โ€“] CaptainRipcord@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 days ago

I am also sure our comrades there have thought of these things. I am sure their calculus is different than ours. They are trying to build socialism in China. They have a long-standing policy of non-involvement. I support it until it comes to genocide.

Sure, but only because them "doing something about it" would also mean that they have the material conditions to do so, which is the only reason they would make that decision.

This sounds like handwaving away criticism to me. They don't do it? Well they would if they could! But people smarter than me decided they can't! Tough luck!

I reject that as defeatism.

when they say that they can't do much more than they already are

Did they say that? I've not seen so much as a statement to that effect. Are you sure you're not wishcasting?

That would mean that everything we support, we support critically, which then removes the meaning of critical support imo.

How? I don't follow. Yes, only give support critically. Never give uncritical support. Nobody is above reproach and everyone should be criticized as long as that criticism is principled and strategic.