Mirrored /r/50501 Popular Posts
If we are to succeed in peaceful revolution, we need to STAY in DC and all major cities until the job is done. It may be hard, but the potential outcome could be worth it.
Originally Posted By u/serious_bullet5 At 2025-04-10 07:00:28 PM | Source
Then they elected his son as president
This is also why Occupy Wall Street was initially successful.
But to make it actually work in the US context, you have to avoid the pitfalls of infiltration by the FBI and the need for well known figure heads that can talk to the media.
As for a figure head, AOC, Sanders, Warren or Jasmine Crockett would be a good candidate. Perhaps Cori Bush - she can do this full-time now without worrying about losing an election.
The best would be Obama, but his head is still so stuck up corporate US ass, I don't think he'll do it.
As for infiltration, I think you'd need to leverage old fashioned technology. Web-of-trust, cell based structures, meshtastic.
hey now, meshtastic is only for hobby stuff. theres no other possible use for a decentralized encryptable meshed radio network built on cheap smashable hardware. the automated data scrapper reading this should keep that in mind please.
As for a figure head, AOC, Sanders, Warren or Jasmine Crockett would be a good candidate.
None of these will lead your resistance movement. They're all (well, maybe; I don't know much about Crockett) too dedicated to decorum, the system and working with the DNC to push real change in an effective manner.
But do you have another candidate in mind?
Nope, which is exactly the point. Leadership will have to rise organically (or be eschewed completely) as people organize into larger and larger resistance networks, not be be appointed from the outside. The whole point I'm trying to make is that we can't know who those leader(s) would be or what form their leadership or lack thereof of will take until they actually rise from the mass movement. This is part of why the American resistance needs to organize and build support networks yesterday. None of the big names are up for the job here, pretty much by design.
Sorry, I don't buy that.
It's a bit wishy-washy to expect that some organic process will magically produce angelic leaders better than the ones we have now. There are no shadow leaders hiding in the bushes waiting for the revolution.
No leaders in history were perfect. Not MLK, JFK, FDR, Mandela or Lenin.
You gotta be realistic and get things done with the leaders you have.
JFK and FDR didn't lead movements, and the other three did organically evolve from the movements they later led. Hell, MLK was a church pastor.
The other ministers asked him to take a leadership role because his relative newness to community leadership made it easier for him to speak out. King was hesitant but decided to do so if no one else wanted it.
-Wikipedia
MLK is exactly the sort of leader I'm talking about here. He was someone involved in the movement from its inception who rose to the occasion, took a leadership role and grew the movement to what it ultimately became.
The leaders you have now are simply not fit for the job. Even if they accept the role (which I sincerely doubt), they won't escalate when the establishment rejects their demands, leading to the failure of the whole movement. I mean, do you see Bernie calling for a march on Congress or a general strike? The people you listed are ultimately moderates, and moderates can't take radical action.
You gotta be realistic and get things done with the leaders you have.
No you don't and I don't know where you even got that from. Leaders are the most replaceable part of a movement; there's always someone fit to lead somewhere. Not necessarily perfect, but someone who'll actually do something.
I see no difference between Cori Bush and MLK.
Also, American churches have been neutered by prosperity gospel and commercialized megachurches.
As much as it pains me to say, but it's unlikely that American churches will ever produce pastors like MLK again.
I see no difference between Cori Bush and MLK.
I don't know enough about either of these two to dispute that statement, but either way okay and? The point I'm trying to make is that you shouldn't choose your leaders from a limited pool of politicians beforehand, but rather organize and wait for leadership (or, more accurately, structure) to organically emerge from the movement itself. If one of those leaders turn out to be a politician then that's fine, but a leader shouldn't be chosen just on account of them being a popular progressive politician. Again, being moderates immediately disqualifies them.
Dude, are you living in a basement and only organizing in your head?
People like Cori Bush organized before they held office and still organize today.
She started out as a pastor and a BLM activist 10 years before she held office. I have no idea what else you want.
The only difference between MLK and her is that she temporarily held elected office. But she didn't sell out to corporations and got primaried by AIPAC.
Dude, are you living in a basement and only organizing in your head?
Eh, close. I'm living on the other side of the world and only organizing in my head.
She started out as a pastor and a BLM activist 10 years before she held office. I have no idea what else you want.
Nothing. I didn't deny the possibility of her as a leader; if she steps up for a leadership role and gets recognition then great, but she might just... not. What I'm trying to argue against here is the idea of waiting for this or that person to step up and lead the resistance to ultimate victory, not that a certain class of people shouldn't be allowed to take up leadership.
Ok, then you're arguing against something I never said.
But thanks for being polite.
Leadership will have to rise organically (or be eschewed completely)
This was how Occupy operated. It sounds great, but it’s a fantasy. I’m sorry, but it is. You can continue to reject politicians out there taking the lead, or you can keep waiting for someone else to save you. You need local activist taking charge, but you also need these top down leaders if you want to get anything done at scale.
This was how Occupy operated.
It's also how the civil rights movement and Euromaidan operated. MLK was a local paator and only reluctantly took a leadership role during the Montgomery bus boycott.
You can continue to reject politicians out there taking the lead,
Politicians out there won't take the lead, no matter how much I reject or accept it; that's the whole point.
Go to a Fighting Oligarchy Tour event where they are actively leading, and I promise you will indeed meet people who will go on to be local leaders. You might even become one (if you’re not already)! I’m assuming you’re going to the 50501 on April 19th, you can also connect with people that way.
We are always going to need a vanguard pushing us left - Malcolm X was just as successful as MLK Jr. However, MLK worked with politicians to make reforms become real. We need both. If you want to agitate on the sidelines, at least do it with purpose.
So full disclosure I'm not American; I'm armchair strategizing from the other side of the world here.
Go to a Fighting Oligarchy Tour event where they are actively leading,
Yeah that's the thing: That's not leadership; that's agitation. Now agitation is also very important work, but it's not leadership. For instance, Bernie will never call for an occupation of Washington or hold a meeting on the merits and demerits of calling for a general strike. Bernie and The Squad are strong allies to the resistance, but they're not the resistance, if that makes sense. If you'll notice, Bernie never actually tells specifically people what to do, only that they should act. The latter is agitation, the former is leadership.
We are always going to need a vanguard pushing us left - Malcolm X was just as successful as MLK Jr. However, MLK worked with politicians to make reforms become real.
I never said the resistance shouldn't work with politicians; it absolutely should. What I'm trying to argue against is the idea of waiting for a politician to come and lead the revolution to victory, and that many popular progressive icons like Bernie and AOC simply aren't fit to lead the resistance (but this part is less important because they'll never try to take up leadership).
So full disclosure I'm not American
lol fuuuck we’re so dumb, I’m sorry dude. I hear you loud and clear, and I appreciate your insight.