72
all 39 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 15 points 7 hours ago

Politicians like Mamdani are the left wing of capital. Full stop. They'll give you a whole speech about the failures of capitalism, but their solution is always, always just to put a band-aid on a bullet wound and hope you don't notice the system is still bleeding you dry. It's a tale as old as time where they co-opt the energy of the masses, promise change from within, and ultimately do nothing but delay the inevitable crisis.

And Mamdani is just the modern day version of Eduard Bernstein. It's honestly staggering how this playbook hasn't changed in over a century. Bernstein was a big deal in the SPD, and he's the guy who looked at Marx's revolutionary ideas and said, nah, we can just vote our way into socialism. He threw class conflict out the window and argued we could slowly reform capitalism into something nicer. He successfully turned the SPD from a revolutionary party into a mild appendage of liberalism, trading worker power for wage increases and welfare programs that left the capitalist class firmly in charge. Rosa Luxemburg called this out in Reform or Revolution where she said that his strategy sucks the revolutionary soul right out of the working class.

Sound familiar?

Mamdani is doing the exact same thing. He gives great speeches about the 1% and corporate greed, but his entire project is about social democratic reforms within a capitalist framework. These are good things! But they're treating the symptoms, not the disease.

The real damage is in channelling what could be a millions-strong grassroots movement directly into the graveyard of the Democratic Party. All that energy, all that hope, are funnelled into meaningless action like phone banking and canvassing for a party that is structurally, irrevocably dedicated to preserving capitalism. Instead of building real, independent power through unions, strikes, and community networks, people got a cult of personality around one candidate.

Reforms under capitalism are always conditional and designed to demobilize the masses. Imagine if all that energy had been directed toward unionizing every Amazon warehouse, organizing mass rent strikes, and building community mutual aid networks that create real dual power. Look at movements like MAS in Bolivia to see what's possible.

And here's the kicker, the part that should terrify everyone is that the reformist path actively paves the way for fascism. The SPD's commitment to playing by the bourgeois rules made them utterly unprepared to confront the Nazis. They prioritized legalistic, parliamentary games over mass mobilization and direct action. They disarmed the working class ideologically and organizationally. And when the Nazis started gaining power, the SPD famously refused to support a general strike or armed resistance, clinging to their faith in a system that was already collapsing. They even allied with the Nazis against the communists in the end.

Now look at the "progressive" squad in the Democratic Party. Same playbook. They use leftist rhetoric to absorb grassroots energy, then funnel it back into a party funded by capital. Their watered-down, incrementalist policies fuel mass disillusionment, which the far-right is all too happy to exploit.

The Democrats' "pragmatic incrementalism" is just managing the decline. It sustains a system that creates the very misery and despair that a Trump capitalizes on. They are the firewall against real change, and their reforms are designed to prevent any sort of structural change. We're watching the same historical cycle play out in real time.

TLDR: Reformism is a dead end that disarms the working class and ultimately strengthens the far-right. Mamdani is the modern Bernstein, and the Democratic Party is the new SPD.

[-] NikkiB@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 7 hours ago

Don’t worry guys, in three years we’ll have a New Yorker with an even more exotic sounding name campaign to the left of whatever fossil is governor and win a huge upset victory! And then THEY’LL be the one invoking the Monroe Doctrine!

[-] darkernations@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

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.

[-] Cheburashka@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 9 hours ago

Well in the First world, marxism can be argued to not be populism, but in the global south it definitely is populism. The idea that the global north has lost its revolutionary potential due to wealth and imperialism is called “Third Worldism.”

[-] darkernations@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

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.

[-] ksynwa@lemmygrad.ml 19 points 21 hours ago

I had no hope for him and still I'm disappointed. What a clown.

[-] darkernations@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 hour ago

Yup same. Logically I knew this would happen but emotionally one still allows to be let down. I think it was the eating with the hand thing pissing a off bunch of westerners that brought an emphemeral smile to my face.

[-] Commiejones@lemmygrad.ml 15 points 21 hours ago

haha. This is the guy some people were calling a communist?

[-] ghost_of_faso3@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 11 hours ago

Give space for comrades to be wrong without gloating it over them, it just alienates people.

[-] Commiejones@lemmygrad.ml 9 points 9 hours ago

"There's an old saying in Tennessee—I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee—that says, 'Fool me once, shame on...shame on you.' Fool me—you can't get fooled again."

[-] fellagha@lemmygrad.ml 20 points 1 day ago

Tell me reformism is a dead end without telling me reformism is a dead end

[-] darkernations@lemmygrad.ml 18 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Liberal zionism two years into a genocide and cop apologism? Barely qualifies as a socdem.

Will not be surprised if he turns out to be a “disappointment”. If he was a real threat then they wouldn’t show him on TV such as a talkshow. If he does get power and able to leverage it (I really don’t like assuming leaders or potential leaders are playing 4d chess) for something of substance I would expect him to be nullified. Without a working understanding (we do not know if he does or does not, though so far not promising) of how capital and liberal democracies actually function I am not sure how you can get beat it.

Case in point: look what they did to PSL.

At best his actions I suspect will be another “how do we distribute the loot of imperialism more equitably”

On twitter there was a good anlogy for this with a customer visiting a restaurant - the kind waiter who is on the customer’s side and the brutish chef who is not, all work for the restaurant owner. It does not matter how nice the waiter is; capital governs all and the waiter despite their best intentions is therefore a useful pawn to help maintain stablity and allowing the customer a pressure valve for his discontent.

https://lemmygrad.ml/post/8309838/6593453

(If you're wondering why the ratio it may be because I initially started with "fuck this guy" as the first line before I removed it because I didn't want people to stop reading past that first line)

[-] SlayGuevara@lemmygrad.ml 46 points 1 day ago

Another day another socdem L

[-] Maeve1@lemmygrad.ml 19 points 1 day ago

Yep. He's squandering any reason for critical support.

[-] rainpizza@lemmygrad.ml 31 points 1 day ago

Lol, some liberal downvoted most comments in this thread. What a way to cope

capitalist coping

[-] KrupskayaPraxis@lemmygrad.ml 25 points 1 day ago

He didn't need to do that. He just decided to go out of the way to criticize socialist countries. Every day I like him less and less.

Still hope he wins though, and hope there will be an actual strong vocal left wing oppostion to him

[-] amemorablename@lemmygrad.ml 43 points 1 day ago

The full quote from the article is even worse:

" I want to be clear on where I stand. I believe both Nicolas Maduro and Miguel Diaz-Canel are dictators. Their administrations have stifled free and fair elections, jailed political opponents, and suppressed the free and fair press. And yet, our federal government's long history of punitive policies toward both countries, including extrajudicial killings of Venezuelans and the continuation of a decades long blockade of Cuba, have only worsened these conditions. Democratic socialism is about dignity, justice and accountability. And above all, it's about building a democracy that works for working people, not one that preys on them."

"Democratic socialists" are some of the most annoying people in western politics because not only are they not socialists in actual practice, they by definition of the moniker make it sound like there's a version of socialism that is not democratic. They throw under the bus international socialists specifically, and more broadly, countries that are self-determining in the face of imperialism, in order to win some points with a largely already-ignorant population to get minor capitalism reform electoral victories. When they do succeed at all, they only further entrench the miasma of pain that is mass political illiteracy.

[-] SpaceDogs@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 7 hours ago

Is he trying to play both sides?

“Yes, Cuba and Venezuela are run by evil commie dictators that need to be taken down but our embargo on Cuba is bad.”

No amount of softly condemning the USA’s deplorable actions right after tearing into AES countries is going to change people’s minds. Democratic Socialists are so annoying. Americans (and Canadians tbh) get so excited when these types come on the scene but they just end up capitulating to the empire every damn time.

[-] amemorablename@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 6 hours ago

Is he trying to play both sides?

“Yes, Cuba and Venezuela are run by evil commie dictators that need to be taken down but our embargo on Cuba is bad.”

I think it's the old "liberal pacifism" shtick. "The oppressor is bad, but the resistance forces using violence to resist the oppressor are also somehow bad because they use violence."

No amount of softly condemning the USA’s deplorable actions right after tearing into AES countries is going to change people’s minds.

Exactly. It confuses the issue and puts the oppressed in a position where they are only ever allowed to be a victim, never a self-determining group who is capable of defending themselves.

[-] Maeve1@lemmygrad.ml 13 points 1 day ago

Not to mention saying aloud for an audience that we straight up murder people and engage in collective punishment. I mean I don't think most USians even considered that if it would be wrong if done to a USian, that is equally odious when we do it to our neighbors.

[-] nocturnedragonite@lemmygrad.ml 36 points 1 day ago

Lmao like clockwork 💀 every single time, it's always nicer capitalism

[-] Maeve1@lemmygrad.ml 12 points 1 day ago

Not nice to our neighbors.

[-] huf@hexbear.net 3 points 9 hours ago

they're only ghosts beyond the border, not real people

[-] SoylentSnake@lemmygrad.ml 30 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

really speedrunning the succdem coward pipeline huh...

[-] haui@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 1 day ago

I'm honestly not sure if he would make it out alive if he didnt lick the boot. Not saying what he's doing is okay, just that his life might be in actual danger as it is.

[-] amemorablename@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 8 hours ago

I think it's more a thing of the limelight. If he doesn't lick the boot, he gets shut out of the capitalist media sphere, which makes it hard to get any electoral traction. And people like him are willing to sacrifice principles (if they ever had them) in order to get elected. They just either don't take into account, or don't care, that by doing this, they neutralize the effectiveness of their own political platform.

Bernie Sanders wasn't even radical and he got shut out and misrepresented to a huge degree.

[-] Maeve1@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 1 day ago
[-] haui@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 13 hours ago

Not sure. I dont follow her or maga in general. Do we have evidence for political murder inside maga? We do have it outside and trump threatened him already.

[-] Maeve1@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 9 hours ago

We have congresspersons and judges saying they're afraid and have been threatened. I imagine threats would be neutralized before hard evidence would be forthcoming.

[-] Maeve1@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

Marge *Green

[-] Malkhodr@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 22 hours ago

Which MTG to you mean?

[-] durduramayacaklar@lemmygrad.ml 30 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

critical support ends here. It’s time to attack to Socialism with New Yorker characteristics

[-] rainpizza@lemmygrad.ml 24 points 1 day ago

Anti solidarity and parroting pro imperialist propaganda are really a telling sign that exposes this people as left anticommunist(check Michael Parenti's Left Anticommunism).

[-] bennieandthez@lemmygrad.ml 24 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Jorge Ramos, you're not a journalist you know this. It's funny that he basically admits this, gusanos are single issue voters you either denounce and support military intervention on Cuba/Venezuela or you're literally a commie.

Jorge, who pressured him for a concrete answer, explained that for him the question is what he calls "el bautizo de Miami," (The Miami Baptism).

"When whoever arrives in Miami immediately, you ask, 'So, before, was Fidel a dictator?' 'Is Raúl a dictator? Is Díaz-Canel a dictator? And then, in the case of Venezuela, it is exactly the same. Do you think so? Hugo Chávez was a dictator. Do you think that? Nicolás Maduro is a dictator, and then by asking that question, the communities immediately can position you and say you are with us or you are not with us. So for me. It's been a very natural immediately to ask everyone about that. And I think it says a lot about what you think about democracy," he added.

this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2025
72 points (97.4% liked)

US News

2373 readers
146 users here now

News from within the empire - From a leftist perspective

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS