It’s almost as if I say things sometimes because I see them occuring or something.

Correct! That is exactly my point. It is THE major problem and contradiction that must be solved prior to any ‘actual’ political work getting done in the west.

It’s a very classic chicken-egg problem. Most YouTubers or podcasters don’t even bother trying to address it as it removes the unintentional obfuscation of what their efforts actually are. Some have tried, such as Haz, but his was a project of ego rather than a connection to any real political movement (and that is besides the ideological idiocy and incoherency of his movement).

Perhaps that is the ‘best’ thing you can do. But it is important not to mistake what the ‘best’ ideological thing is for ‘praxis’. I’d argue there is more ‘praxis’ in becoming a part of a church than in posting online, no matter how correct your theory of change is.

I am not asking leftist e-celebs to create political power where there is none. In fact, I am asking for the opposite! I am asking them to acknowledge and be aware that what they are doing does not generate political power.

It is so interesting to me how people seem to imagine a working-class party with considerable power and influence appearing out of thin air and without any work. … Like, yeah, that would be great, but it isn’t the world we live in yet. But the reality is that building a meaningful “left” means being highly committed to doing the work of actually building it. That is the whole point of a vanguard (if that is your thing) anyway, that people who reach a certain level of ideological advancement begin to do the work, and apply it to the real work, collectively, and begin the arduous task of winning over the masses of people. They treat it something like a second job, and do everything they can to build a real institution of working class power that has integrated, or build ties, into whatever organic efforts the working class has made to self-organize.

If you read the guidelines and expectations from the Black Panther Party, for instance, it sounds incredibly intense. They were expected to do work every day organizing, to report their work daily as well, to read theory for an hour a day, as well as the news. The BPP started off with just two college friends who read a lot of theory, they only had any meaningful impact, and could punch way a ove their weight because thousands of people joined and made a commitment to build it. If you are discouraged because it doesn’t exist yet, or seems anemic, maybe the problem is that too many people have a liberal attitude, that they see that the work needs to be done but expect others to do it for them.

Yup, you have to look at other countries and how they do things. Zero American Excellence.

This wasn’t meant to deride propagandists really. With the way our labor party system works in America, your only real options are DSA, IWW, or PSL. And many of these people are involved in at least one of those orgs. They also help spread the message of organization like ALU and even if they aren’t directly members, which can definitely help you grow and strengthen those movements.

“Freelance” propagandists aren’t totally useless, they just serve a role that’s very different from leader. They are not elected, they are not appointed or even qualified to lead in most cases. What they can do though is help disseminate messages and amplify the voices of those who do serve as elected leaders of actual working class organizations.

You aren’t Lenin, you aren’t Stalin, you’re just someone who works at the film studio. At best like a Sergei Einstein, not someone who leads political movements, but someone who supports them.

I guess that all kinda goes out the window with

:kim-il-young:

As they should be, you just need to understand your role and position when you’re the unaffiliated propagandist. It can feel like you’re doing nothing if you are off the mind that you’re some revolutionary leader and not just there as backup.

I will agree that perhaps it’s more that it gives the malaise an identity, rather than creating it in of itself. But I have seen too many young, hopeful people look to these entertainment personalities for guidance only for that hope to be slowly worn away like rocks by so many waves, with nothing to show for it.

Hell, there is far more hope and energy in the non-profit field, even if they still have absolutely nothing to show for it, because they are least getting paid for their nonsense. In my witness, the path of, as you call it, ‘faux-radicalization’, is absolutely more of a net creator of unhappiness than any other path of radicalization. I don’t like to refer to it as ‘faux-radicalization’ though, personally.

To me it’s ‘radicalization-as-entertainment’, as opposed to ‘radicalization-as-politics’. Both are radicalization, but the outcomes and affects are substantially different. And that doesn’t mean that ‘radicalization-as-politics’ can’t be exhausting and sad as well. It’s just that usually there are better long term outcomes from the latter. With the latter, you generally still get to form a community, meet people, have kids, etc.

I agree with that. There are things I otherwise wouldn’t have known that I could have been comfortably dumb about. But a lot of Marxism is comforting because now I at least have the words and mental framework to explain the things I was already feeling and experiencing. I know people who are like me, but didn’t learn Marxism, so instead they just assume the world is and will always suck and that humanity is bad. I’d rather be a depressed nerd than a nihilist or misanthrope.