• TreadOnMe [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    6 days ago

    Fair enough, but my point is that why should we be looking to them for a strategy that actually affects change on the world, not to quibble if these people lost or not.

    • Chana [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      6 days ago

      Understanding them as not even trying to effect change, but rather satisfy their personal wants (which were slightly reduced by capitalism/imperialism), explains why not to look to them. They weren’t on the left exercising a failing strategy, they were using a successful strategy for their own needs, Vietnamese (and black) people be damned. This should change how we think about their approach: it worked for a different goal, so it could be strategically deployed by us given appropriate circumstances and needs. If a restoration of some liberal norm or PR move serves us, then have at it. If it is instead better to agitate, then it is to be avoided.

        • Chana [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          Maybe aimed at something similar but I don’t think they are succeeding even by the self-soothing metric. Everything seems like more of a toned down prelude to something worse or, similarly, a way to let off steam while ICE raids ramp up.