In some contexts but it is broader than that.

I'm saying his heart is in the right place but he has wrong-headed ideas. Given the guy follows a socialist intellectual tradition it is reasonable that you suggest he gets his head in the right place by understanding socialist social practice on the issue.

Honestly this is a really uncharitable reading of what I'm saying.

If someone ostensibly left-wing or socialist needs to read theory in order value my life and needs as a proletarian ally then they can necessarily be no ally of mine. More work needs to be done beyond tacit academic acceptance.

Except here it seems the guy does oppose transphobia generally but needs specific work done to advance his understanding of the issue.

And understanding social practice in other places to improve your own social practice isn't academic. It is not an ivory-tower-ass thing.

What other minority has to be vetted for their use before being welcomed into your so-called revolutionary project?

Socialist projects are doing better on lgbt issues because they are recognizing the old bigotry against lgbt people for what it is.

LGBT people aren't being used, except in the sense that discarding liberal bigotries in general helps make the system more robust.

I'm literally a trans person btw, I am approaching this from an angle of actually helping people remove their own bigotries. What is your solution here? What should dessalines do to get better on trans issues, concretely? If you're having a hard time articulating your criticism, I would suggest the constructive criticism handbook.

Yeah, it seems like he still has some political development on this front to do to chase out some liberal brainstorms.

I think the guy's heart is in the right place though, I think he just hasn't done the legwork yet on studying how modern socialist states are moving on lgbt issues and why they're doing so.

Oh I think there is going to be a sequel where she covere tops' rights within socialism

It is pretty obvious that the dynamics of how groups work and how you get people to believe in certain goals are pretty universal.

Why do you believe this? Because I've studied how fascists currently recruit and the methods are very different from how socialist orgs recruit. I have also studied how fascism developed in nazi Germany, Spain, and Italy, and they seem incredibly different from socialist forms of movement building.

Populism is designed to abuse how everyone perceives and judges outside information for political gain.

How can you have left wing populism then?

I honestly think you’re just throwing around buzzwords, how is all of this this directly related to fascism?

Populism is a strain of buzzword designed to equate two very different ideologies. Obviously you can't try to minimize fascism directly so since the holocaust fascists have been trying to downplay fascism by making it a symmetrical evil with communism. If you want to learn more I would suggest looking through some of Dovid Katz's writings on holocaust collaboration in Eastern Europe.

And if you can’t be friendly to people with different opinions, your opinions are only a result of one-sided socialisation, not of discussion and reflection with the help of others.

I didn't say we weren't friendly to people, I said we aren't friendly to certain ideas.

And being unfriendly to mainstream ambient opinions that we have decided to reject isn't an indication of one sided socialization. While you might not be socialized to understand socialist ideas, socialists in the west grew up around and are intimately familiar with liberal ideas.

not of discussion and reflection with the help of others. And therefore on the same level as any other unreflected opinion.

Luckily though, socialists invest in the social practice of group learning and reflection, including engaging in ruthless criticism of our own ideas. So no, we have established that it is not at the same level.

I dont understand the joke

Read "why women had better sex under socialism, and other arguments for economic independence"

Hey, please don't try to equate the left and right by calling them both populist. We are not friendly to horseshoe theory or trivialization of fascism here.

We love banning antisemitic zionists here folks, its a hell of a good time

Underdeveloped take from Dessalines: the bourgeoisie love to promote bigotry while covering themselves in a cloak of progressivism

I guess I see it like this: if I think something is inaccurate should I debunk it or should I post "this random right winger online says it isn't credible" (and MBFC is a right winger, but not a fascist)

You're describing neo-colonial regimes that werent able to fully leave the imperialist economic structure.

Compare India to Cuba on women's and lgbt rights

Oh wow, you're conflating Israel and Jewishness, a common example of antisemitism. Lovely.

He is literally just some guy with no expertise in critical media analysis. He just made a website where he gives his opinions on how much you should trust a source.

Hey, just as a heads up we discourage the posting of " media bias checkers" here because it is intellectually sloppy to outsource whether you should trust a source to some guy who has their own bias. And MBFC is just some guy, who has no credentials and doesn't do any sort of scientific analysis to determine his ratings.

Please reply acknowledging you understand this within 48 hours.

what that would mean for women, gays, children, people of non-muslim religions, in terms of personal freedoms, etc

So the wonderful thing about anti-colonial movements is that even if they start right wing they have to get more left wing as time progresses, simply due to the power dynamics that are created through the process of throwing out the imperialists. Once you stop foreign oppression, you have a grassroots mass of militant and armed revolutionaries that you're accountable to and who get upset when you try to reproduce the same economic system. You also are tied at the hip to them as the imperialists seek a return to an old system.

This includes movements where there is no significant communist presence, but it happens faster when there are communists.

Luckily, the PLFP is the second biggest party represented in the Palestinian joint operations room and have significant military and political power, meaning that in Palestine it probably will take a lot less time to materialize.

least slightly socially progressive neoliberals? It’s anyone’s guess really. NO. Of course the Dems, fucking obviously.

What are they actually socially progressive on though? They're still supporting ICE and police state expansion, still doing tough on immigration bullshit, still presiding over migrant concentration camps, still funding and arming Israeli genocide, still rattling the saber at China, still blockading Cuba, not doing anything to protect trans people from genocide, doing exterminationist shit to homeless people in blue cities in blue states,

I could go on but you get the point.

Putting a HRC sticker on doesn't mean you're a little bit socially progressive, it means you have a PR team.

Man, they wanted something better than the shit show that their life had become. They had many ideas about how they could reform their country. A new socialist constitution, a emancipated reunion with the West etc. All they knew was that it couldn’t go on with the current SED clique

They didn't get something better though. They got capitalism, worse living conditions, and a bourgeois democracy that didn't represent them either

How did the SED respond? Fucking off with the last money. They left their population with no help when they negotiated with Kohl. But hey, to you that’s just capitalist propaganda probably.

The SED literally lost influence and that let reunification happen. You're blaming an organization that was trying to prevent something disastrous from happening for the thing happening disastrously.

Now it’s the people’s fault that they got screwed by the capitalists pfffff

Pretty sure it was the fault of the power dynamics at play, as reunifiers had taken control of the government and led to a massive looting of the GDR. And as for the SED "fucking off with the money" you get that the big impoverishment of east germany was that all the nationalized industries were given to private individuals, mostly people in West Germany who used to own(or whos parents owned) the industries prior to nationalization, right?

Also, I ask again: how did the Stasi respond to the lgbt movement in the 80s? Because that shit runs entirely contrary to the propaganda you're trying to spew.

Sure you do, as long as you vote for the candidate that the state prefers.

That isn't how soviet style democracies work. For example, the municipal assemblies of Cuba have multiple candidates for each seat, which are not chosen by the party. Those councils then choose a national representative for their municipality, which is confirmed by a popular vote.

Again, look up “Wir gehen falten”.

Link to what you're referring to please, I didn't find anything interesting in the search.