But what if their vision of society isn't less fucked up than the current one?

As someone who is fiercely argumentative myself (and stubborn, foul-mouthed, and irritable to boot), I totally get getting into scraps with fellow leftists. I am by no means telling you to asspat anyone! People only change when regularly and vigorously challenged, and often not even then - but certainly an unchallenged view is an unexamined one for most.

But ultimately, please try to remember that we are all capable of being comrades here - or at least most of us. We have broad agreement in what needs to go - we can support each other, both ideologically and practically, in the many ways to go about it, even if they may not be the way we ourselves would prefer.

You don't have to fluff everyone no matter how far-fetched their idea, in a "We couldn't win this fight without you trying to project your consciousness into the Astral Realm to awaken the Primordial Leftist Gestalt! 😭🙏" way, but when someone says to you "I'm an anarchist, I organize to alleviate suffering at the grassroots level", the correct response is "Right on, comrade", even if you think state institutions are the optimal solution. Even in simply engaging in the fight, we raise its visibility; in raising visibility, we weaken the powers that be and widen the embrace for our comrades to join us.

None of us will win this fight alone. The leviathan will drag its carcass onwards as long as we refuse solidarity with each other. Maybe not everyone is an ally - but don't operate from the presupposition that disagreement is automatic cause for division.

There are many futures yet possible which are better than our present (though that may be damnation by faint praise), and the chance of any one of us having our ideology implemented 100% in any of them is very fucking slim. If you operate with the mindset of "Only my way is valid," not only do you offload the burden of achieving success onto people who are willing to engage in solidarity with their comrades, but when the future comes, no matter how hard you fought for it... you will be disappointed.

The world doesn't end with ourselves. We exist, and will continue to exist, with many other ways of thinking and doing things. The important thing is to prioritize disagreements, both in action and in sentiment. As long as a comrade is working towards the goal of a better world in SOME way that is not utterly futile, like begging for scraps at a fascist table, they are infinitely more your comrade than anyone who is... well, not working towards that cause.

Agreed. By the time our different ideologies become relevant, we've already made incredible progress. Let's concentrate on getting to that point first.

Nah. Everyone's spiraling into our own little bubbles, including us on Lemmy (albeit more slowly without algos to gas it). And no one is interested in stopping it.

But one observation I've had is that most conservatives (with some exceptions, like libertarian-leaners or small business types) seem to consolidate around authority figures. Kinda like fundamentalist churches/megachurches. Leftists, on the other hand, generally consolidate around ideologies, which ultimately yields far less unity.

I have solidarity with social democrats, democratic socialists, market socialists, democratic confederalists and anarchists.

I do not have solidarity with Marxist-Leninists. They are everything wrong with the left. There is no common ground to be had with them.

The other ⅓ of the “leftists” in threadiverse*:

So in other words:

How to talk with other leftist:

Don't you dare disagree with anything we say or you're the enemy and O'Neill fucking murder you!

Okay then, that all sounds very reasonable!

I was with this till I saw it coming from someone who I constantly see screaming down at anyone that refused to support Harris and/or voted third party. How about practicing what ya preach there buddy?

As someone who is fiercely argumentative myself (and stubborn, foul-mouthed, and irritable to boot), I totally get getting into scraps with fellow leftists. I am by no means telling you to asspat anyone! People only change when regularly and vigorously challenged, and often not even then - but certainly an unchallenged view is an unexamined one for most.

But ultimately, please try to remember that we are all capable of being comrades here - or at least most of us. We have broad agreement in what needs to go - we can support each other, both ideologically and practically, in the many ways to go about it, even if they may not be the way we ourselves would prefer.

You don't have to fluff everyone no matter how far-fetched their idea, in a "We couldn't win this fight without you trying to project your consciousness into the Astral Realm to awaken the Primordial Leftist Gestalt! 😭🙏" way, but when someone says to you "I'm an anarchist, I organize to alleviate suffering at the grassroots level", the correct response is "Right on, comrade", even if you think state institutions are the optimal solution. Even in simply engaging in the fight, we raise its visibility; in raising visibility, we weaken the powers that be and widen the embrace for our comrades to join us.

None of us will win this fight alone. The leviathan will drag its carcass onwards as long as we refuse solidarity with each other. Maybe not everyone is an ally - but don't operate from the presupposition that disagreement is automatic cause for division.

There are many futures yet possible which are better than our present (though that may be damnation by faint praise), and the chance of any one of us having our ideology implemented 100% in any of them is very fucking slim. If you operate with the mindset of "Only my way is valid," not only do you offload the burden of achieving success onto people who are willing to engage in solidarity with their comrades, but when the future comes, no matter how hard you fought for it... you will be disappointed.

The world doesn't end with ourselves. We exist, and will continue to exist, with many other ways of thinking and doing things. The important thing is to prioritize disagreements, both in action and in sentiment. As long as a comrade is working towards the goal of a better world in SOME way that is not utterly futile, like begging for scraps at a fascist table, they are infinitely more your comrade than anyone who is... well, not working towards that cause.

I don't see how I could answer either way. Anarchism is a direct undermine of my own views which is a democracy that has a core structure like a constitution that is agreed upon by consensus and provides an agreed upon frame work for a central government to provide a stable set of rules that collects taxes in a progressive way to limit wealth disparity and utilize for social wealfare and common defense. I prefer a democratic system of law where the society actually obeys its own laws but the laws are not allowed to violate human rights.

I feel like I could argue with an anarchist about organizing

My issue is that there's not enough action from leftist. I can't criticize people's plans because it's hard to evaluate both the means and the goals as well as the effectiveness, but I will give advice on how I think it can be improved, how it went down for me when I attempted something similar, or potential flaws.

I could listen to other people's plan

I'm fine with this, only exception is nazis no solidarity with them only bullets. Anarchy is fine, even if I have my issues with it.

As someone who is fiercely argumentative myself (and stubborn, foul-mouthed, and irritable to boot), I totally get getting into scraps with fellow leftists. I am by no means telling you to asspat anyone! People only change when regularly and vigorously challenged, and often not even then - but certainly an unchallenged view is an unexamined one for most.

But ultimately, please try to remember that we are all capable of being comrades here - or at least most of us. We have broad agreement in what needs to go - we can support each other, both ideologically and practically, in the many ways to go about it, even if they may not be the way we ourselves would prefer.

You don't have to fluff everyone no matter how far-fetched their idea, in a "We couldn't win this fight without you trying to project your consciousness into the Astral Realm to awaken the Primordial Leftist Gestalt! 😭🙏" way, but when someone says to you "I'm an anarchist, I organize to alleviate suffering at the grassroots level", the correct response is "Right on, comrade", even if you think state institutions are the optimal solution. Even in simply engaging in the fight, we raise its visibility; in raising visibility, we weaken the powers that be and widen the embrace for our comrades to join us.

None of us will win this fight alone. The leviathan will drag its carcass onwards as long as we refuse solidarity with each other. Maybe not everyone is an ally - but don't operate from the presupposition that disagreement is automatic cause for division.

There are many futures yet possible which are better than our present (though that may be damnation by faint praise), and the chance of any one of us having our ideology implemented 100% in any of them is very fucking slim. If you operate with the mindset of "Only my way is valid," not only do you offload the burden of achieving success onto people who are willing to engage in solidarity with their comrades, but when the future comes, no matter how hard you fought for it... you will be disappointed.

The world doesn't end with ourselves. We exist, and will continue to exist, with many other ways of thinking and doing things. The important thing is to prioritize disagreements, both in action and in sentiment. As long as a comrade is working towards the goal of a better world in SOME way that is not utterly futile, like begging for scraps at a fascist table, they are infinitely more your comrade than anyone who is... well, not working towards that cause.