You call out Russia or China, MLs think if they regurgitate “read theory” that solves my issues with them.
You call out American liberals and how they aid fascists, you’re calling a secret Trump supporter.
You say that genocide is an evil action, liberals and Tankies will defend their favorite country’s actions because you’re a shill for the enemy if you do.
You say America did something kinda good, you’re somehow a neolib in disguise. You lightly praise the USSR, you’re Stalin’s second cousin as an AI.
I just don’t want people harmed by a government force. Fuck me, I guess? I feel like I’m taking crazy pills for applying the same morals to every politician and country, even ones I live in or slightly like.
Identity labels seem to be a thought-quelling mechanism. As is moralism. Complex theory needs to be approached with an intellectual and analytical mindset
What tactics were used during the Russian and Chinese revolutions? What classes and contradictions were they contending with, what hurdles did they have to overcome, and what choices did they end up making (and why)? Did these strategies achieve their intended purposes, in the short term, mid term, long term? How might those strategies play out in different circumstances?
As the complexities are dissected and analyzed, a moral analysis can also take place: what are my goals and values, and how do these tactics and their effects relate to them? Is there a discrepancy between a desired outcome and the tactics necessary to accomplish it? If so, can that be reconciled?
But naked values with no analysis are unlikely to accomplish anything, and can in fact lead to outcomes that benefit our opponents. If We Burn is a good overview of this problem in the protests around the world during the 2010s.
At the same time, people who reveal themselves to be thinking without analysis can be dismissed, be they liberals, anarchists, or MLs. But the depth of thought is the operative variable here, not the identity or category.