Chana [none/use name]

Consider that this is not why their tune changed. The mass starvation is not what the media and NGOs care about to the exclusion of bombings, but it is the prelude to a very sudden increase in deaths, an unignorable number, and they want to get ahead of this and begin hand-wringing so they can pretend to have always been against this despite actually supporting it for 2 years. It is a successor to “we are working hard on a ceasefire” and “look we are providing air dropped aid”, i.e. cynical PR.

A major, common error in thinking is the presumption that socialist politics is crossing your fingers that one figure ends up not being a piece of shit or incompetent. This is actually a bourgeois way of engaging with politics, where a common person’s role is basically to be a fan or support a candidate, and the candidate has inordinate sway over what that actually ends up entailing, both strategically and in terms of what their political statements and programs are.

This is a fundamental hurdle that any growing socialist must overcome in order to become competent. If your org depends on just one person, it is not a successful or sustainable project, let alone a socialist one. The org must focus on populating itself with competent people and to collectively decide on strategy and actions and for those implementing them to be subordinate to the competent body at large.

This lesson seemingly needs to be painfully learned over and over again. This is a big part of why vanguardism and demcent were emphasized by Bolsheviks. They recognized that the chaos of undisciplined organization made them weak to bourgeois tendencies, including listening too much to just one guy, and they were constantly losing their "just one guy"s to execution and imprisonment and exile. In modern imperial core bourgeois electoralism, the (much less serious) electoral socialists lose their "just one guy"s predominately to self-interested climber (petty bourgeois) tendencies and naivete like suddenly learning that you will be killed without 24/7 security so you better get friendly with the bourgeois state.

The only reason to consider running as a Democrat is for ballot access. If you try to run third party, the Dems eventually come for you by changing ballot access rules for third parties. This is a good example of how electoralism is an energy suck and not effective for mass organization: the bourgeois electoralists will change “the rules” on you constantly and make you spend all of your energy on elections, leaving no room for actually organizing the masses.

DSA electoralists have reversed the power equation, thinking that electoralism is primary for growing a movement. They are wrong, and so every “win” they gain is easily subverted and reversed because they absolutely, 100%, do not build a mass movement from their electoralism. The movement needs to be built more directly with known effective organizing methods, particularly org membership, education, and actions.

There are no examples of anticapitalists gaining power from this.

The only value for any minimally principled socialist to run as a Democrat is to get ballot access. Trying to take over the bourgeois party that doesn’t have to play by any internal rules is and always has been foolish and unserious.

Hey don’t forget the old classic of: simply shoot at cops from alleyways at night.

This is, unironically, the traditional method of expressing principled hatred of cops in NYC.

Is the American left prepared to go through this?

All 235 of us are armed and ready.

The DSA right actively opposes discipline and could therefore never do anything entryist with the Democratic Party. They will capitulate to “their electeds” every time and therefore have no program or means by which to enforce it. Their subscription to electoralism is not reluctant or strategic, it is just lingering liberalism.

This is great man theory. A real socialist will set up struggle sessions in Central Park.

Western leftists are basically touch-starved but instead of it being touch it is any whiff of domestic socialist politics. They’re desperate for anything vaguely in their lane and get parasocial real fast.

Sounds like you’re going to a doc, which is the most important step. In the meantime, stay hydrated. This helps both UTIs and most kidney things.

The pain you’re mentioning may be pelvic floor dysfunction, which often accompanies urinary issues of various kinds. You can (gently) palpitate the pelvic floor muscles to see if they are tight and/or tender. At-home PT exercises, (very) gentle massage, and practicing breathing into your stomach to relax these muscles can all help.

Most self-aware liberal that thinks they are left.

None of the topics of transphobua, impeeialism, etc were mentioned in the comment chain above this btw. They just decided to be dishonest and drop a pile of substantial issues and say, “so this is what you think is stupid shit!?” when they hadn’t said anything like that. And, thus, they created a thread of arguing about stupid shit, i.e. attacking people with things nobody said and seeking conflict over things like vanguardism for no reason.

Join and organize with a communist party.

I think it’s important to get as much information as possible about her health issue so that you can find appropriate flavors. Some aspects of strong flavor are acid - like lemon juice or vinegar or tamarind. Some are sweet like sugar - or if you get miraculin, you could make lemon juice taste sweet. Some are specific organics like terpenes memtioned here (e.g. limonene tastes citrussy, is a common additive for processed foods to taste lemony). Wintergreen, mint, etc. Root beer flavors without sugar. Others are herby. Salt can make bland flavors strong. Glutamate can make thin flavors into savory and satisfying ones. Capsaicin makes things spicy. Some spices are numbing.

But depending on her condition many of those could make her sick. I’m guessing sugar is to be avoided and therefore probably most sugar alternatives that are similarly sweet to sugar (and so trigger downstream metabolic responses). But something like aspartame is much sweeter per gram than sugar so you can sweeten things with a smaller chance of impact. But also if she has phenylketonuria you’d want to be careful with aspartame. Etc etc.

Liberals weren’t demanding anything. They were saying, “vote blue no matter who” and, “how dare you criticize Biden, you Trump supporter!” while giving bad faith knee-jerk responses to all pro-Palestinian positions, particularly (1) pivoting to alleged increased antisemitism for which there is virtually no evidence on the left (purely an attempt at deflection) and (2) trying to extract condemnations of Hamas and reframe the narrative as Hamas vs. “Israel” having “a right to defend itself” (mass murder children).

Liberals were doing the exact opposite of demanding anything remotely pro-Palestine. They were defending Israel and criticizing (and oppressing!) pro-Palestinian voices and loudly announcing that they would fight against any electoral consequences for those enabling the genocide.

And due to their license choice, no forking to get around it (legally). Would need to distribute a script and patch instead.

mentor to women

The deathlord had female disciples!? So sympathetic!

Getting just slightly ahead of the massive death toll about to happen due to starvation.

Next step will be automating their aim so it is just air drone vs ground drone

Look at your second source. Look at the “not a mistake” percentage start out at 59% in 1965 and slowly walk down to around 40% in 1968 and then around 30% in mid-1971. The “was a mistake” crowd starts at 25% and over the same period walks up to 60%. i.e. it began with domestic popularity, as all US-promoted wars tend to, whip the libs up to fight the enemy, and then deteriorated as consequences built up. Then new narratives were created to cope with this reality. Much like with Iraq, many were apparently always against the war even though a couple years earlier they cheered on the cops against protesters. No concern for the much larger numbers of Vietnamese and Cambodians killed and injured really registered among the US masses, of course, despite the efforts of left organizers. That was never considered a mistake and still isn’t among Americans.

Regarding your first source, it is basically irrelevant. What Americans now think about the US war on Vietnam is entirely propaganda narrative.

There is nothing in “the data” contrary to what I said. Would you like to explain what is liberal about the basic realities of history and explaining your own sources back to you?