And there you have it, it’s like an alcoholic refusing to acknowledge they are an alcoholic. They cannot change until they realize that they are the problem
There you have it indeed, any excuse to deflect and ignore the actual point. Alright champ, assume words mean whatever you think they mean and anyone left of Lenin is a fascist. If you can’t handle a segment, how on earth do you have the organization and numbers to overthrow the whole system?
So to recap: the revolutionary approach isn’t succeeding because it’s under attack by liberals, except the liberal attacks are ineffective as evidenced by an 18% approval rating (nevermind that polling actually shows 34%). Not sure how low approval ratings for liberals is evidence for the efficacy of revolutionaries. Also lowering approval for liberals only empowers the more virulently fascist conservatives.
How, pray tell, does any of that demonstrate the strength of revolutionaries? None of that implies positive support for revolution, or organization necessary to implement that revolution, much less any likelihood of revolution securing the desired end goal.
This approach just seems like toothless reactionary bluster.
Liberals are a segment of that fascism.
Even if that were true it wouldn’t refute my point. If you can’t handle attacks from a segment, how are you going to overthrow the whole thing?
And there you have it, it’s like an alcoholic refusing to acknowledge they are an alcoholic. They cannot change until they realize that they are the problem
There you have it indeed, any excuse to deflect and ignore the actual point. Alright champ, assume words mean whatever you think they mean and anyone left of Lenin is a fascist. If you can’t handle a segment, how on earth do you have the organization and numbers to overthrow the whole system?
That’s not a deflection, that’s fighting fascism, which includes liberals
Shifting focus to avoid answering a question is the exact definition of deflection. Answer the question.
We are handling that segment, their 18% approval rating didnt come out of nowhere
So to recap: the revolutionary approach isn’t succeeding because it’s under attack by liberals, except the liberal attacks are ineffective as evidenced by an 18% approval rating (nevermind that polling actually shows 34%). Not sure how low approval ratings for liberals is evidence for the efficacy of revolutionaries. Also lowering approval for liberals only empowers the more virulently fascist conservatives.
How, pray tell, does any of that demonstrate the strength of revolutionaries? None of that implies positive support for revolution, or organization necessary to implement that revolution, much less any likelihood of revolution securing the desired end goal.
This approach just seems like toothless reactionary bluster.
I didn’t say it wasn’t succeeding, I said it’s been stymied by right wing liberals defending the oppression of the working class