Do you know how often bourgeois democracies elect “socialists”? Hell, many of them even elect “communists” on the regular. It’s normal. Get over it. Please.
EDIT - there are basically two main genres of Mamdani poster, both of which keep scrawling MAMDANI on the wall in their own excrement for different reasons, and they all seem to be assuming I am from the other side lol
yes we already know he’s an american politician
Do you not think that Americans are capable of better than this? If not, then doesn’t that mean Zohran sucks and always will, as well as every other American?
It is not possible for a democrat to be better than Zohran. Zohran is a democrat. He is doing things which are expected of him.
I think the people here who are being accused of liking him only like him slightly more than other democrats
nobody here is a giant zohran stan
Sorry, did you see the same thread when he was elected about how important a watershed it was? We have paid employees who knew the man personally on this site, some people have certainly elevated him above the imperialist warmonger we understand all democrats to be
I think its proof Americans, espically younger Americans are no longer scared of red scare propaganda. Which is good
But IDK if many people think he’s gonna do a communism
I also did not see that thread
I think the disconnect in perception here might be because you didn’t see a lot of the really early Zohran arguments on here. People definitely defended him a lot.
https://hexbear.net/post/5899168
267 upvotes and was pinned to the front page. The average democrat doesn’t get that treatment here. I see that it’s older than your account but that may be the disconnect
Again with the communism strawman. It’s people claiming the label socialist before warping it to mean nice progressive democrat. We push back on people like the American communist party who appropriate leftist language for nationalist goals, why would we permit Bernie, AOC, Mamdani to do the same with actual power and offices?
This is true. Based on past conversations I’ve seen here, I think you’re underestimating how much some people here like him. I could make this exact same post about AOC or Bernie and it would be completely uncontroversial.
I have literally only seen this post go “ERM I WANT IT ON THE RECORD THAT ZOHRAN WILL BETRAY EVERYONE!” and then nobody in the comments disagree
And its posted like once a week
its fucking annoying. I don’t care about him I live in Ireland.
What if I posted about random Irish politicians I disliked? I think the people living in America would find it just as fucking annoying
michael healy are IS THE WORST EVER I FUCKING HATE GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Agreed. I understand vent posts, but I’m tired of hearing about it. It wouldn’t bother me if it didn’t make people argue about it though, because then the posts would have like 5 comments and fall right of the front page.
Please do, actually. Vent posts are fine IMO (as I said above) and can actually be interesting and inform people of the internal politics of other countries, which is good. That’s not equivalent to the constant American media circus everyone is forced to listen to.
not at a level of prominence where the Obama phone call comes. We could generate a few Sawants. Maybe some cryptocommunists at less prominent offices, but we’d all hate them because of the fundamental compromises that come with being an elected official. This is just redundant criticism of electoralism and entryism. he won an executive position, let’s save it for when he’s in office not accomplishing anything and it’s useful agitprop.
If we support someone and get them into office, then wait for everyone to realize that that person is bad or inadequate to make criticisms, people will accurately view us as opportunists and hypocrites. Good agitprop requires people to realize that those making it have always known better than Zohran. Materialists can see that Zohran’s approach is not a solution and they’re right to say so.
I’m not even sure we fundamentally disagree that much on this, to be honest. You’re right that entryism is a dead strategy. That’s also what I think about Zohran. Truthfully I think that’s all there really is to say about him on Hexbear unless he’s in the news, but some people seem to disagree because I can’t stop hearing about him on here and it’s always arguments.
I’m tired of hearing about the mayor-elect. The fact that this always turns into a 100 comment thread of arguments is an embarrassing testament to the overall state of theoretical and historical understanding on this website, as well as its tendency towards US-centrism and at times (though not that often, thankfully) even chauvinism. If this place had a principled “line” on Zohran, these threads would still exist, but they’d have 5 comments at most.
Edit: this came out more doomer about the site than I meant it to. This place is good a lot of the time and a much better space than anywhere else online. However, there are a few persistent brainworms that have survived from all the way back in the CTH days.