Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

RedIsNowGreen OP wrote

"Everything" cannot be important - at least not at the same time. To "win", one must prioritize then pick their battles. Choosing battles around which the broadest alliances can be formed increases the chance for success. Myopic focus on objectives that benefit relatively few while ignoring or alienating many plays right into the hands of the HAVEs, who work hard to keep the HAVENOTs focused on our differences rather than our similarities, thereby minimizing the likelihood that we will ever unite (at least long enough) to overcome our common oppressors.


mofongo wrote

  1. History shows, time and time again, that having a mass line in revolutionary time is inviting the counter revolution in. In no revolutionary times is voting Democrat. Ideology does not being revolution, there's no need to make room to those that feel unaccepted by the demand of acceptance and understanding of those different than them.

  2. Stop trying to modernize the language, bourgeoise and proletariat have precise definitions for a reason. Changing it to haves dilutes what you're trying to say, to focus and infantilize your audience. It's doing exactly the thing you're complaining about.


RedIsNowGreen OP wrote

The simpler the language used, the easier it is for people to understand.

I'm good with the "HAVEs vs HAVENOTs" paradigm.

But thanks for your feedback.