Don’t know why he wastes time criticizing him since JT doesn’t do anything wrong. Also really funny that him and other commenters are complaining about The Deprogram being like Chapo.

Upon deeper research, it turns out Day used to post on the subreddit to dunk on BadEmpanada, which is funny since Day himself has strong BadEmpanada vibes.

  • ProxyTheAwesome [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    he’s kinda right, MMT is just social democracy with a hat on. In fact, I don’t see how it’s even much different from Keynesianism that even Liberals almost universally accepted until the Neoliberal era of Reagan

    • ProletarianDictator [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      He’s right, but JT’s role is selling baby leftists on Marxist topics. A big part of that is convincing people a better world is possible. Roderic is just an overzealous dick. Should save his energy for radlibs.

        • TreadOnMe [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Because we live at the center of the imperial world where the first step is even getting people to think about things like they are an imperial system, let alone how we in the imperial core are getting fucked by that imperial system.

          That being said, Day is completely correct here. But that doesn’t mean that JT is wrong.

          • ProxyTheAwesome [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            We’ve been trying the succ dem slow pipeline for 200 years in the West and it hasn’t worked. Maybe it’s time for a different strategy than slowly “waking” up Liberals with social democracy, because all evidence shows that most just remain social democrats

            • TreadOnMe [none/use name]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Oh, and you’re saying a Maoist style insurgency has worked incredibly well in the imperial core as well?

              None of these strategies have ‘worked’. But one of them gets people in the pipeline, the other doesn’t do jack diddly shit unless you are already there. Getting people to even think about this stuff critically at all is a win and if you don’t think it is, I highly suggest you go and talk to some people outside of the leftie political sphere, who have zero idea of what any of this shit is.

              • ProxyTheAwesome [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Where did I suggest Maoist insurgency? Is that really the only options in your view? Guerrilla war immediately or succ dem reformism?

                The high water mark of leftism in the west was during the Great Depression when there was a large and powerful unionized working class involved in a central Marxist party, a party that worked with the global proletarian movements abroad. That is the style to emulate, not weatherman adventurism or Berniecrat social imperialism

                • TreadOnMe [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  No, I’m being flippant, which isn’t helpful. I’m sorry, I’ve been unnecessarily combative.

                  Reform or radicalism will not come until there is a consequential enough war-tien deprivation to actually affect the generalized working class in the U.S., whatever form it takes. Currently, modern unions will roll over if they receive even a portion of the pressure that they received in the 30’s. They can make all noise they want, which is good, but they are not going reach anything close to a ‘high water mark’ unless the actual historical material circumstances support it. They can and historically have, been bought off. Maybe it could support a previously unknown radicalism of MMT socdems, maybe it could support a core Maoist resurgence, maybe it could support a radical unionism. My personal belief is that it will come from emergent historical forms of organizations, but we just don’t know which ones yet, so it is pointless to fight about it.

                  Ultimately and personally, I think the Marxist view of the monetary economy is superior and more historically analytical, but I also genuinely don’t think it matters that much where we are at this point historically. Personally, I’ve been able to turn many libertarian socialists into more Marxist thinkers using MMT as an entry point into structured economics. It’s not an entry point for libs or socdems, it’s an entry point for libertarian socialists. I support your view here, it would be nice if JT self-crits and discusses those problems in a later post. I just don’t think we’re at a point it matters to argue about it, imo any systemic thinking ‘at all’ is good. Propoganda is propoganda is propoganda. I could be wrong though.