picklemeister [she/her]

  • 3 Posts
  • 86 Comments
Joined 7 months ago
cake
Cake day: January 21st, 2025

help-circle







  • trots were a lot more common ~30 years ago or so. swp (socialist workers party) was big (for an american communist party) when i was a kid and in true trot fashion ended up splitting into a number of nominally active and defunct parties. PSL actually comes from that lineage via the workers world party who split from swp. these days socialist alternative had been fairly active though they don’t come from the US swp tree. Kshama Sawant was a city councilor in Seattle under SA though i believe she also did a split along with a faction of that party. trots in general are still a going concern pretty much everywhere but with the frequency of party splits and the lack of the USSR as a foil you see where they get the reputation for factionalism and being smallish newspaper/book club orgs.

    i think to your first question there’s some accuracy there but, taking off my hexbear hyperbole hat, social democrats are common enough even if they don’t have the terminology for it and social democrats with neoliberal characteristics aren’t exactly uncommon anywhere you find social democrats. democratic socialists being social democrats is common enough to be a thing but it’s not a given and for some people this is a sort of intermediate stage. online is whatever, but Communist is a loaded term in the US when you’re interacting with the waking world where it’s much more rare to hear used as a descriptor and usually not without some meaning behind it. on-the-ground anarchists who use communist as a descriptor are usually anarcho-communists who work within mutual aid and bloc circles, ml and trot leaning people will usually have some sort of theoretical development even if it’s nascent or piecemeal. in the US those people are of course rare but that goes back to what I mean about ‘communist’ being a rare descriptor offline for a variety of reasons.












  • this is where I land because hey, if it works then it works, but i do think there’s a fine line between something being ‘imported’ and something from abroad speaking to what was already there. like, us american culture wars aren’t transported to and imposed upon europe, they’re just bombastically repackaged versions of things that already existed throughout “the west” ( to include Japan) which are eagerly adopted by sympathetic ears. an easy example from br*tish culture would be the institutional transphobia there which has its own roots in cultural mores and academic terfery and while it interplays and accepts influence from outside, the outside is speaking to what was already inside. the attitude and tone are deeply influenced by what’s happening in the us (because it’s essentially the front lines of these culture wars) but the content isn’t new to europeans in any but the most superficial lenses.

    basically i would never say it’s a bad idea to blame america because everyone should, but being mindful that what america has done has been enthusiastically aided and abetted by the west for their own benefit and only after effectively handing off the mask of chief exploiter from themselves to the us so that they could continue to benefit under better branding. that these ideas and concepts have always had eager adherents throughout the west and the combative nature of the amerikkkan version is appealing because of these underpinnings.