How to get past the stigma of talking about "socialism/communism/Marxism"

[IBleedRed]

Sometimes, when I am trying to engage people, I come up against committed reactionaries and the project is futile from the beginning. Many other times, however, I talk to people and they agree with many of my points...until I have to bring up the S word or the C word or the M word.

What's the best way to engage with people? What I try to do is talk about general things first, i.e news stories or general complaints like high rents or low wages, and then transition into a criticism of capitalism as a system. But talking about socialism is a much different story, and it's where we lose so many people...I'm sure it's a combination of a) they have negative opinions of all Marxist thought and b) they don't want to be associated with something so "radical" and evil or whatever

I'm not sure if this belongs in Learning, but I'll leave that to the mods. Thoughts?

[DoCt SPARTAN]

When I don't debate socialism, I bring up (like what you said) News, corruption, war/revolutions, imperialism, history, etc. Mostly all stuff that all can be related socialist politics. I like to pull out statistics that can really prove a point. So you have to do some research in to whatever your interested in discussing.

Most of my friends, and people in life know i'm a socialist, so most they think I'm some crazy rebel and not educated on politics/ideologies at all(besides my close friends and relitaves). So every now and then i like pulling out some facts and destroying their middle-class American plastic reality.

[consuming negativity]

Get them to agree with you using logic/reason and avoid all of the buzzwords. Then, when you've got them thinking your opinion is decent, surprise them with it being literally godless baby-eating communism.

[AmilcarCabral]

Since about 1996 when I got first into the internet I have been in many conspiracy theory forums, in many philosophy forums, socialism forums like these, Facebook, etc. And in one of these websites http://www.informationclearinghouse.info (a site devoted to Middle East affairs and US Imperialist wars in that part of the world) which has a comments section, where I read the thoughts of others, specially from many people of Iraq and middle east nations who have been victims of the US Imperialist wars in that section of the world, have said that most americans are very argumentative people, very skeptical people, and very pragmatic people, very psycho-rigid, and have a *one track mind* ultra-closed minded mentality. Most average people of the whole world are in a way argumentative and skeptic, pragmatic and closed minded.

But I think that in USA people are more skeptical, more pragmatic and are more psycho-rigid, more rational, more legalists, more moralists than the people of other countries. That excess of ultra-legalism in Americans, even in progressive americans, in libertarians, is an impediment for any radical change. Many americans think that because the US founders were capitalists, did a capitalist-revolution, wrote a capitalist constitution, founded a capitalist country with a capitalist economic model. Then we all should be capitalists, and that any other political system is not allowed.

That's why if there is a radical violent revolution led by a radical populist leftist leader in America, the mainstream media might claim that he is violent and evil (Like Bill Ayers, the radical leftist of the weather underground organization back in the 1970s) and most americans who are very moralists, very rational, very anti-conflicts, and who view the use of weapons to reach a political goal as a satanic crime. Will not support that violent radical revolution. And for the great majority of the population of USA they think that it is better to accept this reality of Donald Trump, Bill Gates, The Rothschilds, JP Morgan, The Rockefellers, The Bush Family, Dick Cheney, rich politicians, Obama, baseball stars like Alex Rodriguez, movie stars like Madonna, Angelina Jolie (who is super rich), Madonna (super rich), and an upper layer of the middle class (doctors, lawyers, high-wage workers like Edward Snowden who earned 200,000 a year working for CIA, high-salary independent workers, real estate sellers) living like kings and queens on earth. While the rest of USA, the great majority of people we see at Wal Marts and in the US roads every day living a shitty life of work, lawn-mowing, paying bills, paying taxes and zero pleasures.

So that self-defeating, suicidal, nihilist, fatalist, skeptical pragmatic, religious, ultra-moralist, ultra-legalist, ultra-rational psychorigid mentality of most americans is one of the most powerful impediment for any american communist activist to talk about how socialism with people in this country.

THERE IS ANOTHER GREAT PROBLEM ON HOW TO BREAK THE ICE, ON HOW TO STRIKE A CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW COMMUNISM IS THE ONLY SOLUTION FOR USA. THAT PROBLEM I SEE IN USA IS THAT MOST AMERICANS HATE TALKING NOT ONLY TALKING ABOUT POLITICS, BUT ABOUT ANY THING, THIS IS A SILENT MUTE NATION. AMERICANS ARE A SILENT SOCIETY. LIVE IN A CONSPIRACY OF SILENCE, A NATION IN TOTAL SILENCE !!

Besides most americans are very silent people, are people living in a permanent state of silence. You can't even talk about gas prices with strangers in Wal Marts. People in this country are avoidants, they do any thing to avoid any eye-contact and any social contact with strangers. One strategy that many people in America do to avoid any invasion and intrusion from strangers is doing their grocery shopping while talking on their cell phones. You don't have to be a psychologist, a psychoanalist to see with your own eyes in any where in public areas like in Wal Marts and in retail stores how most regular americans hate strangers, and are so violent against unknown people, against any strangers.

So be careful with people in this country, people in this country are crazy and not too friendly and not too open minded to strike a conversation with others. People in America are so anti-people that in many houses they have these signs that read "Beware of dogs", even if they don't have dogs in order to scare people away. This is a very anti-social nation. So it will not be a piece of cake for my fellow communist militants to walk into the houses of average americans to talk about socialism with them. Or to strike a conversation about socialism with any strangers at any Wal Marts and retail stores of this country





Sometimes, when I am trying to engage people, I come up against committed reactionaries and the project is futile from the beginning. Many other times, however, I talk to people and they agree with many of my points...until I have to bring up the S word or the C word or the M word.

What's the best way to engage with people? What I try to do is talk about general things first, i.e news stories or general complaints like high rents or low wages, and then transition into a criticism of capitalism as a system. But talking about socialism is a much different story, and it's where we lose so many people...I'm sure it's a combination of a) they have negative opinions of all Marxist thought and b) they don't want to be associated with something so "radical" and evil or whatever

I'm not sure if this belongs in Learning, but I'll leave that to the mods. Thoughts?





When I don't debate socialism, I bring up (like what you said) News, corruption, war/revolutions, imperialism, history, etc. Mostly all stuff that all can be related socialist politics. I like to pull out statistics that can really prove a point. So you have to do some research in to whatever your interested in discussing.

Most of my friends, and people in life know i'm a socialist, so most they think I'm some crazy rebel and not educated on politics/ideologies at all(besides my close friends and relitaves). So every now and then i like pulling out some facts and destroying their middle-class American plastic reality.

[Sinister Intents]

A lot of very good information has been states. I'm quite drunk but I just wany to tell you it takes to.r, yoyll get betrer I'm veru sure of this because I did

[Ritzy Cat]

We need to rename Communism to Friendism !

[Sinister Intents]

We need to rename Communism to Friendism !

FUCK [email protected] We ishould aso still call it communism but anso acnarchism

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Avoid jargon and don't be condescending. Let the other person finish their argument in its entirety even if you've heard it a million times and think you have the perfect rebuttal. When people roll their eyes after you out yourself as a communist, its generally not based on how they actually feel about communism, its because the people that talk about communism tend to be irritating as fuck and no one wants to interact with those kinds of people.

[Alexios]

A lot of very good information has been states. I'm quite drunk but I just wany to tell you it takes to.r, yoyll get betrer I'm veru sure of this because I did

What a useful post this was!

[Le Socialiste]

I've found the opposite to be the case, curiously enough. While I'm sure a lot of it has to do with where I live, I believe there's a case to be made for people's growing acceptance of radical arguments of conclusions. These developments are as much a product of the economic crisis and its impact on everyone's living standards as it is a result of the upswing in resistance that emerged throughout the last three years, beginning with the Arab and N. African revolutions and encompassing a wider array of oppositional movements stretching from Greece to Chile to the U.S. There is also something to be said about people's perception of socialism in the post-Cold War world, and the growing acceptance of young people of socialist ideas (though these could border on social democratic).

When you look at the political and economic landscape of the U.S. in particular, you'll find that the working-class has suffered tremendous defeats in the name of austerity. Government appeals to 'belt-tightening' don't find much resonance anymore, since the blatant power grab(s) repeatedly undertaken by sections of the ruling elite have become evident to everyone. It's no secret that working people as a class have had the weight of the crisis thrust onto their shoulders, or that CEOs, corporations, and the ruling class have come away with record profits while the rest of the population wallows in what's been termed "the new normal." You mention this to anyone, and their typical response will be one of general agreement and resentment.

The reality is this: the working class and other sections of society have by and large come to identify that there's a conflict of interests at play. Their awareness of the situation has been shaped and informed by the lessons of Occupy and its accompanying rhetoric of 'haves' and 'have nots' (however simplistic that may be). Many of their conclusions, however, are being molded by the working peoples' defeats everywhere. The Arab Spring remains a point of inspiration for millions, but it has entered into an uncertain period; a 'one step forward, two steps back' kind of thing. Greece has been wracked with over two dozen general strikes in the last several years, an impressive feat no doubt - but one that has yet to significantly alter the balance of forces in the country. Occupy, despite having garnered immense support from broad working and middle class layers throughout the country, folded under the twin weights of state and police brutality, as well as the movement's failure to account for how best to move forward after the destruction of encampments nationwide. Before that, you had inspiring mobilizations - but also defeats - in the field of organized labor (Wisconsin, Ohio, etc.). The result has been the cultivation of a general awareness in which the true interests of the ruling class have been visibly decimating the gains won by workers over the last century, but also a sense of defeatism.

All this is to say a confluence of events has created a situation in which people - workers, students, the unemployed - are disillusioned with the system and beginning to draw radical conclusions based off what they've observed and encountered. The rise and decline of social movements the world over has similarly resulted in the atomization of working class activity. There's still things to point to (Fight for $15, foreclosure resistance, fightbacks against assaults on public education), but these all still operate in relative isolation from each other and have yet to link up important generalizing lessons in carrying the struggle forward.

It's a matter of mixed and uneven consciousness, is what my long-winded post is trying to get to. I've spoken with people who've readily agreed with my arguments around socialism, capitalism, and the need to uproot and overthrow the latter, but still display an air of defeatism and despair that nudges them toward modest reform initiatives on the one hand, and total inaction on the other. As for getting past the 'stigma' of talking about socialism/Marxism? You need to be able to argue how and why these things are relevant to working people, to articulate the nuts and bolts of a system that doesn't function according to the interests of the vast majority of producers. That entails solidarity with, and a willingness to participate in, even the more modest expressions of fightback. Smaller campaigns, whether they happen to revolve around labor and the minimum wage, racism and police brutality, or women's rights, must be placed in perspective. As revolutionary socialists, however, we must also recognize that participation in these areas of work are vital for the creation of more generalized forms of resistance.

[Sinister Intents]

What a useful post this was!

Indeed. sorry, driunk, I'm saying it takes time to build up the knowledge and self esteem necesary to argue against the reactioanaries. Personally it's taken me continually arguaing against the reactionary assholes, despite failure, to get any good at arguing my socialist beliefs. It just takes time and to to immerse yourself in the arguments.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Since about 1996 when I got first into the internet I have been in many conspiracy theory forums, in many philosophy forums, socialism forums like these

Yeah, that shows, trotskistmarxist, that really, really shows. Can we ban this piece of shit (again) now? He even moaned about the ROTSCHILDSZZZ & BLOOD ROCKEFELLER REPTILES as usual. :rolleyes:

[Raquin]

It's impossible until socialists, communists and Marxists stop being jokes.

[Raquin]

It's impossible until socialists, communists and Marxists stop being jokes

[Ritzy Cat]

It's impossible until socialists, communists and Marxists stop being jokes.

I'm sorry, do you know what the word joke means?

[Ceallach_the_Witch]

I often use the term "post-capitalist" to refer to a communist society. It seems to be recieved reasonably positively - since by and large most people aren't actually too hot on capitalism - they're just eternally told the alternatives are evil.

[Wonton Carter]

I would say talk about the labor movement and such, talk about the good unions have done for the workers in the past, and continue to do. As someone said above, saying 'post-capitalist' generally helps ease it all in.

[AmilcarCabral]

Takayuki: Do not point your anger against other leftists, point and direct your anger against the capitalist oppressors. No wonder the left is fucked up, with leftists like you, hating and offending other leftists because you don't tolerate and like their opinions, there will not be any hope for a united leftist powerful movement.

What the heck is your problem? be friendly and loving toward other leftists, do not think of yourself as special and superior to other leftists


.


Yeah, that shows, trotskistmarxist, that really, really shows. Can we ban this piece of shit (again) now? He even moaned about the ROTSCHILDSZZZ & BLOOD ROCKEFELLER REPTILES as usual. :rolleyes:

[AmilcarCabral]

Many leftists suffer either from low-self esteem, mysanthropy, narcissism and many other disorders caused by the ultra-individualist philosophy of life of capitalist societies, all these mental personality disorders are an impediment, a destroyer, a killer of any inspiration and any motivation for all leftist comrades to join together into a united leftist workers party. Like the comrade in this section who called me "a piece of shit". This world is doomed with rotten anti-social apples inside the left like Takayuki who I think is full of intolerance and hatred toward other comrades. The other day I saw him/her offending another comrade in this forum


It's impossible until socialists, communists and Marxists stop being jokes

[Sabot Cat]

AmilcarCarbal, I think it's kind of sanctimonious and condescending to appraise all opposition to your positions or yourself as the results of mental ailments that need to be surmounted. It's even worse to present them as symptomatic of an ill-defined systemic problem because you aren't even engaging that person in a conversation anymore, but gesturing at them and saying, "See? See? This is the shit I have to put up with folks; this is what's wrong with the world!" to an audience that might not even exist. There are better ways to debate with people and rhetorically defend yourself.

[AmilcarCabral]

Red: Hi, I guess you are right, I need to be more tolerant toward other comrades and toward the personal thoughts, behaviour patterns of other comrades and people. Because we are not perfect and each person is diferent and even within the left, each leftist has many different ideas about how to overthrow capitalism. But what I was trying to say in my former comment is that I don't think is ethical and productive for other leftists to insult other leftists.

And I think that if leftists who are tired of being ruled by The Democratic Party, by The Republican Party in USA, by neoliberal political parties in Europe and in other nations of this world and who would like to see real workers states, cooks, nurses, teachers and workers ruling countries, and owning the wealth of countries. I think it would be productive for each leftist to be more tolerant toward other leftists, for maoists, marxist-leninists, to be more tolerant toward trotskists and anarchists and for anarchists and trotskists to be more tolerant toward maoists, marxist-leninists and other factions of leftist ideology.

The people united will never be defeated




AmilcarCarbal, I think it's kind of sanctimonious and condescending to appraise all opposition to your positions or yourself as the results of mental ailments that need to be surmounted. It's even worse to present them as symptomatic of an ill-defined systemic problem because you aren't even engaging that person in a conversation anymore, but gesturing at them and saying, "See? See? This is the shit I have to put up with folks; this is what's wrong with the world!" to an audience that might not even exist. There are better ways to debate with people and rhetorically defend yourself.