Let's discuss our approach here. A lot of people are just insulting people and calling them liberals. I don't think this is a good way to argue. We should instead point out their liberal positions, and why they are incorrect, so that they can see them and correct them, rather than just labelling them as liberals and hating them for it. Most people on this forum are generally good socialists, its just a lot of them have liberal views. Calling them liberals won't help, it will make them see us as their enemies, rather than making them reconsider their views. The point in this group is to correct people, not to be hating them. What do you all think?
Can't I do both at the same time? It makes me feel good and could be seen as semi-'effective.'
Just like we approach ''normal people'' on communism, we should approach these people in a soft way first. When they start coming with lots of liberalism, we tell them politely to think a bit, and realise that things aren't soo simple and good, before getting to socialism, we must go through some rough first.
Your right SG. Our job should be to point out the ways in which bourgeois ideology manifests itself in certain variations of revolutionary leftism, and the ineffectiveness of attempting to justify communism within the confines of bourgeois values and ethics. There are certainly many many examples, but one off the top of my head is the attempt to justify socialism based on some abstract notion of universal "justice", rather than on one class overthrowing another. When we're talking about revolutionary tactics and organization, we're not talking about it in terms of justice but rather in terms of class power.
