Edit: Damn already so many replies.

  • DonLongSchlong@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    but they could unquestionably move the needle.

    Source? Jk, but you can’t just make that assumption. What does “move the needle” even mean? And what is the cost of moving it?

    I assure you that our comrades over there have already thought about those things.

    If they did, you’d support it, right? If so, how could you defend them doing basically NOTHING about it?

    Sure, but only because them “doing something about it” would also mean that they have the material conditions to do so, which is the only reason they would make that decision.

    That also means that them not doing something about it is based on their material analysis and I trust them when they say that they can’t do much more than they already are. Who am I to disagree? I simply don’t have the hubris to assume that I know better than the most successful socialist experiment of humanity.

    They know more about their geopolitical standing than I do. I am just gonna refer to the experts and the experts in this case is the CPC

    The alternative to critical support is uncritical support, and I’d hope no Marxist gives uncritical support to literally anything.

    That would mean that everything we support, we support critically, which then removes the meaning of critical support imo.

    I believe it is more so that it is critical for us to support something even if it hurts us. At least, again, that’s how I understood it.

    • CaptainRipcord@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 days ago

      I am also sure our comrades there have thought of these things. I am sure their calculus is different than ours. They are trying to build socialism in China. They have a long-standing policy of non-involvement. I support it until it comes to genocide.

      Sure, but only because them “doing something about it” would also mean that they have the material conditions to do so, which is the only reason they would make that decision.

      This sounds like handwaving away criticism to me. They don’t do it? Well they would if they could! But people smarter than me decided they can’t! Tough luck!

      I reject that as defeatism.

      when they say that they can’t do much more than they already are

      Did they say that? I’ve not seen so much as a statement to that effect. Are you sure you’re not wishcasting?

      That would mean that everything we support, we support critically, which then removes the meaning of critical support imo.

      How? I don’t follow. Yes, only give support critically. Never give uncritical support. Nobody is above reproach and everyone should be criticized as long as that criticism is principled and strategic.