I’m aware that people who make a living from the internet have an incentive to clickbait and appeal to the lowest common denominator to maximise views and thus earning potential. Nonetheless, I maintain that the posse who made being super into analysing disney movies and meaningless internet drama into a career were never left to begin with and always did their anti-reactionary stuff from a liberal democratic framework of there being nothing wrong with the current system.

Most of these online people were never communist to begin with. Don’t know much about Samsen, but last I checked he is a generic lib making videos about some reactionary gamer. For most of the breadtube/nebula posse, being the “left” was just marketing and sub-culture appeal akin to being a skater or hipster rather than questions of fundamental political economic importance such as critical support for flawed but nonetheless anti-hegemonic forces.

Secondly, it isn’t true that bad is a nihilist. He is against entryism as it is tactic that hasn’t once achieved anything of note. I really wish Americans would stop falling for the idea that if they just vote for the DSA entryist candidate, then socialism will happen. Mamdani, AOC, Sanders, and a number of other supposedly “left” Democrat electoral options were either all imperialists from the start or got coopted. You will not change the system from within, it’ll change you. This isn’t nihilism, it’s just facts.

Edit: not that I’m big on the guy personally. I think supporting the US-aligned Zelensky puppet regime, palling around with the lausan collective, being a transphobe, and doing anti-Maduro propaganda amid imperial aggression against Venezuela are all quite damning reasons for why he shouldn’t be considered a comrade. He is good at bullying lib entryist advocates and being an opportunist, that is all.

Right sorry, must’ve misclicked

An ad hominem would be to dismiss an argument by attacking the person or circumstances. You know, like calling someone a Russian bot.

Secondly, I think you missed the point of the image. You claim to believe America is bad, but simultaneosly adopt it’s views on geopolitical rivals uncritically. Yes, including the view that anything that portrays the west in a negative light being “Russian propaganda”. Funnily enough, that’s the real ad hominem and is something incredibly common to hear coming out of liberals.

Edit: this was actually aimed at potustheplant, not Mayali. Clicked reply on the wrong comment.

That’s not true, anarchists regularly allow themselves to be infiltrated by cops and closet white supremacists.

Of course, it’s just going to take a lot more to foment that sentiment in a volunteer soldier from the first world than a conscript from the global south. It’s very possible, and there are at least a handful who did become class conscious and anti-imperialist. If the end result is someone who aids the cause of global Communism then that’s good, it’s just going to take a lot of time and work to reach someone to get them to that point. Given the current state of the western left, I’m not hopeful about the prospects of that happening anytime soon.

Obviously, if an Israeli ended up defecting and chose to aid the Palestinian national liberation struggle, that’d be a good thing and don’t think any of us would complain. The reality though is that is rarely likely to happen and I wouldn’t hold my breath.

I’m under no delusions that something like all these guys being tried and sentenced for what they’ve done will ever happen in my lifetime. I’m simply not interested in having sympathy for them or being scolded for not liking them for things they did.

I don’t believe all bastards are beyond redemption. No one is going to be anywhere close to perfect 100% of the time and will have done or said something reactionary in the past. I simply don’t see the point in giving the benefit of the doubt when it comes to something like this, neither to vets or people who are trying to finger wag us for being disinterested in playing along with the absurd notion that we should ignore their victims. I could get the demonisation point if it was about something like someone having worked in HR or whatever in the past, but we’re talking about guys who unjustly killed people.

Personally, I don’t believe any of these examples are comparable to Israel and America. I don’t doubt that in many parts of the world, including in western countries like Brazil, there are members of the armed forces who are sympathetic to communism. However, not all military orgs are identical or a regular instrument of imperialism. Being a Russian conscript in WWI is obviously not the same as being an American drone pilot who enlisted of their own volition.

So what exactly are you trying to promote as point of view here? In contrast to what? As a contrast to “individuals aren’t responsible for anything”?

Not saying that you’re guilty of this, but I’ve often gotten the impression that people who talk about stuff like the “poverty draft” or whatever genuinely think these people had zero responsibility in what they ended up doing. Same goes for stuff like “the government, not the people” which is …uhhhh.

it is important to acknowledge the heavy ways in what material conditions influence people.

Obviously this goes without saying. Personally though, I believe that it’s quite possible to acknowledge that these people aren’t ontologically immoral but ended up there because of real material reasons while also believing that they should be held accountable for their actions.

I mentioned troops because the topic is a lightning rod for moral supremacists. (and it worked!)

Sounds more like you got no real argument and are now trying to pretend it was some clever plan to get the “woke moralists” to reveal themselves or whatever.

the ex-soldier who teaches commies to shoot guns build tunnels and avoid being seen by drones did bad things. so even though all I do is read theory and post on the internet, I’m a better communist.

Actually, it’s really strange to make up this guy and pretend everyone else is wrong for reading what you wrote lucidly. Most of these guys aren’t going to do that, they’re going to end up some Graham Platner type who only supports the “good wars” while wanting a bigger slice of the pie. Really bizarre choice of hill to die on.

It’s not fanfiction, I am simply saying that we should judge that other group by the same standards that OP wishes to apply to troops in order to show how pointless and counterintuitive it is to do so for either troops or cops.

the question is why are these leftists disproportionately talking about troops?

Because no one else is willing to talk about the harm these people do in nearly the same volume as the mainstream does about domestic problems like police brutality or ICE. The real victims in all this are forgotten about and everyone is expected to shed tears over guy having PTSD for killing people in the name of imperialism.

Personally, I think it’s incredibly inconsistent to say “ACAB” while not applying the same standards to troops, we too can make similar appeals to “material conditions” to justify or excuse the things cops do. In theory, everyone is a potential “comrade” but in practice there are also certain groups who will fight and die for capital. Troopers did so once, and likely will a million times before they have a sincere change of heart. I’m tired of having to explain this to people who would rather dive into stale Liberal talking points instead of just accepting pretty obvious objective truths.

It’d be like if I said “Next time there’s a big blowup about ICE or police brutality, I will concern troll about “alienating potential comrades” by being too critical about ICE.” With Communists like these, there is just no way I would ever want this movement to succeed. Lol. Seriously though, the rest of the world shows solidarity with the ineffectual American left, while that same left refuses to reciprocate and goes to bat for the troops that are currently doing something a million times worse than anything the cops have ever done domestically. Amazing how rhetoric like this doesn’t fall under the “No bigotry, anti-communism, pro-imperialism” rule.

I’m personally not at all interested in the success of a movement that is willing to go against everything it’s supposed to be about just to extend the olive branch to some Graham Platner type. If you’re willing to throw the world’s poorest under the bus just so that first worlders can have free healthcare and feel nice-fuzzy about having “rehabilitated” a child killer, then what’s even the point of calling yourself an anti-imperialist or Communist? At that point, just call yourself a liberal or a socdem.

Also, institutions are made up of people. They can’t exist without personnel that enable them to be, they have to be upheld by someone. You can’t have settler colonialism without settlers choosing to participate, you can’t have imperialism without people choosing to uphold it. Criticism of institutions is also criticism of people, they don’t pop out of nowhere and aren’t allowed to continue existing because of some invisible hand.

Okay, then lets extend this line of thinking to cops. After all, law enforcement are humans capable of change too and if you really believe what you’re saying, you should have no problem being friends with the local PD. ICE, welcome to the Resistance^TM!

The truth is that you brought up troops specifically for a reason. I’ve seen way more “demonisation” of local law enforcement than I have of the military, even among supposed “leftists”, but you are specifically offended about troops. Why? Because your local cops police you while the troops police the vassals and colonies on your behalf. The way you feel about being harassed by cops, is a mere fraction of what the people of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan have had to endure. While the armed forces are human, their victims are also humans.

This extends to demonization of the troops

This is where you lost me. I only ever seen this get brought up when it comes to defending the “troops”. Funny how it’s always like this. If someone complained about Communists “demonising cops/ICE” they’d rightly get made fun of as a lib who is indifferent to the nature of these positions. But it’s specifically a sticking point for you that Communists aren’t saying “thank for your service” to a glorified contract killer.

Also no, American troops aren’t responding to their material conditions. The vast majority come from fairly well-off backgrounds and enlist with the view that it’s a chance to have an “adventure” or to “serve their country” (a country founded on slavery and colonialism). If I had to guess, the truth that you’re indifferent to what the soldiers did abroad because it didn’t happen to you is a fact that is deeply uncomfortable to you.

I’d say it would be quite difficult to foment anti-war sentiment in the same way as the Vietnam War era. The West capitalised on 9/11 and was able to very effectively sell the Iraq War (and subsequent wars) to the public because of this. I don’t think there was anything quite like that even in red scare terms for Vietnam.

Plus, another crucial difference is that Vietnam War-era America had conscription with roughly one-third of America’s military personnel being conscripts who were drafted, it’s generally a lot easier to get people to be against something when it obviously infringes on an individual’s ability to choose to not participate without consequence. Nowadays though, it’s an all-volunteer force that is very unlikely to be receptive to the same messaging.

I personally don’t believe that conceding on basic principles to gain ground with people who are fundamentally opposed to anti-imperialism will have a positive effect. At that point, you’re essentially just preaching labour zionism.

I’d say it’s uncontroversial and true. The armed forces of the US largely exists to maintain America’s imperial dominance abroad, there is nothing valorous about going to the global south to murder the world’s poorest for your own personal gain. Vets themselves have often admitted to signing up of their own volition to either have an “adventure” or to make money in some way murdering foreigners. Mike Prysner attempted to shift responsibility by laying blame on Bush, but the reality of it is that he and his friends ended up there of their own volition. Nobody sent them but themselves, there was no draft nor conscription. Plus, even if there was conscription, conscientious objectors are a thing. If people in apartheid South Africa and America during the Vietnam War could do it, there is zero reason for why it wouldn’t be viable now.

Here’s something that’ll come off as “moralistic” and “unscientific” to the stormtrooper apologists here, but it is not in fact okay to murder foreigners in a totally unjust imperialist “operation” and you should expect no sympathy when you’re injured or killed by the very people you enthusiastically signed up to murder. The only way you could disagree with this is if you view non-white/non-American lives as less valuable.

If you have a problem with this but not people making the same arguments to defend the IDF or US armed forces, it can only be because you don’t see non-American lives as equal in value.

Not that BE is good of course, he’s a radlib who happens to uphold the correct political line occasionally.