socdoneleft
@socdoneleft.bsky.social
I make socialist and progressive videos
Well, that depends. Most tankies are strong Stalinists and thus support classic 2nd campism, so they endorse left-of-center anti-US forces, like DPRK.
Blanket anti-US sentiment is more of a 3rd Worldist / non-Leninist view. That's how you get leftists for Iran.
Blanket anti-US sentiment is more of a 3rd Worldist / non-Leninist view. That's how you get leftists for Iran.
February 11, 2026 at 11:59 PM
Well, that depends. Most tankies are strong Stalinists and thus support classic 2nd campism, so they endorse left-of-center anti-US forces, like DPRK.
Blanket anti-US sentiment is more of a 3rd Worldist / non-Leninist view. That's how you get leftists for Iran.
Blanket anti-US sentiment is more of a 3rd Worldist / non-Leninist view. That's how you get leftists for Iran.
I mean, it's both, isn't it?
In the 2000s, the US left was equal parts young anarchists, young Trots, and aging demsocs -- those traditions very much stamped themselves on the post-Bernie left, no?
In the 2000s, the US left was equal parts young anarchists, young Trots, and aging demsocs -- those traditions very much stamped themselves on the post-Bernie left, no?
February 11, 2026 at 10:29 PM
I mean, it's both, isn't it?
In the 2000s, the US left was equal parts young anarchists, young Trots, and aging demsocs -- those traditions very much stamped themselves on the post-Bernie left, no?
In the 2000s, the US left was equal parts young anarchists, young Trots, and aging demsocs -- those traditions very much stamped themselves on the post-Bernie left, no?
I have promoted this article since the day it came out!
I'm making exactly the same argument it does!
US parties largely *don't exist* -- or are incredibly weak/"thin" -- BECAUSE primaries, celebrity candidates, and megadonors actually control them. Example: Trump taking over the hostile RNC!
I'm making exactly the same argument it does!
US parties largely *don't exist* -- or are incredibly weak/"thin" -- BECAUSE primaries, celebrity candidates, and megadonors actually control them. Example: Trump taking over the hostile RNC!
February 11, 2026 at 9:56 PM
I have promoted this article since the day it came out!
I'm making exactly the same argument it does!
US parties largely *don't exist* -- or are incredibly weak/"thin" -- BECAUSE primaries, celebrity candidates, and megadonors actually control them. Example: Trump taking over the hostile RNC!
I'm making exactly the same argument it does!
US parties largely *don't exist* -- or are incredibly weak/"thin" -- BECAUSE primaries, celebrity candidates, and megadonors actually control them. Example: Trump taking over the hostile RNC!
In fact, progressives championed two reforms: Partisan primaries OR nonpartisan elections.
In local nonpartisan elections with successful left parties, we see that dues-paying party system emerge.
Progressive Dane and Richmond Progressive Alliance both pay dues! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richmon...
In local nonpartisan elections with successful left parties, we see that dues-paying party system emerge.
Progressive Dane and Richmond Progressive Alliance both pay dues! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richmon...
Richmond Progressive Alliance - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
February 11, 2026 at 3:10 PM
In fact, progressives championed two reforms: Partisan primaries OR nonpartisan elections.
In local nonpartisan elections with successful left parties, we see that dues-paying party system emerge.
Progressive Dane and Richmond Progressive Alliance both pay dues! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richmon...
In local nonpartisan elections with successful left parties, we see that dues-paying party system emerge.
Progressive Dane and Richmond Progressive Alliance both pay dues! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richmon...
Other countries exist!
The American electoral-party system is unique in the world: State-run partisan primaries, very strong candidates, very weak "parties".
No Euro country has this. They have dues-paying membership parties. Most have more responsive, less corrupt politics than we. What gives?
The American electoral-party system is unique in the world: State-run partisan primaries, very strong candidates, very weak "parties".
No Euro country has this. They have dues-paying membership parties. Most have more responsive, less corrupt politics than we. What gives?
Do people not realize it is illegal for parties to do this in the United States because we decided around the turn of the last century that we didn't want unaccountable party bosses to decide who we could vote for
People pay because they want their ideology to win
February 11, 2026 at 3:06 PM
Other countries exist!
The American electoral-party system is unique in the world: State-run partisan primaries, very strong candidates, very weak "parties".
No Euro country has this. They have dues-paying membership parties. Most have more responsive, less corrupt politics than we. What gives?
The American electoral-party system is unique in the world: State-run partisan primaries, very strong candidates, very weak "parties".
No Euro country has this. They have dues-paying membership parties. Most have more responsive, less corrupt politics than we. What gives?
Oh: I'm implicitly arguing that the lack of action isn't because centrist types don't want to come off as DSA Right, but because they wants to rock the boat
(Also, I think soft campism is more popular than we'd like: R&R-MUG called Ukraine a "US client-state".)
(Also, I think soft campism is more popular than we'd like: R&R-MUG called Ukraine a "US client-state".)
February 11, 2026 at 5:52 AM
Oh: I'm implicitly arguing that the lack of action isn't because centrist types don't want to come off as DSA Right, but because they wants to rock the boat
(Also, I think soft campism is more popular than we'd like: R&R-MUG called Ukraine a "US client-state".)
(Also, I think soft campism is more popular than we'd like: R&R-MUG called Ukraine a "US client-state".)
See also: How mad minor restrictions on IC comms ("don't justify killing") made the Left, or narrow endorsement restrictions ("must be anti-Zionist") made the Right
So the current balance remains, because it pisses everyone off, but not enough for them to take the nuclear option & risk blowback
So the current balance remains, because it pisses everyone off, but not enough for them to take the nuclear option & risk blowback
February 11, 2026 at 5:20 AM
See also: How mad minor restrictions on IC comms ("don't justify killing") made the Left, or narrow endorsement restrictions ("must be anti-Zionist") made the Right
So the current balance remains, because it pisses everyone off, but not enough for them to take the nuclear option & risk blowback
So the current balance remains, because it pisses everyone off, but not enough for them to take the nuclear option & risk blowback
There's no way around this, except for the NPC to halt one wing's preferred Thing, which makes people REALLY angry
Example: The anti-mutual-aid and pro-mutual-aid factions of DSA were at each other's throats because they tried to shut each other down 2/3
Example: The anti-mutual-aid and pro-mutual-aid factions of DSA were at each other's throats because they tried to shut each other down 2/3
February 11, 2026 at 5:17 AM
There's no way around this, except for the NPC to halt one wing's preferred Thing, which makes people REALLY angry
Example: The anti-mutual-aid and pro-mutual-aid factions of DSA were at each other's throats because they tried to shut each other down 2/3
Example: The anti-mutual-aid and pro-mutual-aid factions of DSA were at each other's throats because they tried to shut each other down 2/3
I actually think Mikhail is wrong here
National DSA is implicitly divided into fiefdoms where people self sort into Their Thing, the work they want the most
The DSA Right gets (most of) electoral, the Center gets (most of) labor, the Left get the IC & Robert's Rules because that's Their Thing 1/2
National DSA is implicitly divided into fiefdoms where people self sort into Their Thing, the work they want the most
The DSA Right gets (most of) electoral, the Center gets (most of) labor, the Left get the IC & Robert's Rules because that's Their Thing 1/2
February 11, 2026 at 5:16 AM
I actually think Mikhail is wrong here
National DSA is implicitly divided into fiefdoms where people self sort into Their Thing, the work they want the most
The DSA Right gets (most of) electoral, the Center gets (most of) labor, the Left get the IC & Robert's Rules because that's Their Thing 1/2
National DSA is implicitly divided into fiefdoms where people self sort into Their Thing, the work they want the most
The DSA Right gets (most of) electoral, the Center gets (most of) labor, the Left get the IC & Robert's Rules because that's Their Thing 1/2
Conservatives are killing American science.
They've obliterated & politicized research grants. They've obliterated every scientific agency.
It may take a decade to recover from this skill loss & career disruption.
They've obliterated & politicized research grants. They've obliterated every scientific agency.
It may take a decade to recover from this skill loss & career disruption.
February 11, 2026 at 3:25 AM
Conservatives are killing American science.
They've obliterated & politicized research grants. They've obliterated every scientific agency.
It may take a decade to recover from this skill loss & career disruption.
They've obliterated & politicized research grants. They've obliterated every scientific agency.
It may take a decade to recover from this skill loss & career disruption.
Reposted by socdoneleft
So the feds ARE NOT considering an mRNA vaccine for the flu, which could save countless lives, but ARE backing research into whether horse dewormer can cure cancer, because the right views vaccines as elite and ivermectin as populist.
Cool.
kffhealthnews.org/news/article...
Cool.
kffhealthnews.org/news/article...
FDA won’t review Moderna application for first mRNA-based flu vaccine
The decision, which shocked company officials, comes as the FDA says it will take a stricter approach to federal vaccine approvals.
www.washingtonpost.com
February 11, 2026 at 2:24 AM
So the feds ARE NOT considering an mRNA vaccine for the flu, which could save countless lives, but ARE backing research into whether horse dewormer can cure cancer, because the right views vaccines as elite and ivermectin as populist.
Cool.
kffhealthnews.org/news/article...
Cool.
kffhealthnews.org/news/article...
Gallup, YouGov, any pollster you like tells the same story: Most Dems were not liberal until ~2020-2024 period.
Will you admit this fact?
Will you admit this fact?
February 11, 2026 at 3:02 AM
Gallup, YouGov, any pollster you like tells the same story: Most Dems were not liberal until ~2020-2024 period.
Will you admit this fact?
Will you admit this fact?
Dues-payers vote on who the party should endorse. That's the whole point! Same as in a union!
This is how "primaries" all over Europe work, where most people rate their democracy stronger & better!
This is how "primaries" all over Europe work, where most people rate their democracy stronger & better!
February 11, 2026 at 2:56 AM
Dues-payers vote on who the party should endorse. That's the whole point! Same as in a union!
This is how "primaries" all over Europe work, where most people rate their democracy stronger & better!
This is how "primaries" all over Europe work, where most people rate their democracy stronger & better!
If you agree that both DSA and CNL are subfactions of the Democratic Party (ie, quasi-factions), competing to win primaries and allegiance, then it is comparing apples to apples to compare their dues-paying membership.
That's why I made that comparison.
How do you break the symmetry?
That's why I made that comparison.
How do you break the symmetry?
February 11, 2026 at 2:47 AM
If you agree that both DSA and CNL are subfactions of the Democratic Party (ie, quasi-factions), competing to win primaries and allegiance, then it is comparing apples to apples to compare their dues-paying membership.
That's why I made that comparison.
How do you break the symmetry?
That's why I made that comparison.
How do you break the symmetry?
It's an excellent article!
February 11, 2026 at 2:43 AM
It's an excellent article!
Literally every union in America pays dues, and has done so since the 1870s at latest
Dues-paying organization is rarer among centrists and conservatives, who can rely more on large donors
If you wish to build politics away from megadonors, you want this structure to multiply a hundredfold
Dues-paying organization is rarer among centrists and conservatives, who can rely more on large donors
If you wish to build politics away from megadonors, you want this structure to multiply a hundredfold
February 11, 2026 at 2:42 AM
Literally every union in America pays dues, and has done so since the 1870s at latest
Dues-paying organization is rarer among centrists and conservatives, who can rely more on large donors
If you wish to build politics away from megadonors, you want this structure to multiply a hundredfold
Dues-paying organization is rarer among centrists and conservatives, who can rely more on large donors
If you wish to build politics away from megadonors, you want this structure to multiply a hundredfold
FRSO is not a subfaction, correct. Both DSA, WFP, and CNL are.
The original poster argued DSA was small. This is true! By the same measuring stick, the org closest to the original poster's ideology is tiny.
Until 2024, most Democrats were not liberals. It's a ballot line, not a programmatic party.
The original poster argued DSA was small. This is true! By the same measuring stick, the org closest to the original poster's ideology is tiny.
Until 2024, most Democrats were not liberals. It's a ballot line, not a programmatic party.
February 11, 2026 at 2:37 AM
FRSO is not a subfaction, correct. Both DSA, WFP, and CNL are.
The original poster argued DSA was small. This is true! By the same measuring stick, the org closest to the original poster's ideology is tiny.
Until 2024, most Democrats were not liberals. It's a ballot line, not a programmatic party.
The original poster argued DSA was small. This is true! By the same measuring stick, the org closest to the original poster's ideology is tiny.
Until 2024, most Democrats were not liberals. It's a ballot line, not a programmatic party.
Correct, DSA is de-facto a Dem subfaction.
Dues-paying membership is useful ruler to compare orgs. It's closer to 1:1 than "mailing lists" or "donor count".
Our Revolution has 8 million "supporters", of which ~60k pay dues. The latter comes closer to OR's true income & volunteering capacity.
Dues-paying membership is useful ruler to compare orgs. It's closer to 1:1 than "mailing lists" or "donor count".
Our Revolution has 8 million "supporters", of which ~60k pay dues. The latter comes closer to OR's true income & volunteering capacity.
February 11, 2026 at 2:29 AM
Correct, DSA is de-facto a Dem subfaction.
Dues-paying membership is useful ruler to compare orgs. It's closer to 1:1 than "mailing lists" or "donor count".
Our Revolution has 8 million "supporters", of which ~60k pay dues. The latter comes closer to OR's true income & volunteering capacity.
Dues-paying membership is useful ruler to compare orgs. It's closer to 1:1 than "mailing lists" or "donor count".
Our Revolution has 8 million "supporters", of which ~60k pay dues. The latter comes closer to OR's true income & volunteering capacity.
And yes, Dems are not a political party. Primaries choose candidates, not the party. Candidates raise 99% of cash, not the party.
That's why AOC could defeat Crowley. Because US parties are hollow, candidate-run shells.
Dems are a, basically, ballot line that pools donations from candidates.
That's why AOC could defeat Crowley. Because US parties are hollow, candidate-run shells.
Dems are a, basically, ballot line that pools donations from candidates.
February 11, 2026 at 2:24 AM
And yes, Dems are not a political party. Primaries choose candidates, not the party. Candidates raise 99% of cash, not the party.
That's why AOC could defeat Crowley. Because US parties are hollow, candidate-run shells.
Dems are a, basically, ballot line that pools donations from candidates.
That's why AOC could defeat Crowley. Because US parties are hollow, candidate-run shells.
Dems are a, basically, ballot line that pools donations from candidates.
Repeating "they're a Dem" adds nothing
I outlined the case:
- Dems are a ballot line
- They identified with a Dem subfaction
- Said subfaction's strongest dues-paying org is small
- This suggests the relative mass-membership weakness of neoliberals, not leftists
Why reply without responding?
I outlined the case:
- Dems are a ballot line
- They identified with a Dem subfaction
- Said subfaction's strongest dues-paying org is small
- This suggests the relative mass-membership weakness of neoliberals, not leftists
Why reply without responding?
February 11, 2026 at 2:18 AM
Repeating "they're a Dem" adds nothing
I outlined the case:
- Dems are a ballot line
- They identified with a Dem subfaction
- Said subfaction's strongest dues-paying org is small
- This suggests the relative mass-membership weakness of neoliberals, not leftists
Why reply without responding?
I outlined the case:
- Dems are a ballot line
- They identified with a Dem subfaction
- Said subfaction's strongest dues-paying org is small
- This suggests the relative mass-membership weakness of neoliberals, not leftists
Why reply without responding?
They claimed 600k to the The Guardian in December 2025.
It's plausible -- they charge $120/yr in dues and had $51 million in contributions in FY24 (midpoint is December 2024), which would be ~425,000.
(In reality, contributions is dues + extra dues + donations + grants.)
It's plausible -- they charge $120/yr in dues and had $51 million in contributions in FY24 (midpoint is December 2024), which would be ~425,000.
(In reality, contributions is dues + extra dues + donations + grants.)
February 10, 2026 at 11:46 PM
They claimed 600k to the The Guardian in December 2025.
It's plausible -- they charge $120/yr in dues and had $51 million in contributions in FY24 (midpoint is December 2024), which would be ~425,000.
(In reality, contributions is dues + extra dues + donations + grants.)
It's plausible -- they charge $120/yr in dues and had $51 million in contributions in FY24 (midpoint is December 2024), which would be ~425,000.
(In reality, contributions is dues + extra dues + donations + grants.)
The main reason tankies suck on foreign policy: Glazing dictators
The main reason centrist Democrats suck on foreign policy: Sending bombs to genocidaires
The main reason centrist Democrats suck on foreign policy: Sending bombs to genocidaires
February 10, 2026 at 11:38 PM
The main reason tankies suck on foreign policy: Glazing dictators
The main reason centrist Democrats suck on foreign policy: Sending bombs to genocidaires
The main reason centrist Democrats suck on foreign policy: Sending bombs to genocidaires
Ye shall be scooched right in v17
February 10, 2026 at 11:08 PM
Ye shall be scooched right in v17
I could've sworn I read an article in DSA Mass that leaned toward a dirty break
But that would've been like 3 years ago so 🤷♀️ idk
But that would've been like 3 years ago so 🤷♀️ idk
February 10, 2026 at 10:54 PM
I could've sworn I read an article in DSA Mass that leaned toward a dirty break
But that would've been like 3 years ago so 🤷♀️ idk
But that would've been like 3 years ago so 🤷♀️ idk
News Media Vouchers is an obvious solution for the underfunding of investigative journalism
So too should FOSS Vouchers solve the underfunding of public-serving free software.
In other words: Subsidize PAYING FOR IT!
bsky.app/profile/socd...
So too should FOSS Vouchers solve the underfunding of public-serving free software.
In other words: Subsidize PAYING FOR IT!
bsky.app/profile/socd...
We can extend the Founder's vision -- a content-neutral, universal subsidy of news -- into the digital age.
It's called news vouchers. Every year, every American gets $150 to subscribe to any news producer they please.
Bonus: News freed from ad markets means less clickbait.
It's called news vouchers. Every year, every American gets $150 to subscribe to any news producer they please.
Bonus: News freed from ad markets means less clickbait.
February 10, 2026 at 10:07 PM
News Media Vouchers is an obvious solution for the underfunding of investigative journalism
So too should FOSS Vouchers solve the underfunding of public-serving free software.
In other words: Subsidize PAYING FOR IT!
bsky.app/profile/socd...
So too should FOSS Vouchers solve the underfunding of public-serving free software.
In other words: Subsidize PAYING FOR IT!
bsky.app/profile/socd...