(Thread here: https://nitter.fdn.fr/RodericDay/status/1666063389733298176#m) They have some decent stuff, but they are also tailist patsocs. It’s probably better to just read the Black Agenda Report article than buy the book.
this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2023
4 points (75.0% liked)
GenZedong
8 readers
1 users here now
This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.
Serious posts can be posted here and/or in /c/GenZhou.
We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information.
Rules:
- This community is explicitly pro-AES (China, Cuba, the DPRK, Laos and Vietnam)
- No ableism, racism, misogyny, transphobia, etc.
- No pro-imperialists, liberals or electoralists
- No dogmatism/idealism (Trotskyism, Gonzaloism, Hoxhaism, anarchism, etc.)
- Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
He's a journalist/podcaster that relies on audience donations to stay in business. He may not be a grifter in intentions but he relies on grifters to grow his platform. He's ultimately a tailist, but what's the qualitative difference between a tailist and a grifter?
In what sense is he a tailist? As far as I know, relying on donations is fairly common for independent journalists and political activists, and he isn't exactly making a lot of money
His content sits almost entirely within the corporate media landscape, as in he's either siding with one or reacting to it.
He's outside of the democrats now but still limits himself to discussions within that space.
There is certainly plenty of content discussing that, but it's far from everything they cover. Unless you've heard some unacceptable stance of his (regarding landback or something similarly important) that I haven't, I don't see the reasoning for him being a tailist or a grifter, assuming you don't have this view of more or less any Marxist who's primarily a journalist or pundit
Uncritical platforming of Haz is the most recent example. He called everyone who criticized him for that Liberals. Haz is anti-Land Back and a settler nationalist.
And look, I overall have a positive view of RBN, but Nick is the one I'm most worried about. It's coming to the point where he's either in it for clout or fails to differentiate clout from correctness.
I agree that was a bad idea. IIRC Haz didn't actually express any of his horrible takes during the stream, but he shouldn't have been invited regardless. If this is a reoccurring trend with his guests, I can see your point (that doesn't match what I've seen, but I haven't been following RBN for very long)