this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2025
252 points (96.3% liked)

Progressive Politics

2976 readers
734 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/32730153

"The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. His heart sank as he thought of the enormous power arrayed against him, the ease with which any Party intellectual would overthrow him in debate, the subtle arguments which he would not be able to understand, much less answer. And yet he was in the right! They were wrong and he was right." — George Orwell, 1984

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jimmydoreisalefty@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago (6 children)

The problem with this quote, and things like Ur-fascism is they apply to both sides if you look at the full picture

That is why it is called a duopoly; they both work against the working class while offering crumbs so as to keep us thinking that they fight for us.

We need an independent (from the duopoly, oligarchy) working-class movement to address the systematic issues that continue to increase the struggles we all face.

TIL

"Ur-Fascism" or "Eternal Fascism: Fourteen Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt" is an essay authored by the Italian philosopher, novelist, and semiotician Umberto Eco. First published in 1995, this influential essay provides an analysis of fascism, a definition of fascism, and discusses the fundamental characteristics and traits of fascism. Drawing on Eco's personal experiences growing up in Mussolini's Italy and his extensive research on fascist movements, the essay offers his insights into the nature of fascism and its manifestations.

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 days ago (5 children)

I didn’t only mean it in the context of party politics, I also meant it in the right-left spectrum as it is generally understood and how it manifests in discourse, but especially in online discourse. I find that the online left is as punishing of any disagreement with the agenda as MAGA is, if not even more.

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml -1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I find that the online left is as punishing of any disagreement with the agenda as MAGA is, if not even more.

What a shock, you find people who you disagree with disagree with you more than people you agree with. Very interesting insight.

I don’t agree with MAGA on almost anything but it was not an anecdotal observation since I’m not really on board with the online progressive agenda either (which is disjointed and nonsensical). It was an observation of how left communities tend to ban almost immediately after some dissent is expressed right leaning communities allow dissent. Not universal though, there are communities like r/conservative (which I’m not even sure has real people anymore) who will ban if you even dare to contradict even blatantly wrong things.

It this is all based on observation, I go to both red and left communities to see how the conversation revolves around issues.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)