A personal philosophy is a fine and dandy thing to have - but it’s not much of a security measure to protect against the very thing OP says they are concerned about, is it now?

Imagine encouraging members of activist groups to unilaterally POLICE the behavior of their fellow members - in an anarchist community.

Imagine being unable to bring up very real security concerns within an activist group so that the group can solve the problem in an appropriately DEMOCRATIC manner - again, in an anarchist community.

Are you TRYING to cultivate a culture of suspicion in your orgs?

Imagine turning “here, read this book”

Oh, look, it’s the standard “read my fave Beardy McDeadguy’s book” answer edgelords that are completely out of touch with the people they (purportedly) wish to liberate offers to those they assume to be too ideologically “impure” for their glorified counter-culture club they mistake for a political movement.

Do you seriously think the CNT-FAI was built this way? Or the movements in Chiappas, or Rojava?

bell hooks wrote her books to inform - not to be used as a way to purity test people because you don’t know how to democratically normalize common-sense security measures in organizations.

Lmfao, new to leftist spaces are you?

Unfortunately, no. I’m not.

It is not the fascists that have rendered the left so ineffective and weak in the Anglophone world, Clyde - it’s the liberals that did. And all your edginess doesn’t hide the fact that the left still virtually have no answer to liberal co-optation - unless you want to inform me of some brilliant plan that the left has managed to hide for the last seven decades?

Ask them to read some bell hooks

I don’t think putting people through a “re-education” process is going to have the results you think it will.

However, this is an important point - having certain people monopolize the security function IS a pretty dangerous security risk in itself, and it would be a far better strategy to make this a perfectly understood and non-negotiable paradigm within the group than trying to subtly psyop certain individuals who may simply be too enthusiastic for their own good.

MLK and Malcolm X tried to warn us about liberalism a long, long time ago… and I don’t think the left, even now, has realized what liberalism truly is - the “political arm” of the capitalist order. The carrot to the fascist stick.

but their ideological descendents still managed to fester

That’s because the US and their liberal European collaborators went out of their way to preserve fascism in Europe. The US tried to destroy the Taliban - and now the Taliban is essentially untouchable (which they most definitely weren’t before). You get a lot of political credibility on your home turf for defeating the US - just ask Vietnam.

I’m having trouble parsing it.

The whole reason there is a fascist resurgence is because liberalism has been exposed as a pack of lies. That started even before the 2008 recession, and now one of liberalism’s holiest cows - Zionism - is collapsing right before everyone’s eyes.

No more carrot for the US - now there will only be the stick. “Hearts & Minds” had absolutely nothing to do with the brown people they were dropping napalm and willy pete on - the target of “Hearts & Minds” was always the people doing the dropping.

Both the Taliban

You didn’t get the memo? The US ran from Afghanistan with it’s tail between it’s legs, while the Taliban rules there and is now literally untouchable. The US’s “steamrolling” isn’t as impressive as you believe it to be.

“winning hearts and minds”

The US can’t even win “hearts & minds” in Bumfucksville, Arizona any more.

Is Canada supposed to be afraid of a country that couldn’t defeat Vietnamese rice farmers and Afghan goatherders?

but the right wingers insist it’s the “radical leftism” of social democracy.

That shouldn’t surprise us. The capitalist order only allows for the existence of two (supposedly) opposing ideologies - liberalism and fascism - that in reality is complementary to each other when it comes to maintaining their precious status quo.

So it stands to reason that fascists should cast liberals as the “Radical Left!” - that’s the ideology they are taking over from as liberalism is failing to maintain the status quo. It’s failing in it’s role as “good cop.”

It is far, far easier to radicalise a fascist than a liberal. A fascist, unlike a liberal, has to actually do the dirty work of the capitalist class while the liberal benefits from it while pretending their hands are clean. It’s not that difficult pointing this out to fascists - deep down, most of them already suspect this.

MLK was correct about liberals.

Biden is a right-winger. Liberalism is right-wing, and has never been anything else.

Mosquitos.

President of what?

Thanks.

What’s an LIDL?

Do you believe we can achieve those systems with our current world order? (Liberal-facsism)

Yes. But only in the chaos caused by the disasters this world order itself inflicts on the world.

How do you implement direct democracy and scale it without interference from the capital class?

You can’t. It has to be done with the understanding that the capitalist class will do it’s utmost to destroy you.

Which system could we expect to live under that would reform

We have seen all kinds of attempts to “reform” capitalism - from Lenin’s “state capitalism” to the US’s New Deal to our current “Capitalism With Chinese Characteristics” All of them leaves the door open for the eventual re-establishment of the capitalist mode of production and it’s inevitable class domination.

what system would this task require?

We require a system of direct democracy. Some will call that anarchism, or socialism, or “council communism”… but it will all boil down to the exact same thing.

We (from the perspective of the capital class) are the pigs threatening to eat the carrot.

No. We (from the perspective of the capital class) are the pigs rejecting the carrot… therefore, it is only the fascist stick that can now protect the capitalist order.

Nothing new about this - it’s essentially what happened after WW1.

Using your analogy, how would we achieve a less exploitative relationship with the capital class?

You’re essentially asking how we stop a serial abuser from being a serial abuser.

There are two ways, of course. You either remove the victim, or you remove the serial abuser.

Somehow, I don’t think the former is an option.

No, that is a choice that

Again, liberal. That’s not my “solution” - that is what your precious status quo will be doing anyway.