Firstly, we are not “NazBols.” This red-brown alliance crap is nonsense. We are not incorporating “right-wing” beliefs into our paradigm. We do not believe that “right-wing” people are born essentially or innately evil; their essence as human beings did not lead them to choose right-wing ideology. We think they are worth talking to about class consciousness and communism (as is everyone). While I think the best people to talk to are those who profess to be “apolitical,” like myself in my younger years and the majority of registered voters (as of January 2022, 46% of registered voters
) - people who don’t trust either of the major parties and know they’ve both led us astray.
Nevertheless, I think “right-wing” people are worth speaking to, as many understand the system has failed us and understand how the “left” assists the state in upholding this.
This is, in fact, the big hurdle when speaking with a “leftist,” we often deal with the idea that they “already get it.” Mark Fisher’s Capitalist Realism
is both a diagnosis and a great example of the kind of pessimism we see in the modern “left.” Many understand the need for a new paradigm, but most believe that changing their behavior in the current paradigm will eventually get us to one. It will not, as per Engels’s Socialism: Utopian and Scientific
The big hurdle when talking with a “right-winger” is explaining that I am nothing like the stereotype of a communist, that the left is not representative of Marx, and that I ultimately do care about them as a person. Is this going to “convert” all of these people to become Good Communists™? I don’t know! But I know that many people are willing to learn how the current structure impedes their interests and what to do about them. We do not meet these people without trying.
Understanding the difference in approach with communist advocacy with both of these groups is to realize that society has not been misled by one overarching ideology - rather a choose-your-own-adventure book of different ideologies with the appearance of the ability to choose one’s reality. Obviously, as with those books, there are pre-determined endpoints. These amalgams of ideological choices, which ultimately least one to a point which benefits (or at least doesn’t threaten) the power structure as it is, are the “state ideology.” I call it “custom reality,” as it functions similarly to how one “customizes” a car using aftermarket parts: these parts were still designed and made in a factory with no input from the person doing the “customizing,” and ultimately, there are a limited number of possible outcomes. My book on this subject is called Custom Reality and You
Next, it is essential to address the term “patriotic socialism.” I believe that This term and its abbreviation “patsoc" have been propagated to provoke defense of “patriotism” without the specified proletarian character. When one defends “patriotism,” an outside observer (or an opponent) can misinterpret and/or misrepresent it to include the patriotism of the bourgeoisie. We reject their patriotism - the bourgeois assertion that the United States (as a ruling class entity) is a force for good in the world.
This is an excellent time to bring up social chauvinism, a charge levied against proletarian patriots. A social chauvinist supports their country’s bourgeoisie and their state over the international proletariat. A proletarian patriot recognizes the bourgeoisie and their state as the enemy of the people, both the people around them with whom they have direct relationships and those in faraway places.
The term “patriotic socialism” is generally not used in our advocacy. I believe it to be an outside attempt to poison it, a means to try to make our patriotism sound like “national socialism,” which the abbreviation “patsoc” reinforces by sounding like “natsoc.” This is a ridiculous development and reduces “left-wing” people to repeating old conservative propaganda - that the Nazis were a form of socialism on some level and that there are modern socialists that support them. We reject Nazism without hesitation; “national socialism” is ultimately another ideology that supports fascism (capitalism in crisis, clamping down).
Do Nazis exist? Absolutely - and we loudly condemn their beliefs. There are Nazi supporters in the United States, some intentional and some not. The intentional ones march around with swastikas, and the unintentional ones do it with Ukrainian flags. There are neo-Nazis worldwide, with the most prominent example the American media is currently talking about being the ones embedded in the Ukrainian state power structure. Our media is loudly supporting these people because it serves the interests of our bourgeoisie and their state.