Against my better judgment, a point. Opponents make arguments about individual radical demands (open borders, abolish prisons, nationalize Amazon, end work) as if they'd occur in a vacuum.
Some dude said "but then Trump would be in charge of Amazon" in response to my tweet. Nagle assumes open borders but all else remains the same.
This totally misreads how politics actually works; that these demands interconnect with broader demands for remaking the economy and the world.
So no, Trump won't be in charge of Amazon because a Trump admin is never going to nationalize it. Open borders similarly won't be implemented in today's political context.
But this tendency to assume that activists who focus most of their energy on one particular issue have no time or effort for others. Reflects the nonprofitization of politics...
Which in itself is driven by rich funders who want deliverables and don't want to actually challenge their own power.
But for self-proclaimed leftists to pretend that socialists/leftists who advocate prison abolition, for example, aren't embedded in a politics that calls for radical transformation is to admit that they themselves actually aren't.
I mostly write about labor! But occasionally I write about abortion rights and access, debt, prisons and policing, immigration, etc etc because all of these things (SURPRISE) are connected
Picking and choosing policy solutions based on deliverables is in no way radical. It's just liberalism.
Anyway if you like this rant I recommend Kathi Weeks's The Problem with Work, where she describes the point of utopian demands while making some
Also thanks to @RachelPerrone I just read this which is relevant and good: popula.com/2018/11/18/a-w… 
