Thread by @RodericDay

People don't like feeling left out; like their thing is uncool or unpopular or below consideration.

So I think socialism would fare better in popular communication if people focused less on responding to and engaging with liberals, and more on intra-communist dialogue.

Nuance is a weapon, and we should notice when we are told that "socialism" should be a big indistinct blob, whereas we must adhere to an exacting taxonomy whenever we refer to liberals and conservatives and alt-right and fascists and so on.

Speaking as a newbie: whenever I saw communists dialogue in public, even in disagreement, it made communism seem vast and historical and inspired curiosity.

Whereas e.g. refusing to take sides on "China" for the sake of "unity" made it seem opportunistic and cobbled together.

I think we should foster public spheres where the majority of commentary boosted and echoed is socialist.

Nothing wrong with the occasional dunk, but when *so* much content is "responses to right wingers," they are setting the terms of the conversation and winning regardless.

What I am proposing isn't closing ourselves off.

I am saying that for *many* people a public discussion between LeftieA and LeftieB makes the answer seem "somewhere on the Left," whereas one between Left and Right makes the answer seem "somewhere on the Center."

This:

https://twitter.com/TomFrome/status/1339215768865677313

In case anyone wants more to go off, I'll share a short and a long read that I am obviously very inspired by this morning.

Short, by @Tolpuddle1833
medium.com/@lovelass_and_…

(Very) Long, by Tom Scocca.
gawker.com/on-smarm-14765…