Realism

I consider the essence of Marxism-Leninism to be realism.  To focus on doing things that work in practice.

I believe CPUSA does this fairly well, and so has been generally more effective than anarchists and trotskyists.

None of course has "changed the world," so you can prefer to believe differently, say in idealism.  But FWIW all successful anti-capitalist revolutions have followed M-L principles if not teachings explicitly.

This is even more obvious now that Sweden has been taken over by a far right government.  I remember that during the pre-Reagan era in particular, Sweden was considered by many to be close to Communism with it's mind numbing Socialism.

But anyways, you don't have to be a self-professed M-L like me to be realist, and so this is addressed to all such.

Anyways, one obvious things to a M-L is that there are governments and international conflicts.  The M-L explains these as being driven by Capitalism.

But as well as being realist (aka "Scientific") we M-L's are driven not just to understand, but to change things.

In that context, everything we say and do is important, just as it would be, for example, to a devout Catholic.

But our God is not theirs, ours "God" is the goal of From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.

This means quite clearly that when we have allies, who are working towards our interests, it's best to praise them in public and criticize only positively in private.

Capitalists, monarchists, catholics, whatever would (and do) do exactly that.  We shouldn't be forced into an unnecessary idealism...in fact that's what THEY encourage us to do to weaken us.

So all this comes to mind when a friend (who is registered as Republican to vote in Republican Primaries, because he says that the Democratic Party in Texas is hopeless, but then he votes for Democrats in the Final elections anyway) dismisses the chances of Democratic candidates in Texas and otherwise (because of the partie).

He seems to think it's just fine to disparage those he prefers (if he even does...we could begin to wonder about that).  As if the ideas that he promotes are ineffectual and therefore blameless, existing in some kind of isolation from the rest of reality.

In fact words and ideas have a life of their own, and spread like wildfire.  We should not be setting the fires we hope to be putting out.  If I were a weak minded person, I'd say, it's hopeless, so I won't bother to donate to Democrats, post Democratic signs, work Democratic campaigns, or perhaps even vote!  After all, it's hopeless.

This is pretty obvious to me, I may have gripes about some Democrats, but all the same I don't want to be contributing to their defeat by disparaging them in principle at every opportunity, as it seems many "leftists" I follow do (and often ignoring the sins of Republicans).

Now this doesn't exactly apply to real journalists like David Sirota, who does a good job of pointing out the problems with many democrats without flopping over to the "Democrats are hopeless, and anyway all the Parties are The same" that seems to  many in the true left (socialists, communists, and left anarchists).  Sirota points out that Republicans are worse.

The "All Parties are The Same" will sadly apply if you focus on Foreign Policy.  But there's basically no choice there anyway, it would require a Revolution to change US Foreign Policy, not a mere election.  That should be understood by any realist.

But it is important to consider all things.  To be a "One Issue" voter is to be the biggest form of sucker.  And here there not realistic choice anyway.

So I am happy that CPUSA strongly favors Democrats, and I've seen The People's World tends to heap more praise on Democrats than even The New York Times (which serves a disparate set of capitalists, mostly the MiC, and is strongly in favor keeping every politician under control of the MiC).

That's the realistic position.  It does little good to vote for more "idealistic" choices which have no real chance of winning, but instead to try to influence the only real choice available, such as it is.

I feel the Democrats I plan to vote for, Beto, Casar, and Peter Sakai, are far better than their alternatives.

My disappointments with Biden have virtually nothing to do with these (and they wouldn't in fact stop me from voting for Biden again against any Republican I can think of in the future, but that's the future and not now).

But I can see on twitter there's a virtual army of people who endlessly disparage Biden and Democrats in principle and as if that's all what they upcoming election is all about.

Though I suppose I follow them for that reason, they have often had better scoops.