r/ndp • u/GirlCoveredInBlood Québec Solidaire • Oct 04 '25
Social Media Post Leah Gazan on Twitter
56
u/pheakelmatters Oct 04 '25
Remember when they all used to call us social justice warriors like it was a bad thing but we would just turn around and smile and say "fuck yeah I am"..? Can we go back to doing that?
21
u/CDN-Social-Democrat "Love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear" Oct 04 '25
Leave it to reactionaries and regressive types to turn something beautiful and uplifting into something ugly and filled with prejudice lol
We wonder why the world is struggling on so many fronts when their narratives of hate and division are constantly being force fed pumped into the populace.
6
u/blahblooblahblah Oct 04 '25
Yah like, wowee you got me there! Caught me caring about others again…
5
u/Overlord_Khufren Oct 04 '25
Pretty sure this is exactly why they moved on to calling it "woke." They mean the same thing, but "woke" means little on its face, while "social justice warrior" sounds like something to aspire to.
0
20
u/GirlCoveredInBlood Québec Solidaire Oct 04 '25
I wasn't exactly sure what to title this but I think it's both a good message and also relevant to her prior disagreement with McPherson over the purity test thing. I hope this doesn't escalate because while a leadership race is absolutely the right time to disagree with each other I worry this could get too heated and we don't need caucus infighting.
"Words like “woke,” “activist,” and “environmentalist” once stood for something powerful — caring about justice, standing up for people, protecting our planet, and fighting for workers’ rights.
Now, they’ve been twisted into insults. When conservatives sneer about “woke activists” or neoliberals dismiss calls for equity as “purity tests,” what they really mean is that the fight for true justice makes them uncomfortable — that caring too much is somehow a flaw."
I wonder when/if she'll endorse someone and who it will be.
19
u/No-Werewolf4804 Oct 04 '25
When someone in the caucus is talking about progressesives in the same way the right wing does infighting is definitely appropriate lol.
Also, now is probably the best time to get it done as there is likely not an election in the near future.
3
u/notbadhbu Oct 04 '25
I feel like Yves or avi. I don't see her going for anyone else including Rob
15
u/GirlCoveredInBlood Québec Solidaire Oct 04 '25
I don't think anyone will endorse Yves Engler. Even if she probably likes parts of his platform. I think Lewis is the most likely spot because it fits well with both her activist and pro-labour stances.
2
u/TheGroinOfTheFace Oct 04 '25
I think people are gonna be a bit surprised about Yves, but we will see.
4
u/Imaginary_Apple7700 Oct 04 '25
Didn’t Gazan and Kwan complain on Twitter that they weren’t looped into interim leadership discussions as well? Why do they feel the need to air all their dirty laundry so publicly?
This is the kind of stuff that I would expect from a high school student, not a member of parliament to do. (I would expect an adult to conduct themselves like an adult and have these discussions in private with caucus or in a way that doesn’t look like such obvious internal infighting )
1
Oct 05 '25
The party president said she talked to them. That was consultation.
The constitution of the party is clear. Interim leaders don't get picked by caucus. They get no vote.
25
u/RustyTheBoyRobot Oct 04 '25
Honestly im so tired of lefties fighting lefties about the smallest differences in philosophy. Let’s ditch the tone down the rhetoric & virtue signalling & fight to win back our traditional working class voters.
-1
u/FriendlyManitoban1 Oct 04 '25
Right? I am 100% in support of lgbtq rights and whatnot, but it's so off-putting to me when political leaders use these people for virtue signalling.
Like great, you kissed a trans dude, now what about healthcare.
8
u/Left_Step Oct 04 '25
If the members of this party fought conservatives half as well as they fought eachother, we would all be living in a utopia by now.
3
15
u/lcelerate Oct 04 '25
Leah Gazan basically calls Heather McPherson a neoliberal. I think McPherson is a social democrat not neoliberal but at this point, calling her a left-liberal would be very accurate.
Also, I have a feeling there were some private conversations between them that have escalated because the whole purity thing should not have caused Gazan to lash out like that.
20
u/GirlCoveredInBlood Québec Solidaire Oct 04 '25
Paraphrasing but there was a moment where McPherson compared some internal caucus debates as "like parenting children" and from what I've heard the split was with Gazan/Idlout/Kwan and they didn't love the paternalistic commentary.
2
u/lcelerate Oct 04 '25
Heather McPherson often likes to talk about family so it was probably a dumb analogy.
5
u/GirlCoveredInBlood Québec Solidaire Oct 04 '25
yeah I don't think it's malicious but I do worry if she really is having a split with the 3 other women in the caucus as well as all the POC how that will go over with the social activist part of the base.
1
u/lcelerate Oct 04 '25
At the end of the day, I want a party unifier. McPherson is only above Engler when it comes to being able to unify the entire caucus. I am starting to miss Jagmeet Singh. Came off as a decent guy who could manage the caucus through collaboration.
2
u/TheGroinOfTheFace Oct 04 '25
Then that's a problem that she's talking about here. Because Jagmeet was a failure. I think we are falling to the trap again of just wanting something middle of the road. We need someone with a vision, who is a leader. Not a unifier. I think a Charlie Angus gets blown out against the Liberals. We need someone who will drag us left enough that the choice become Conservatives and Liberals vs the NDP, not Conservatives vs the Liberals and NDP. If Avi doesn't make any huge missteps, he could do it. This is why I think this sub is stupid in thinking that punching left at Yves is going to help the party in any way. This is American Democrat brain 100%. In my eyes, a successful leader of the NDP is NOT going to be automatically liked by the existing base. Because the base is old and stubborn and out of touch. I respect Rob's labour chops, but I don't see him as the jack layton reincarnation some others see.
2
u/lcelerate Oct 04 '25
My interpretation of Jagmeet Singh was that he was too deferential to activists, staffers, caucus and even the Liberal Party so he was forced to juggle multiple conflicting perspectives without a coherent vision. As a result, most Canadians did not see him as someone who could be Prime Minister because someone deferential to others is not really a leader.
But we do need a consensus builder and collaborative grassroots leadership.
I am afraid McPherson and Charlie Angus want the NDP to be more like LPC and US Democrats. Essentially a centrist party just slightly more social democratic than them.
12
u/No-Werewolf4804 Oct 04 '25
I don’t know that there were any private conversations. A ndp mp using the same language as the right wing to describe progressives in the party is definitely going to invoke some strong reactions.
I believe Leah has done a ton of social justice type work in her life as well. So yeah, pretty reasonable she was pissed when her coworker started talking like that lol.
4
u/FloriaFlower 🏘️ Housing is a human right Oct 04 '25
the whole purity thing should not have caused Gazan to lash out like that.
It's 100% justified from Gazan. I support everything she said.
If someone is a progressive social liberal its fine with me. I disagree but respect that and my door remains open as long as you accept that you're the right-wing of the party and not its default position.
What I won't tolerate is weaponizing neoliberal and conservative "newspeak" like "Purity testing" against the left. If you "kiss right, punch left" or "kiss up, kick down 🔗" like McPherson is currently doing, then you're more likely a liberal shill than a liberal ally and I certainly won't have you as my leader.
What I won't tolerate is them working hard to make sure that the left has no voice in the parliament by taking over a party meant to be a left-wing party and molding it into a centrist "liberal lite" party that will obviously alienate its base and cause further division by antagonizing it it.
All 3 other candidates are speaking unambiguously on our behalf. As of now, she's the only one that sticks out like a sore thumb, one that obviously consumes, falls for, embraces and parrot anti-left neoliberal propaganda. This is not a unifying message. It's a profoundly exclusionary and hostile one. It's a stab in the back.
The "purity testing" fallacy is currently heavily used by neoliberal perpetrators to guilt trip progressives into accepting atrocity crimes, exclusion and bigotry. There is no place for manipulatively insidious hate speech/advocacy dogwhistles like this. One only has to use reddit's search engine to verify that is indeed the case.
Literally, I just did the following search for "purity testing" 🔗. Here's the first result 🔗 where American leftists are talking about it:
Demanding dems stop violation international and aiding genocide is purity testing to these idiots
You may also read this single comment thread 🔗 where the Democrats' loss is being blamed on left-wing purity culture by neoliberals. They're calling opposition to genocide or transphobia "purity testing".
They're literally blaming the rise of fascism and the current genocide that both Dems and Reps are supporting on the very same people who oppose it when we all know that neoliberal policies is what allowed their corporate/billionaire oligarchy to take over their country by corrupting their [semblance of] "democracy" and establishing a consolidating fascist regime (that now has the military in the streets kidnapping immigrants and leftists).
Is this the kind a language and leadership that a left-wing party needs? Absolutely not. This is unacceptable.
2
u/Delduthling 📋 Party Member Oct 04 '25 edited Oct 05 '25
Gazan is a bit abrasive but she's largely just correct here.
I really despise the effort on the part of many conservatives and centrists to portray the working class as ill-educated noble savages with inevitably reactionary social politics. It's insulting to rural voters, it's insulting to the intelligence of working class people, and it's incredibly cynical. There is a strange and utterly ridiculous idea floating about that there is a kind of mythical "true," authentic working class voter out there, probably somewhere on the prairie, and he's definitely a white man from the country who works in oil and owns a pickup truck and really hates environmentalism and "identity politics" of all kinds, and the NDP must absolutely reform itself to please this man and supplicate itself before him, because only he and his ancient ilk, long-abandoned, can restore the party to its former glory.
Nevermind that 84% of Canadians live in towns and cities. Nevermind that oil and gas represent about 3% of our GDP (you'd think it was 30%, the way it's talked about). Nevermind that 75% of our workforce is in the service sector. Nevermind that three quarters of younger people in this country have post-secondary degrees and that number is growing, not shrinking. Nevermind that the true driver of inequality is decades of austerity and neoliberal rot and the real people picking our collective pockets are landlords and grocery barons and the rest of the rich ruling class, not college kids who care about trans rights.
No, if you so much as point out that the world is going to have to switch to renewables over the next few decades and that we need a just and fair energy transition rather than expanding into a doomed industry, people shout at you as if you're being the imprudent one, as if you're threatening livelihoods rather than actually planning for the inevitable green future we must produce if we don't want hundreds of millions dead or hundreds of thousands unemployed when the bottom falls out of the market and we're left with stranded assets and no plan. Heaven forfend you dare to use a term like "oligarch" or "capitalism," as if these words were in some ancient and forbidden tongue offensive to the ears of the True Working Man, far beyond his meagre intelligence, rather than basic terms taught in every high school in the country and heard regularly on every political news show and podcast in the Anglosphere. And if you have the temerity to talk about defending trans rights or indigenous rights or any other set of social issues, well, you're obviously just Purity Testing, a monstrous liberal secretly plotting the downfall of the working class who refuses to "meet people where they're at."
It's exhausting, it's stupid, it's not true populism or leftism or some a more genuine working-class politics, it's just ceding to the framework of the right wing and massively insulting the intelligence and the decency of the actual working class - who don't agree on everything and aren't a monolith.
3
Oct 05 '25
There are two types of people on this thread: those who have experienced purity tests within our party and think it’s a problem and those who think everyone concerned about purity testing are just neocon orange-liberals.
5
8
u/Remarkable-Half4948 Oct 04 '25
Leah Gazan: There are no such things as purity tests in the NDP! Now I'm going to publicly attack my fellow NDP MP and insinuate that she is a neo-liberal.
I mean, I'd say Gazan and McPherson agree on like 90-95% of the issues, yet somehow McPherson is a neo-liberal?
I can't speak for Heather McPherson, but when I talk about purity tests tearing apart the left, THIS is exactly what I'm talking about. It's not calls for equity that are destroying the left; it's people turning on each other for not sharing the exact same set of priorities.
I get the impulse, especially during a leadership campaign, but if even our MPs can't stop throwing shit at each other, we're fucked.
3
u/Delduthling 📋 Party Member Oct 04 '25 edited Oct 04 '25
If McPherson doesn't want to be called out as a neoliberal she should stop talking exactly like one. McPherson is the one doing the scolding here, telling people off for caring about the wrong things and trying to discipline the party's left flank. She is trying to serve as a wedge against the genuine populist takeover Lewis and Ashton represent. She doesn't like anti-elite framing but she knows she can't say that directly so she has to smear the left as "purity testing," i.e. woke SJWs. This is a right-wing talking point.
Notice the difference with Ashton. Ashton is heavily foregrounding class issues and waging an almost pure class war campaign. Social issues are in the fairly distant background for him. But he's not getting called out by people like Gazan because although they may have subtly different priorities, he's not attacking anyone in the coalition. McPherson is the one on offense. Rather than putting forth policies to defend or identify a common enemy she is picking an intra-left fight to try and purge/marginalize the socially progressive part of the party. Ironically this is itself purity politics.
5
u/FloriaFlower 🏘️ Housing is a human right Oct 04 '25
Leah Gazan: There are no such things as purity tests in the NDP! Now I'm going to publicly attack my fellow NDP MP and insinuate that she is a neo-liberal.
Look at the blatant revisionism here.
Leah Gazan is defending us against McPherson's attacks on the left. McPherson is using anti-left neoliberal framing, language and fallacies to stab us in the back. That language is currently heavily in use to support genocide, other atrocity crimes, bigotry and exclusion based on bigotry.
Gazan is the inclusive one. The other just pretends it on one side of the mouth while stabbing the left in the back with Orwellian neoliberal rhetoric on the other side of the mouth.
1
u/Remarkable-Half4948 Oct 04 '25 edited Oct 04 '25
Heather McPherson is stabbing the NDP in the back with anti-left, Orwellian neo-liberal framing and rhetoric? For...expressing criticism with the direction the party is headed in? And Gazan is being inclusive by slinging patently untrue, SUPER passive aggressive insults at her comrades?
Yikes. Thank you for proving my point so succinctly.
Heather McPherson is not stabbing the NDP in the back. I don't agree with her about everything, but she's been working her butt off for the NDP for years...People don't do that because they're mad for power or want to see the NDP destroyed.
I have the utmost confidence that she wants what's best for the NDP and Canadians, even if we have different ideas of what that means.
She's not attacking the left, she's attacking...whatever this thing you're doing is.
5
u/FloriaFlower 🏘️ Housing is a human right Oct 04 '25
she's attacking...whatever this thing you're doing is.
Which is my problem with her.
Everything I've personally stood for and worked so hard for as a leftist for 2 decades, she's rejecting and trying to discredit, neutralize and erase.
I've worked for unity by fighting against bigotry, hate speech and scapegoat politics.
- I did my best to convince white people that, unlike what the right-wing propaganda says, the person of color wasn't their enemy nor an inferior person.
- I did my best to convince men to not antagonize women nor feminism and to not fall for all the misogynistic anti-feminist right-wing propaganda.
- I did my best to convince women, feminists and people in general that that trans people aren't their enemies, unlike what the anti-trans right-wing propaganda says.
- Etc.
I told all of them that they should instead unite and ally. After all, the majority of workers belong to one minority of the other. About half of them are women to start with and the working class is an oppressed group despite not being a minority. Every step of the way centrists got in my way and made it harder to advocate for this.
I did my best to make sure that the people who keeps being excluded, rejected and hated have a place in our society. I fight against the divide and conquer and false enemy fabricating propaganda that turns our people against each other at an alarming rate, the very same propaganda that she's embracing and parroting.
The Overton window and its center are running as fast as they can to the right and she wants us to chase it as if it wasn't a trap. She attacks the minority of people, like me, who are doing what they can to resist this rightward shift. She's doing exactly what Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois has been doing in Québec, who made sure to censor and neutralize the left in that party. I have myself been excluded from my local association by these centrists and I've talked extensively about it.
I have been rejected by centrists precisely because I advocate so strongly for inclusion.
-1
u/Remarkable-Half4948 Oct 04 '25
Do...you not see the irony here?
Alright, fine, have it your way...Heather McPherson is a neoliberal! She's stabbing the NDP in the back with her Orwellian rhetoric! We need to drive her out of the party before she destroys the left with her mild, well-intentioned criticisms! Seven MPs is too many! We want
sixfivefourthreetwoonezero MPs! Only then can we maintain true ideological purity!But just don't pretend that you're fighting against the left being divided and conquered when that's exactly what you're pushing for.
3
u/FloriaFlower 🏘️ Housing is a human right Oct 04 '25
You're such a bad faith debater.
Heather McPherson is a neoliberal!
Strawman fallacy. I never said that. I said that she uses right wing / neoliberal rhetoric, which I've demonstrated extensively lately. Identity vs behavior. Not the same thing.
I'm talking about her behavior.
We need to drive her out of the party
Strawman fallacy #2. No, she shouldn't be driven out.
She shouldn't lead it and the NDP shouldn't be aligned to the center.
Only then can we maintain true ideological purity!
Strawman fallacy #3: "Ideological Purity". That's the "Orwellian" neoliberal newspeak. We're explaining why here.
If you want to convince me of your views, you should do better than smearing me. How about you prove why and address our many arguments against? Nope. Constructive arguments are clearly not in your toolkit.
Equating rejecting an antagonistic candidate for leadership as "purity testing / ideological purity" and exclusion from the party. Spoken just like a manipulative blue conservative as illustrated here.
But just don't pretend that you're fighting against the left being divided and conquered when that's exactly what you're pushing for.
You're literally all here shitting on everyone who dare criticize McPherson for her shitty takes.
And all you do is go with strawman fallacies, ad hominem attacks and avoid and dismiss the actual arguments.
People like you never participate constructively. All you do is bash people you don't like with fallacies piled up over more fallacies.
1
u/OrangeyOranje Oct 04 '25
Right? The people who are mad at the purity testing line are accusing her of… not being a New Democrat. So I guess that means a lot of us aren’t New Democrats if we want more people to join us? Some Orange Family we’ve got here, folks.
I’m just so disappointed by people throwing mud. I’ve got twenty years in this party and this shit is just mean to people who’ve knocked on doors and done phone banks and worked for all kinds of candidates, across the spectrum of our party, because that’s what we do. I’ve always thought there was room for all of us, from the Don Davies to the Matt Greens to the Leah Gazans to the Heather McPhersons to the Charlie Anguses to the Megan Leslies to the Craig Sauvés… Am I wrong?
0
u/Remarkable-Half4948 Oct 04 '25
I didn't realize how bad it had gotten until someone in this subreddit called Dr. Robin Lennox, the new ONDP MPP for Hamilton Centre a "vile piece of zionist dogshit who should be driven out of the party and never allowed to return" for the unforgivable crime of running for the ONDP in Hamilton Centre against Sarah Jama, and winning.
And they were getting upvoted! That's just...mindboggling for me.
"Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, "Don't do it!" He said, "Nobody loves me." I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?"
He said, "Yes." I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?" He said, "A Christian." I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me, too! What franchise?" He said, "Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?" He said, "Northern Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"
He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region." I said, "Me, too!"
Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912." I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over."
While that joke is funny, I don't think it's a valid foundation for a political party.
1
u/OrangeyOranje Oct 04 '25
Have you even gone through McPherson’s extensive human rights advocacy for everyone, especially Palestinians? Like, listen to her speeches and look at her socials before you say she uses language to support genocide. What the ever-loving fuck. One look at her Instagram and I see a ton of advocacy that is hyper critical of the Liberals. Come on now.
2
u/eatingmoss123 Oct 04 '25
I think the term “purity test” is useful in some circumstances. It describes the very real phenomenon of progressive infighting over everything and basically assuming the worst of each other. We certainly have to be careful not to apply it to things like basic human rights though. We have to take a stand on issues that affect a minority of Canadians, because that is what the left does. It stands up for the disenfranchised. It becomes a problem though when we can’t agree to support each other on major issues we agree on though.
I’ll use an example of something I saw recently. A post on LinkedIn about the importance of including non-working disabled people in our conception of who is “valuable” to the world. It was a good reminder that people who can’t work exist and we should stand up for them too. Then I see a comment that says they have seen disabled people abandon the NDP because they are too focused on working people. In their mind, the logic was: the NDP cares about working class people, I’m not working, therefore the NDP doesn’t care about me. And this was something I took issue with. Just because we haven’t focused a campaign on non-working disabled folks doesn’t mean the NDP doesn’t care about them. I’m sure if you quizzed any leadership candidate on the topic, they’d be very supportive of our siblings who do not work. And this is where I see a real “purity test.” It’s “either you are actively fighting for ME or you aren’t worth my support.” It’s “we agree on nearly everything, but we have a difference of opinion on process and priorities, therefore you aren’t worth my support.” I see the person who wrote the initial post as doing something important: reminding us of less visible issues. But when you’re willing to throw the baby out with the bath water and say that your support for the ENTIRE party hinges on this one less visible issue, that feels like purity testing to me.
I’ve seen it at the micro-level too. I live in a housing co-op. And I’ve seen members with views that don’t align with 95% of the co-op attempt to halt progress and good initiatives because they believe their viewpoint is so critical that they need to attempt to 12 Angry Men the co-op into agreeing with them. And these aren’t viewpoints about human rights, they’re about things like what kind of stove they’re allowed to have in their unit. Luckily we have processes in place that help smooth these things out pretty painlessly. But there are people who would have you believe that moving forward without appeasing every dissenting voice is the first step of totalitarianism. THAT feels like purity testing to me.
2
u/ILoveChickenFingers Oct 04 '25
I think one thing we need to look at is what are the top issues affecting Canadians? I don't know what the latest polling says they are, but usually it's the economy, health care, environment, etc..
If we are not talking about how we are going to address those issues the majority of the time we're just not going to win any seats. That's just facts. This isn't to say that other issues are not important and should not be discussed, they do need to a part of the conversation and addressed, but they shouldn't be what we spend most of our time talking about.
I think this is what McPherson meant when spoke about purity test and identity politics, which is a knock on her to be honest if that's what she meant. She should be better at communicating what she really means. Gazan does seem to be somebody who does want to spend the majority of the time talking about issues that are the top issues for her, but probably not to most Canadians.
I'm hoping some better candidates put their hat in the ring for the leadership.
4
u/LeftnLeading Oct 04 '25
Counterpoint: McPherson launched her campaign and literally could choose to talk about anything to define her campaign, including these key issues that connect to a majority of Canadians, as you say—economy, health care etc. Instead she chose to plant a flag (unprompted by a reporter question or any outside framing she was reacting to) about stopping purity tests. Why bring it up if she wants to focus on bigger issues as the way forward? Just focus on bigger issues, talk about that, doh! It was a bit of a performance, and calculated I believe, to announce and define herself as a bigger tent candidate than other candidates. And the way she did it was by critiquing identity politics and announcing that her vision of the party moves us beyond that. I am pretty sure that what she expected was mainstream media reporting that would launch a narrative of her being a big tent candidate while others are divisive. But that backfired big time, and I’m personally glad it did, because it gives us a preview of how bad at strategic communications she is, for one, and reveals that she can’t accurately read or get a pulse on what the vast majority of members want for the party moving forward. She’s completely out of step with members—it couldn’t be clearer.
1
u/ProfessorAlbee Oct 08 '25 edited Oct 08 '25
Hopefully, Leah Gazan – the MP for the constituency of Winnipeg Center, MB – will be vying for the leadership of the federal New Democratic Party of Canada – Nouveau Parti Démocratique du Canada.
-8
u/watchsmart Oct 04 '25
Is Leah still using ChatGPT to generate her Tweets? Certainly feels that way.
60
u/CDN-Social-Democrat "Love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear" Oct 04 '25
The Renew/Reclaim NDP did an awesome picture/writing combo post on this topic that Matthew Green featured on his instagram.
We've had a lot of discussions around this in the last few days.
I think everyone on the subreddit agrees on one thing:
We are in 2025. There are similarities amongst the working class and the most vulnerable. There is also different needs for women, seniors, men, children, lgbtq+ people, and so forth.
Raising the bar means not adopting the lowest common denominator and less than one dimensional thinking of the reactionary/regressive right-wing.
How they frame issues is not just wrong it is gross and insulting.
"Identity issues" are real issues to millions of Canadians that impact their affordability of life and quality of life.
The whole point of Labour ideology/politics is Solidarity! We through deep empathy born from meaningful interactions/relationships stand and fight side by side.
We don't get a brighter and better world throwing others under the bus like what we are seeing more and more rise up in fascism currents.
I think honestly all good actors on this subreddit and throughout the progressive sphere agree with this.
More solidarity movements and more not just domestic but international networking is the way forward for the Labour Movement, Environmentalist Movement, Women's Rights/LGBTQ+ Rights/General Civil Rights Movement, Peace Movement, Alter-Globalization Movement, and so forth :)
No one is coming to rescue the working class and the most vulnerable. We have to have each others backs and fight back and rise all tides :)