Working people want to see the Squad stand up to the establishment. Progressive leaders and leaders of major labor unions need to harness that desire and publicly urge that the Squad use their numerical balance & refuse to vote on the MUST PASS stimulus bill unless $15 is in it.— Kshama Sawant (@cmkshama) March 6, 2021
the specific criticism to me seems to be that AOC as a ‘progressive’ has made a lot of decisions that haven’t exactly held up to what people expected of her.
This isn't even a specific criticism -- what decisions? what were the expectations? -- but it's still far more substantive than driving by and yelling "AOC sucks, amirite?"
calling someone a wrecker for having an opinion you disagree with is not cool
That's not cool, but that's not what I did, either.
even if he did just say "AOC sucks amirite?" to me that would still be a valid opinion to have, because i've definitely had that thought at points in my life. if you want them to explain more why AOC sucks you could say stuff like "what makes you think AOC sucks?" rather than just accusing them right off the bat of being a wrecker.
specifically the expectations of not cozying up with pelosi when whoopi fuckin goldberg says "hey you need to fall in line." and then just cowering to 'mama bear's' political hierarchy.
usually i agree with you on a lot of points and think you're one of the better more frequent posters here and would like to not have a super souring experience with you on this, but i just think that you oughta give a little bit.
We will lose if we tear ourselves apart. One easy way to tear ourselves apart is by flinging vague accusations at people who are at least trying to move things in the right direction.
Criticism is fine, but it needs to be specific to avoid vague pissing matches where everyone is fighting on shifting ground. Point out something they actually did or something they actually said. Then we can have a conversation about real things instead getting bogged down in whether someone's characterization of those things is accurate.
rather than just accusing them right off the bat of being a wrecker
See, here's an example of a specific criticism. "You said X, in Y situation." This is useful because you can go back and see if I actually said that, and you can easily find whatever surrounding context is necessary. It's way more productive than "you suck" or "you're an asshole" or the like. This is how we should criticize people pulling in the same direction.
but that specific criticism is of you doing what you did. if you accept it as a legitimate criticism, and accept it as a decent example, please acknowledge the criticism itself.
This isn't even a specific criticism -- what decisions? what were the expectations? -- but it's still far more substantive than driving by and yelling "AOC sucks, amirite?"
That's not cool, but that's not what I did, either.
even if he did just say "AOC sucks amirite?" to me that would still be a valid opinion to have, because i've definitely had that thought at points in my life. if you want them to explain more why AOC sucks you could say stuff like "what makes you think AOC sucks?" rather than just accusing them right off the bat of being a wrecker.
specifically the expectations of not cozying up with pelosi when whoopi fuckin goldberg says "hey you need to fall in line." and then just cowering to 'mama bear's' political hierarchy.
usually i agree with you on a lot of points and think you're one of the better more frequent posters here and would like to not have a super souring experience with you on this, but i just think that you oughta give a little bit.
We will lose if we tear ourselves apart. One easy way to tear ourselves apart is by flinging vague accusations at people who are at least trying to move things in the right direction.
Criticism is fine, but it needs to be specific to avoid vague pissing matches where everyone is fighting on shifting ground. Point out something they actually did or something they actually said. Then we can have a conversation about real things instead getting bogged down in whether someone's characterization of those things is accurate.
See, here's an example of a specific criticism. "You said X, in Y situation." This is useful because you can go back and see if I actually said that, and you can easily find whatever surrounding context is necessary. It's way more productive than "you suck" or "you're an asshole" or the like. This is how we should criticize people pulling in the same direction.
but that specific criticism is of you doing what you did. if you accept it as a legitimate criticism, and accept it as a decent example, please acknowledge the criticism itself.
No, I did not call them a wrecker right off the bat. Scroll up and read for yourself -- my initial reply to them was:
This is another benefit to specific criticisms: if they're mistaken or otherwise inaccurate, it's easy to go and check what was actually said or done.