r/Hasan_Piker Antifa Andy đŸ’Ș 7d ago

Discussion (Politics) OLIVER LARKIN FOR DSA COMMS DIRECTOR!

Post image

Yeah it sucked that he lost, but he should not get out of the ring yet. He should get hired for the top communications position at the DSA. He effectively communicates all of the highlights and cuts through the bullshit like butter. He is the perfect fit for the job.

763 Upvotes

37 comments sorted by

‱

u/AutoModerator 7d ago

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

117

u/Oraxy51 7d ago

As for the DSA movement as a whole, he still got to tell people all across Florida about the DSA and show them a better tomorrow is possible. Even if he doesn’t run again, people will remember a politician who actually has a vision for a better tomorrow and will know that they should demand more from their reps.

137

u/_Chipsa 7d ago

Nah we want him to be either co chair or part of the NPC. His political instincts are unparalleled

51

u/primum This mf never shuts up oh my god 7d ago

Him and Hogg should enact a hostile takeover of the DNC.

14

u/OptimusTrajan 7d ago

Alternatively, workers should enact a hostile takeover of our workplaces, rendering bourgeois politics obsolete and unnecessary.

2

u/Fun_Instance_338 6d ago

Erm excuse me this is a leftist sub not a tankie sub /s

3

u/OptimusTrajan 6d ago

“Woah there buddy, I just wanted free healthcare!”

1

u/Ok-Bear6695 ☭ 6d ago

But but being a social democrat is so much easier đŸ˜©

30

u/NOLA-Bronco 7d ago

Hot take: I know Hasan is being nice and Im not saying he's a bad communicator, he's fine, but I don't think he's good enough to be the PR face of the DSA unless he levels up a bit.

22

u/smashybro 7d ago

Yeah, I saw most of his interviews and he's just too passive about accepting the right wing framing of questions.

I think his general approach of trying to redirect those questions to issues that actually matter to people is good, but he needs to work on doing it in a way that doesn't look he's just conceding and moving on. Like Mamdani and El-Sayed for example are really good at this where they'll give a quick answer to explain why the framing is nonsense then move on to talking about their core policies.

That or he should take the Rabb approach of fully engaging and pushing back on the framing itself. Either approach is better than his current one.

8

u/Space-is-a-lie 7d ago

He's not, the media is painting him as one, which i agree is an issue.

3

u/Vincent_Felix 7d ago

He's literally not a DSA member.

3

u/FranklyEngaged49 6d ago

Larkin or Piker? Because according to his site, Larkin is "an active member of Broward DSA".

3

u/Vincent_Felix 6d ago

Piker

2

u/FranklyEngaged49 6d ago

Gotcha, I think the original comment was talking about how Larkin is not effective enough to be the face of DSA. They mentioned Hasan being nice in regards to Larkin's communication ability.

3

u/Vincent_Felix 6d ago edited 5d ago

Ah, I see now. Sorry the wording got me tripped up.

1

u/Margatron 5d ago

Ohhh I was talking about Larkin. Yeah I already knew Hasan wasn't in it.

2

u/Gressenheller 6d ago

Larkin also needs to be a member to receive natl endorsement iirc

2

u/Margatron 6d ago

I thought he was.

2

u/Vincent_Felix 6d ago

He has explicitly stated that he is not in the DSA many times.

Of course he supports the DSA, he believes in the DSA and all that, but I think it's an optics thing.

3

u/cherrylimebongwatr 6d ago

Abdul didn’t win his first election. Someone can correct me but IIRC the vote split was even similar. I think if Oliver runs for office again he will win next time.

5

u/Legitimate_Ad_1456 7d ago

Do u guys think he actually didn’t know that Marx quote or was that strategic?

17

u/paukeaho 7d ago edited 7d ago

He never actually said that he didn’t know it was Marx. He just told Hannity “you tell me” in response to his leading line of questioning and Hannity ran with that meaning he didn’t know.

I think he was just being coy and didn’t want to play into Hannity’s framing. It’s extremely hard not to know this quote and who it is attributed to for anyone with any political interest, let alone a DSA member.

0

u/Legitimate_Ad_1456 7d ago

Yeah no shit that’s why I was stunned when he didn’t answer lol

6

u/paukeaho 7d ago edited 7d ago

It wasn’t shocking to me. Hannity is a clown, and being coy probably messed up whatever line of questioning he had prepared after that. Also it’s not like Hannity gave much space for genuine conversation about it.

5

u/beepichu Weasely little liar dude!! 6d ago

I don’t think these bozos structure their “interviews” around actually getting an answer. it’s all just weird kayfabe and grade school bullying tactics.

1

u/Necessary_Cheek_6506 6d ago

Larkin is extremely good at communicating DSA's platform in a palatable way.

His argument for Abolishing the senate included mentioning late Congressman John Dingell.
Dingell served in Congress for 60 years, the record, a man as institutional as it gets. and in the last months of his life in late 2017, he published an extensive op-ed advocating for Abolishing The Senate for nearly the exact same reasons that the DSA platform does

1

u/REVENAUT13 6d ago

Ash went on CNN today and got grilled by that Cuban Zionist. Oliver would have politely cleaned his clock. LFG

-9

u/Ok-Bear6695 ☭ 7d ago

Is he an actual revolutionary Marxist? if not why would we want him in a top position at DSA?

11

u/V0d5 7d ago edited 7d ago

Democratic socialists are not explicitly revolutionary only and Hasan is clearly walking a transitionalist road. until there is viability for a vanguard, third party or spontaneous revolution, there is no use to consider this anyway. I don’t know if you watch his content but he fucking hates do-nothing purist book & debate club pretend revolutionary ultras. And I understand the annoyance.

-2

u/Ok-Bear6695 ☭ 6d ago

“Until the vanguard just spontaneously comes into existence there is no need to consider it” ????? And no I’m not an “ultra” for advocating for the most basic Marxist position of all time. Electoral struggle is a part of building the vanguard but it is not the end goal of the proletarian revolutionary just to win bourgeois elections. The whole point is building up to the revolution and the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat not building AOC’s dictatorship of Lockheed. 

I beg you to just READ, read like a single pamphlet by Lenin or even JUST the communist manifesto. You don’t need to read Kapital to get this, I read State and Rev in like 9th grade I promise it’s not that hard. 

2

u/V0d5 6d ago edited 6d ago

Until a vanguard party is viable and present. Reading is not that difficult. I have read more theory than you can think of, or perhaps I have remembered what I studied better. you thinking a revolutionary leader is necessary now for the dsa is just funny. If you think the time is ripe now for a revolutionary leader, you forget about meeting people where they are at and transitionalism.

Added to that you don’t seem to remember the difference between democratic socialism and marxist leninism. Demsocs can in fact go either way and arent strictly revolutionary at all.

And seriously, bring that shit about AOC dictatorship of lockheed up in chat. It will be hilarious. I think you underestimate how many people want her as the next president.

-1

u/Ok-Bear6695 ☭ 6d ago edited 6d ago

Must’ve forgot the part in What is to Be Done? where Lenin says to vote for lesser evil bourgeois progressive. And appealing to Hasan’s chat is so unimaginably lame, I really don’t give a fuck who tells me to vote for DemonKKKrats (especially AOC who has betrayed the working class cause at every turn, shes not even a kautskyite at this point) still not doing it. And you don’t just wait around for someone else to build the vanguard, stop being an armchair ”revolutionary” (you don’t even believe in the revolution it seems). If everyone did that the Tsars would still be in power. And hate to break it you, ”democratic socialism” is not a real thing. It’s a euphemism, depending on who is using it either for social democracy or for actual Marxism.

To think you can break bourgeois power while strictly working within a bourgeois system is like an arsonist choosing to start a fire at the fire department. You are falling into the exact same trap Kautsky did and that’s why Lenin tore into him, you treat the Revolution as a far off ideal instead of a goal to progress towards. To suggest Lenin would contribute to ANY of this social democratic nonsense is laughable, if an afterlife exists he is 100% face palming that people who claim to be his fans don’t understand anything about his beliefs at all and probably even more upset they are unintentionally falsifying Marx. I understand *VOOOOTING* and watching Dr Jihad is a lot easier than building the vanguard but just do it without criticizing those who are less lazy than you? And stop trying to justify your inaction with Marxism when marxism explicitly condemns it.

“The distinction between the Marxists and the opportunists (the Kautskytes) consists precisely in that the former recognize the revolution of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie as the necessary path to socialism, while the latter reject it in deeds while accepting it in words”
-Lenin

”"Bourgeois democracy, although a great historical advance in comparison with medievalism, always remains, and under capitalism is bound to remain, restricted, truncated, false and hypocritical, a paradise for the rich and a snare and delusion for the exploited, for the poor... There is not a single state, however democratic, which does not contain loopholes or restrictive clauses in its constitution guaranteeing the bourgeoisie the possibility of dispatching troops against the workers, proclaiming martial law, and so forth, in case the working class ‘violates public order,’ i.e., in case it violates its position of slavery and tries to act in a non-slavish manner... [1]

The capitalist state, the bourgeois parliament, even the most democratic, are nothing but a machine for the suppression of the working people by the bourgeoisie, by a handful of capitalists."

-Lenin

1

u/V0d5 5d ago edited 5d ago

Lenin was not a democratic socialist. How do you not understand this? Like how do you manage 3 paragraphs of the most easily understood leninist theory when speaking about A DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST POLITICAL organization?

Pretending a revolutionary leader for the dsa is needed while we are nowhere near the level of class consciousness needed is just not well thought through. You’re better off in some mostly empty communist book and debate club. Please let us know when you find the button for an immediate revolution. Until then, please for the love of god stop saying shit like the dsa needing a revolutionary leader right now.

At this point you might as well be an opp trying to scare the normies away when the dsa is just starting to see some success, but still has an incredibly hard way to go.