this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2025
51 points (98.1% liked)
Slop.
563 readers
264 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: Do not post public figures, these should be posted to c/El Chisme
founded 8 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm usually on board with Cassie's takes (she's a solid organizer from what I can tell), but in this case I gotta say its a bit elitist.
I hate to say it but I kind of agree with her, as someone who has family in Appalachia. There's a bit of fetishization of the rural working class (especially Appalachia due to the history of miners unions) on the left but I don't really think we can compare the material conditions of these people to that of Russian or Chinese peasantry. For one most of these people at least own the land they're living on, they may be poor otherwise but that gives them a degree of autonomy and dignity tenant farmers lack.
But regardless there still irony in a bunch of anti-ML libertarian socialists suddenly calling the rural poor "backwards" cuz they voted for a cheeto.
Russian peasants also owned their land post-1861, but their plots were just so small (peasants called the smallest guaranteed allotment кошачий надел - 'cat's allotment', because it was enough to feed a cat) that it was barely enough to survive, so they called for the land reform and partitioning the land held by noble landowners.