Mike is a person I disagree with in quite a few ways, however I don’t despise him like I do many other western leftists.

My main disagreement with him comes from his broader political strategy concerning the US.

To put it in basic terms, I believe that he suggests that socialists in the US should support socdem candidates and movements in the US in order to implement a new deal style social democracy in the US again. His argument as to why is that the US implementing those kinds of policies, and necessarily reducing its millitary spending, would constrain the US from being able to suppress global socialist movements. By allowing foe that breathing room, the global south socialist movements could achieve sovereignty against the imperial core, leaving the US ruling class unable to exploit the Periphery to the same extent, and making it easier for US socialist to fight against their own state.

I wouldn’t call it the worst perspective but I think it’s very flawed.

Most prominently, is the fact that the 1st new deal was only made possible by Military Keynsianism, which would strengthen the MIC nor weaken it. Also the conditions of total destruction across the developed world which came about from WW2 isn’t the case, plus the global south is currently a larger portion of the world’s global production and is growing. There’s also the issue that the Socdems of the US all completely capitulate to the neoliberal establishment. They are eitheir just as complicit in empire or too politically incompetent to counteract reaction.

In my view, we should advocate for socialism unapologetically, and organize around defense against fascism until the US has exhausted its capacity to act as an empire entirely.