Hello comrades. In the interest of upholding our code of conduct - specifically, rule 1 (providing a friendly, safe and welcoming environment for all) - we felt it appropriate to make a statement regarding the lionization of Luigi Mangione, the alleged United Healthcare CEO shooter, also known as “The Adjuster.”
In the day or so since the alleged shooter’s identity became known to the public, the whole world has had the chance to dig though his personal social media accounts and attempt to decipher his political ideology and motives. What we have learned may shock you. He is not one of us. He is a “typical” American with largely incoherent, and in many cases reactionary politics. For the most part, what is remarkable about the man himself is that he chose to take out his anger on a genuine enemy of the proletariat, instead of an elementary school.
This is a situation where the art must be separated from the artist. We do not condemn the attack, but as a role model, Luigi Mangione falls short. We do not expect perfection from revolutionary figures either, but we expect a modicum of revolutionary discipline. We expect them not simply to identify an unpopular element of society 
, but to clearly illuminate the causes of oppression and the means by which they are overcome. When we canonize revolutionary figures, we are holding them up as an example to be followed.
This is where things come back to rule 1. Mangione has a long social media history bearing a spectrum of reactionary viewpoints, and interacting positively with many powerful reactionary figures. While some commenters have referred to this as “nothing malicious,” by lionizing this man we effectively deem this behavior acceptable, or at the very least, safe to ignore. This is the type of tailism which opens the door to making a space unsafe for marginalized people.
We’re going to be more strict on moderating posts which do little more than lionize the shooter. There is plenty to be said about the unfolding events, the remarkably positive public reaction, how public reactions to “propaganda of the deed” may have changed since the historical epoch of its conception (and how the strategic hazards might not have), and many other aspects of the news without canonizing this man specifically. We can still dance on the graves of our enemies and celebrate their rediscovered fear and vulnerability without the vulgar revisionism needed to pretend this man is some sort of example of Marxist or Anarchist practice.
I just skipped over that jargon and didn’t even remember reading it. I got the gist of what was being written. I interpreted “taillism” as “bullshit”. But since you bring it up we can all learn together. If you duckduckgo for this word, every hit is explaining the meaning, which is funny. It mostly gets used to tell people what it means.
Tailism - ProleWiki:
Now that I know this, it doesn’t really add anything to the post TBH.
I wouldn’t draw any big conclusions just because the post uses a word you and I don’t know the meaning of. That’s just sort of how it is to be human, people are always saying things you don’t totally get. Just do you best. The overall intention is clear enough. I don’t see that this is any barrier to participation?
It is worth noting that ProkeWiki, being an explicitly ML wiki, is defining tailism specifically in the context of Marxism Leninism. The concept could be applied more broadly - outside of the specific context of a Marxist Leninist organization.
More generally, tailism is when you cater to the most backward elements of a political coalition out of short-sighted expedience. You are following (“tailing”) the coalition, instead of providing leadership. For instance, when the Democrats decide to throw trans people or immigrants under bus to soothe the suburban fascists instead of thinking about how the volunteers they need to actually win an election feel about that. Or when the “MAGA Communists” decide doing the same is the key to winning the hearts and minds of the proletariat (who they conceive of specifically as white guys in steel toe boots [and as a white guy who wears steel toe boots to work, this repulses me]).
Tailism is something we see all the time in the realm of politics, even if it is not described as such. More conventionally, politicians of this mold are referred to as “weather vanes.” They point whichever way the wind is blowing. If a cause is unpopular (i.e. gay marraige during Obama’s 2008 campaign), they don’t support it - no matter how justified the cause is, regardless of the fact that its popularity is higher than ever and growing. They make no effort to actually change people’s minds, and on the flip-side, they will re-enforce any reactionary perspectives that polls above 50%.
thank you.
this was the vibe I was getting from context, but having it spelled out so clearly is tremendously helpful, especially with that similar term added
really appreciate your taking the time to type this up ❤️
thanks, that’s a more thorough and helpful explanation!
sorry, I wasn’t very clear about the relevancy of that tidbit to my larger point
for me, part of understanding how to engage on Hexbear is reading the modlog to see What Not To Do, especially when I come across a “removed by mod” in a conversation I found interesting or educational
“Tailism” was the sole reason for some removals recently, and it’s been used a bit in conversation about the recent struggle sessions, which implied to me that this was a common vocabulary word.
the larger point, though, is not about this particular word, but about the level of political education one needs to be familiar enough with that word that seeing it as a removal reason in the modlog is inherently informative, and wondering if that is the level of knowledge that the mods expect of the userbase
hopefully that’s more clear, sorry 😔 it’s late and I’m not communicating well
Well I see that you got a better explanation above. :) But ya if you are trolling the mod logs and responding to them than that is relevant context lol. That’s more than I am willing to go for at this time.