At what point does someone who is mostly reasonable, with a few bad takes become someone not worth listening to? Also, can we separate the art from the artist? For example with Badempanada, he has a couple bad China takes and is kind of toxic online, but he’s well researched, so it really depends whether ML’s I’ve met listen to him. Do you listen to Maoists who are good 95% of the time, but might have a bad Gonzalo take from time to time? Or is there enough agreeable content on the internet that you can just listen to those you agree with? Are certain bad takes just too bad? Will you stop listening to someone after they say something transphobic, even if they’re good the rest of the time like Paul Cockshott? Or if someone is willing to talk with someone like a Larouchite, are they automatically a right deviationist with nothing worthwhile to say, or are the just forming a United front on a specific issue?
I’d like to add that if you truly manage to turn around and get better, you should be accepted again. Being a misogynistic right winger, for example, is something that is becoming more mainstream for a lot of young guys. If they manage to learn from their mistakes and become, let’s say, left wingers, we shouldn’t hold their past against them. I personally am willing to do this for other things as well, even for violent mistakes.
Terms and conditions apply here as well, of course. Some things can’t be excused. But I’d like to see the context of your actions first.