The comments page and social media responses to the Intercept hit job against RiseUp4Abortion Rights, Bob Avakian, and the Revcoms have been interesting. While there are of course haters posting responses, there have been a significant number of people who have been sharply critical of the article. These critical comments of course themselves contain contradiction, and there are things to be struggled with. At the same time, the opening that these indicate should be seized on and pushed to the maximum.

From Facebook Comments

• Daniel Holcomb: I've never heard of this group-and yet, this poorly written article does seem to enhance their image as it has all the hallmarks of a hit piece: vague, conspiracy theory insinuations with no supporting evidence, and no clear point to it except to boost institutional liberals who were essential to getting Roe overturned. Looks like the Revcoms are the good guys.
• Ron Jacobs: This is doing the boss man's work.
• Noah Walker: It probably means that these so called veteran activists are afraid of standing up to the Supreme Court and want to continuously lose.
• Phil Benshoof: They're not wrong in saying we should be taking to the streets
• Eric Sapp: don't scold activists for being activists. What we need is more protest around the overturning of Roe, not purse-clutching neoliberalism
• Ace Thelin: a strange hit piece on the protesters who are the most informed about what real change would actually take. Moderate liberal protests will not change things. What exactly about B. Avakian scares this author I'm not sure. Condemning communism without any understanding of it and no critique of capitalism is doing the work of the ruling class. The intercept is weaker and weaker every day, ever since they pushed G. Greenwald out for telling the truth.
• Tommy Lucas: Democrats desperately trying to twist the narrative and distract America from what a mess they are making of our country and the world

From Responses on Twitter

• Noble Drew Thomas: This is a garbage article that makes accusations without justifying them. After reading this article I still don’t know who RevComs are and what makes them a cult. This just feels like a smear piece.
• CVM: to be certified by "established" groups in order to protest. Possibly new energy & strategies are needed.
• Dr. Chill Biden: Wow this is a rare extraordinarily bad article from you guys
• LA Legault: Oh FFS, they’re in the streets fighting for women— everyone relax.
• no name ideas △△△: Fighting for good things is good, actually.
• H.C. Harrington:  The article doesn't make a strong case that these folks aren't doing a good job in the fight. Besides making vague statements about a cult the things the people are saying seem to be correct. They are doing more than most as far as I can tell. Cult? This article doesn't convince.
• Lori (forced militant): Scaremongering readers with the term Communism? My my, Intercept.
• Paul Heron: I’m not convinced this article is particularly fair. It feels like a red baiting article, also a cult? - I am no revcom Maoist but aren’t they allowed to campaign? Part of me - I just think at least they’re having a go!
• PS Imagery: Where is your evidence? Any of you? Instead if ANY investigation of the truth,Urepeat unfounded BS and peddle it as truth. Ask WHY not 1ofU has taken it upon themselves to dig in and seek the truth about the rehashed BS you’re all sharing?? Otherwise, show your evidence, NOW!#RU4AR
• Dexter: Maybe instead of casting baseless suspicion - why not write about how a small group came to be so central in bringing people out into the streets for abortion rights - when so many others have claimed the mantle of that struggle and been absolutely absent. This is shameful

From Responses on Instagram

• bookhawk: Don’t be fooled by this Bullshit- This is exactly the same tactics used in the 90’s by “acceptable” mainstream conservation groups against “radical activist” environmentalist organizations like earthfirst!- essentially self satisfied liberal do-nothing DC lobbyist groups attacked and cannibalized anyone who brought new and diverse direct action tactics to the movement calling them a cult of personality and misogynist and dangerous to discredit them and successfully slowing the momentum of movements that should have been applauded and supported- for prioritizing the urgency of impending local and global environmental disaster. These guardians of legitimacy also opened the door for the more radical organizations to be infiltrated delegitimized and dismantled by federal agents happily acting as antidemocratic thugs for corporate interests- people are still suffering the very real legal repercussions of state terrorism. Never trust any activist organization that appoints itself the guardian of legitimacy when it comes to any form of activism, they are simply propaganda machines doing free work for the states oppression. This isn’t a playground game, there are potentially brutal consequences to infighting.
• mr.thoughtcriminal: Those veteran abortion rights activists failed...my it is time for a new generation to take over
• periwinklelilly: This is trash. How shameful of you, Intercept.
• iandroidimichele: you disappoint me @theintercept … i had to do a double take bit of personal research but this didn’t pan out… personality cult?
• meladjust3d: Um... Are you burying the lead on this, @theintercept? Because that would be really irresponsible of journalists to do when it involves the topic of people's rights and life or death. You forgot to list anything in the summary that would indicate wrongdoing or connection to wrongdoing in this group's actions, connections or espoused beliefs yet essentially call them a “far left cult”? Further, why make controversy out of WHEN they formed and started protesting? *Of course* women's rights/abortion rights groups will have formed in the days since a leak over the SCOTUS planning to repeal the half-century old ruling to the right to abortion... Who tf is “digital strategist” Mary Drummer? “An activist”... for abortion; against abortion? From...? Why does it matter if a “15-year-old” was involved in an abortion rights protest? If you're old enough to get pregnant, you're old enough to worry about your rights. Further, not everyone who needs an abortion got pregnant willingly. It overtly sounds like you don't care about any of that though. The rest of this summary just sounds like normal 21st century protesting. I don't know who “Bob Avakian” is; too bad that you used up the summary on your article of how this abortion rights group is a “far left cult” talking about very normal protest activities instead of explaining WHO HE IS, if that's supposed to explain everything. — I don't play “click here if you want the answer” when it comes to such an incredibly serious issue. I'd have absolutely read the article if you'd simply explained that Bob Avakian is an example..: some sort of quack doctor with like a mind/body cult or SOMETHING. This can get tae f*ck though. Thanks for making me now question everything I've read from you guys.
• hedge.rider: Poorly written, buries the actual issues with the org while seemingly demonizing direct action. Weak.
• lovely_alazay: Do you even know what a cult is 😂😳🫣 this is embarrassing
• heyjoehey: To paraphrase someone else, any form of protest deemed acceptable to those is power is meaningless.
• handmaids_body: Ridiculously misogynistic article. If women advocating for bodily autonomy is labelled a “cult” then what the hell do you call the people advocating against it???