[-] CITRUS@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 years ago

To be honest I am pretty put off that they discredit some of the biggest strides in decolonization, and I think it stems from a lack of class analysis. Why do they see exploitation of the land for the good of all as settler colonialism?

From what I have garnered so far, settler colonialism is based on hierarchy of "national classes" (for lack of a better word). Nations have a class of proles and bourgeoisie, when in a settler colonial state the bourgeoisie give a their proletarian cultural group a priority and kickbacks for settling hence the bourgeois position. So the settler proles and oppressed proles hold contradicting positions, as long as the settler proles hold a bourgeois position.

We have seen settlers and indigenous nations work together to overthrow colonialism, in the USSR, China, Cuba and even with bourgeois democratic states in LatAm. Why is this? I believe it is because the class of settlers have been proletarianized enough to align with the oppressed and synthesize into a new state. Russians, Han Chinese, and Spaniards under the boot of Imperialsm had proletarian positions, and thus could synthesize with any oppressed nationalities With DOTPs specifically we see the first blow to settler colonialism, the elimination of the bourgeoisie as an oppressing class and thus the need for nations in the first place has started crumbling.

Sadly Tuck and Yang's Liberalism holds them back from a class analysis, but their own class interests allow them to address settler colonialism. At the moment, they ARE right in saying that the most progressive way to decolonize the US is putting land back in Indigenous hands (proletarian hands). This is because as long as US Imperialism exists (as it does now) the Euro Americans hold a bourgeois and counter revolutionary position. (keep in mind this is not an exact science, and anglos are being proletarianized more and more each day. Hell I am a white settler and I am living barely on paycheck to paycheck).

What happens is the Indigenous revolutionary kernel is much more developed compared to the Settler revolutionary kernel. Thus the indigenous people hold a vanguard position, as any indigenous population has always had across history. Only when settler's kernel is developed enough can it synthesize with the oppressed nations into a DOTP. And you can see indigenous leaders for decolonization even without a class analysis advocate for this synthesis. The more settlers work together with the oppressed nations, the less it will be solely indigenous but until that happens it holds an indigenous character (if that makes sense)

[-] CITRUS@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 years ago

So what do you think we should do then? Are there any steps to at least get a foothold in the class struggle? You mention all these problems, but what are the solutions? Are we just at a point where our first steps are to explain and organize? Or just wallow in defeat?

Theres a rise in the Labour Movement, hell the Guardian has stated it here, that there is the largest support of Unions since 1965. And the strike numbers keep going up. The ruling class haven't made concessions yet as the movement isn't strong enough (as of now and which we can change!), plus as the US loses its hegemony on the periphery the bourgeoisie will have to sacrifice more for each sliver of concession!

The point on not being able to cripple the economy makes a lot of sense. But again what will happen as the US loses its grip? Wouldn't the peripheries shift to anti-imperialism effectively work as a cripple to the economy? And as I am getting more educated on the Labour aristocracy i will know more in depth, truly there will be material conditions to swing fully into imperialist talking points. BUT, that is happening anyway so it's more feasible to educate the populace and radicalize them as the conditions worsen BEFORE they turn to the right wing. I toe the Panther line when it comes to the unemployed, as they can be the most radical champions of the working class!

You say the US is the most pro-imperialist and anti-communist country on Earth. That may very well be true, but let's dig into the average American thought process. Americans know for a fact that their country has its own interests against the world. Americans also sympathize with communism, problem is they think it only works in theory. They unknowingly support Imperialism when they see "Evil Putin is invading the innocent Ukraine and Xinnie the Pooh with freedom loving Taiwan!" not because they want to have a total US hegemony but because they see them as imperialists themselves. Surprise, surprise, people don't like wars. While i will admit the escalation in Ukraine is a huge set back for anti-imperialist education, we can use the differing narratives that have been provided by the US over and over again to snap them into class conscious. It would be best with China, as it is an AES state instead of Russia which even takes some leftists convincing to critically support. I believe the socdem youth are ripe for radicalization, after all it will be them and their children to further propagate the truth and organize. While it may seem effective to convince Gen Xers, as they are the ones mainly run things right now, spreading an ideological base within the youth, who are growing up in the time of the fall of US hegemony and the internet, is the most productive use of our efforts.

What will happen with their organized class when the exploitable resources in their hands slip through their fingers? At the moment, They are too organized for a revolution to be successful, but wouldn't they start dividing up the remaining resources at best, and at worst be waged into a full civil war against each other?

The bourgeois democracy is stable, but again only as long as the relations of Imperialism exist to supplement them. You mention that the most politically active people are drained by the theatre of the shit show. So we know these specific people are the type who keep up to date on things and at least try, in their own ways, to be politically educated? Can we not show these people the stability of and Dialectical Materialist outlook? I remember when I was a "lib"--I was pretty disillusioned even then--there were some traces of political thought that made sense. A centralized government that provides for you, to have the ability to reap what you sow in your work, and to have women's full sexual autonomy. Problem was these were all spread out over the "sides" of the aisle. Bernie advocated for the first, but conservatives had pushed the bootstrap mentality, and then the libertarians and liberals advocated the last. But almost all of them advocated for small business owners. Why? It is a way for us to sympathize with our semi proletarian brethren, without endangering the structure of Capital. "Small business owners" was our short breath of class consciousness. Being able to reap what you sow from your own work, while not being crushed down by the big capitalist. It was idealistic, but showing people that they CAN have a better life with out exploiting others made the working class feel content. Now when we open these politically active libs to a world outside Capital, they will start to realize what interests they really have and not limiting themselves to the allusive mystery of "small business owners".

Also I wouldn't say the US has the strongest military on Earth. The most funded one sure, but most of that is kick backs to the MIC. The weapons are known to break, the MIC has a trend of making them "customizable". Most of it goes into its Navy and the Airforce, which can't hold a lot of ground, but is suited for its imperialist ventures. Also Nato's stockpiles are being drained out right now. Now the domestic police are different situation, they are very much a threat. But their crackdowns and abuses will just have sharpened the contradiction. We saw even with Liberal co opting, what massive uproar the Murder of George Floyd caused. And what did the Biden administration do in response to the masses? They increased the Police Budget! This will only further exacerbate the struggle with the Police, and more faith lost in the dems! Organizing in a police state seems impossible, but yet don't we see the massive mobilizations of Palestinians in their struggle against the Israeli state? Communists have always been persecuted, but that just adds to our own struggle!

Your average military members actually don't get paid a lot, they have many concessions but even then that's a carrot on a stick. Its common to hear grunts speak of "You only join the military if you are dumb or if you are poor". Sure the highest members receive great sums of money, but you can't lead soldiers, who joined for the concessions, to fire on people who are fighting to improve the conditions which led them to join in the first place. Not to mention oppressed minorities are overrepresented in the military

This ties in nicely with a secession movement. We know one of the most radical regions in the US is New Afrika. I would imagine many of the soldiers will defect to the side which represents them. Plus many of the training establishment lies in its regions so if the cards are played right, they could hinder mobilization possibilities.

Now I doubt a revolution will happen anytime soon, could possibly be multiple decades. But what I want to instill is revolutionary optimism. Sure I am young and I am naive, but if we don't act like it's possible then it will never happen. Id say Morale is the greatest factor for us in the States. Our conditions will continue to worsen, that will make the populous revert to mask off imperialist war mongering. You are right, us comrades in the States are drastically outnumbered, and are painted as crazy lunatics who bash their head into a wall over and over again, thinking that will fix all the world's problems. But we must hold our heads high and proclaim our communist beliefs to the masses. Yes, at first they will take everything you say as a grain of salt. Yes, they will start repeating debunked propaganda. Yes, we will be putting a target on our backs. But isn't that what we signed up for when we called ourselves Communists? Our talking points will be put into the attic of their brains, collecting dust. But when that moment happens--and I know you know the moment as we all have experienced it as MLs--when every little sense of liberalism is put under inspection, and all the theory taught to you through other Communists struggle is squashing that liberalism out of frame; Your brain just clicks. One day those liberals who denied your input to be nothing of value, will come back to you asking to lead them along the path of revolution. After all we have to challenge their world view, how can they learn if they are unaware of the possibilities?

Now what if we benefit from imperialism too much to be radical? Even if thats the case it's not an end all be all. Was Engels unable to be radical from his class interests? What about Zhou Enlai. Hell what about you and I? We have happened to be radicalized in the most anti-communist State in history. Are we special? I don't know about you, but I am not. No but think about it; We are radicals in the place where your material analysis says it should be near impossible. I find that... hopeful. Even in the strongest most allusive bourgeois state, class consciousness seeps through. It is beautiful, hope. One thing stronger than fear.

TLDR: Revolutionary Optimism, lol

No but Muad, I respect you comparatively older comrades who have paved the way for the younger people like me. Thank you, sincerely. I would still be a Western Leftist or god forbid a lib if it wasn't for Lemmygrad. :)

[-] CITRUS@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 years ago

ALWAYS 🤣, figured if we had one, it would be called Lumpen

[-] CITRUS@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 years ago

oh of course don't get me wrong love the onion, always have, i think its weird for me to find something i dont like from them

[-] CITRUS@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 years ago

Okay this helpful but I have a few more questions.

So I agree, that non indigenous people are part of the settler state and thus are considered settlers, but why are they (specifically white people) considered non revolutionary? (I mean we are both considered settlers, yet we are communists)

Is it not in the best interests of both to dismantle the Empire? Is that labour aristocracy exists? Cause I don't think that is strong as it is anymore and especially with inflation, it seems to be reaching a screeching halt.

Isn't it more that the state itself funnels, or least tries to, white people into petty bourgeois positions to separate the working class, instead of every single white person being of petty bourgeoisie class? Because it feels pretty Un Marxist to say blue collar, trailer park types aren't proletarian, but maybe that's what you were getting at and I misconstrued. But even then, arent petty bourgeois intrests with the proletariat?

Now sorta related, but should MLs in North America, especially the US, support every single secession movement or only specific ones? Should we support Texas seceding because it will be less colonized, and will weaken the Empire, plus might get the ball rolling other "states"?

Again, no malice just questions.

[-] CITRUS@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 years ago

Agh a "centrist" past their prime. So they say they don't have political opinion cause they "aren't interested in politics" or "I'm better than these rAdICaLS". I mean I think it could work out, Parenti starts off destroying fascists and critiques the USSR so I think if they see any "red flags of a tankie" they are already too deep in the book. I say go for it, but it's your life.

[-] CITRUS@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 years ago

Now how conservative? Racist, homophobic, or transphobic?

[-] CITRUS@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 years ago

Why is it based against NATO but then hates on the DPRK and calls the Native Americans “landlords”? It even talks a bout China wanting to dismantle the West’s power but then calls Isn’t real a “nerdy nephew”, what political stance is this? I’m so confused...

[-] CITRUS@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 years ago

Ah Capitalist South Korea bringing you Squid Game and Bong Joon Ho's Snowpiercer and Parasite.

[-] CITRUS@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 years ago

Yeah, I feel like California would be a good place to consolidate our MLs in America. It has lots of Bernie supporters, Worsening conditions for the poor (price of houses, car centric, huge race disparity, etc) a discontent with the current government. But also geographically strategic, it's huge, the rockies act as a buffer from the rest of the US, far away from Washington, and would be close enough to get aid from China. Economically it would be a huge dent in the American bourgeoisie, and it could be swing to the back of the legs for the eventual demise of the Empire.

Being in a red state, I also agree our country folk have good values just misinformed. I have an idea to make an ML party, but it's ambiguous in its iconography as not to scare off the public. All we need to do is gain their trust with actions, and describe our mission without the "scary" words then we can rope them in to Socialism.

[-] CITRUS@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 years ago

The thing is we are too politically and physically divided. Do you think it's possible for a region of the US to break off, instead of the whole country, and if so where?

[-] CITRUS@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 years ago

Thanks! Do, whatcha call em, western "leftists" knee-jerk into hating Stalin cause of their leftover liberalism prohibits them from learning past the propaganda? How can people realize that the rich aren't our friends and never trace it back to the Amerikkkan bourgeoisie atnd their Empire?

view more: ‹ prev next ›

CITRUS

joined 2 years ago