cross-posted from: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/297928

As you have all noticed, this seems to be a point of contention here. This is a good thing, since it means someone will learn something.

Now we seem to be all over the place, with this general area of thought, provoking many questions. Whether or not PatSocs are socially conservative, what is position on social conservatism? Many of us are very young, both in age and ML experience, so an online discussion would be a great learning tool.

  1. Are socially conservative individuals allowed to be apart of the leftist movement?
  • A. Are socially conservative individuals victims of bourgeois propaganda? -B. If socially conservative people are turned away by the left, where do they go? -C. How high of a position would a social conservative be allowed in a ML party? -D. How has or will MLs educate socially conservative folk? -E. &tc, &tc.

  1. What exactly is Patriotism? -A. Does patriotism depend on culture? -B Is possible for a distinction between patriotism for a country and wanting to abolish the state? -C. Is patriotism corrupted in the Core? -D How have post imperialist countries with Communist experiments built patriotism? -E. &Tc &TC

  2. Who even are the PatSocs? -A. If the label is too convuluted, should we make a distinction between Maupin and American exceptionalists? -B. Who of the leaders do we consider MLs? -C. Should patriotic socialist be distinct from socialism or is inherent in socialism? -D. How much do WE even know if PatSocs? -E. &Tc, &tc

We can look at the USSR and GDR for these questions. Remember the Hammer and Sickel came from somewhere.

Things to look out for about the US: -It is the imperialist power, AND a settler state. -Low levels of cultural development -The culture that is there is taken from marginalized groups. -Americas are the most propagandized people in the World. -It is huge and incredibly diverse

More questions about the US could follow: -Should the US be balkanized? If so how does patriotism be built in balkanized regions? -How does land back go about? Will indigenous countries emerge, and if so should we reconsider American MLs as different MLs for the Regions in North America. -If see different nations and regions in North America how does that affect culture? Is the question of how we view the land a prerequisite to discussing patriotism, is it contradictory to call yourself an American Patriot if you decide to divide up the land until regions?

There is so much potential for deep political for North American based Comrades, this is a rabbit hole I do want to delve into. I’ll cross post this to GZD but I want it mainly on Leftist Infighting.

    • apolitical_gamer@lemmygrad.ml
      5·
      2 years ago

      The documents in second link say that Paul J. Sakai was born in 1917, got his undergraduate degree from the from the University of Washington in 1940, and was unable to complete his graduate work because of his military service in 1978. The rest of the files describes his testimony to the Commission of Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians in 1981 as his family was sent to Ninidoka Relocation Center in Idaho during the 40’s (WWII). The Commission heard from more than 750 witnesses, which tells me that he is one of many Japanese individuals who was affected by American internment camps.

      I found a picture of this gravestone bearing Paul J. Sakai’s name, birth date (i.e. August 4, 1917), and death date. If this is the same Paul J. Sakai described in the documents you linked, he would’ve been 64 in 1981 (the time of his testimony), which means that he died shortly after giving it in 1984. I believe that the Paul J. Sakai in the documents you linked and the dead man are the same person since it’s common for American military personnel to be buried at Arlington National Cemetery.

      It could be that Paul J. Sakai, the American military veteran, wrote Settlers in 1983 shortly before his death in 1984. But then you need to explain the publication of these later works: The Dangerous Class and Revolutionary Theory (2017), Learning from an Unimportant Minority (2015), Basic Politics of Movement Security (2014), The Ideas of Black Genocide in the Amerikkkan Mind (2009), and The Shock of Recognition (2002). These books were supposedly written by J. Sakai according to this website.

      There’s a lot of information you can use here to find more evidence that’ll possibly back up your claim. For example, you can find J. Sakai’s birth record and see if he was born in 1917, graduated from university of washington in 1940, joined the military on January 23, 1941 at Fort Bragg, had family sent to Ninidoka Relocation Center, gave a testimony to the the Commission in 1981, wrote Settlers in 1983, and then died in 1984. Then find evidence showing that the books above were not written by J. Sakai, but someone else.

      It could also be a coincidence that there is someone named Paul J. Sakai and J. Sakai who lived in the U.S. at one time. Maybe “Sakai” is a popular Japanese last name like “Smith” is in America.

      • gun
        22·
        2 years ago

        According to the author’s note on Settlers, the book was published long after it was written. The reason for this being that Sakai originally didn’t want to publish it, but was persuaded by those he worked with. In light of this, I don’t think these later writings disprove the connection, because these could always have been published posthumously.

        you can find J. Sakai’s birth record and see if he was born in 1917

        I can’t. There is very little public information about him. It’s unknown even if J Sakai is a pseudonym or not.

        • apolitical_gamer@lemmygrad.ml
          4·
          2 years ago

          I don’t think these later writings disprove the connection, because these could always have been published posthumously.

          Maybe, but that’s only a possible explanation if we’re assuming J Sakai = Paul J. Sakai and that he died in 1984. Since we know so little about J Sakai and don’t have an explicit reason to link the two, I don’t think this assumption can be derived by the evidence you provided. The ambiguity around J Sakai personally makes me want to avoid over-speculation.

          I found this written in 2002, which claims to be authored by J Sakai and others, in the anarchist library. It says this about Sakai:

          As Hamerquist’s essay started to circulate among a small network of anti-fascists and anarchists, it was proposed to turn it into a pamphlet and distribute it to a wider audience. Sakai, author of an essay on right-wing tendencies in the anti-globalization movement, was approached to write an introduction and critique of what Hamerquist laid out. Sakai soon discarded his initial draft when another event rocked our world—the attacks that sent the World Trade Center and part of the Pentagon up in flames.

          This article was also referenced. It was supposedly written by Sakai himself:

          Again, they cannot be easily counted or measured because they are still uncoalesced. Kept diffused by various imperialist strategies in order to prevent their disruptive potential. How much potential can be seen by the fact that in the 1986 Louisiana election, 57% of the total white vote for u.s. senator went to David Duke of klan and neo-nazi fame. Or the quiet use of steady, low-level, anonymous settler violence in aryan regions to both eliminate sources of abortion and to end u.s. policing of public lands ( i.e. the faint beginnings of a shadow government).

          I haven’t read either of these articles. I bring them up because if they were truly co-authored or authored by Sakai, then it is unlikely that he died in 1984 because the events he discussed happened in 1986 and 2002. This is assuming that J Sakai is not a pseudonym (i.e. a real man). I would have no way of knowing ofc

          But I was wondering why so little is known about J Sakai. Is it because he’s working with the U.S. government? I haven’t looked into Sakai’s character so I wouldn’t feel confident claiming that. But then I came up with a slightly more plausible explanation: there is probably zero information available about the man because his overall politics are anarchist/mlm adjacent. I highly doubt that you will be able to find in depth information about any of the authors on anarchistlibrary, etc. It could be because they’re all working with the government, or because anarchism (or mlm-ism) is not an active, popular movement in the U.S. with noteworthy leaders.

    • TheConquestOfBed
      5·
      2 years ago

      Not Sakai:

      The development of broad, interracial working-class support for egalitari an demands might have substantially transformed the politics of the United States and made the achievement of those demands more likely. There were the beginnings of such a movement in the 1930s and 1940s among the UMWA and certain left unions in the CIO. These beginnings were rightly, although perhaps overoptimistically, touted by scholars, civil rights activists and organizations, and Black newspapers during this period, many of whom had been highly critical of interracial unionism in the past. The history of the CIO during the 1930s and 1940s suggests that the achieve ment of interracial working-class solidarity and racial egalitarianism in unions is a difficult task. The crushing of left-wing unionism, however, destroyed whatever possibilities existed for racially egalitarian unionism; congealed the CIO in a bureaucratic, conservative mold; and laid the basis for the long, continuous decline in American union strength which continues to this day.

      https://libcom.org/article/race-and-cio-possibilities-racial-egalitarianism-during-1930s-and-1940s

      Nice job critically looking at the contents of my post. AGAIN, historically, unions in the US failed due to internalized racism, distancing themselves from communism through anti-russian/pro-nationalist sentiment, and through opportunists in organizing positions focusing bureaucracy toward cooperation with the US government. The reason I quote Sakai is because he very conveniently points out in the same paragraph (so I don’t have to quote 12 different books and research papers) that black organizers commonly resisted anti-communist sentiment and situations of their leadership getting in bed with Democrats. Orgs with racist sentiments most often collapsed quickest. This is not a controversial fact regardless of who’s saying it.

      Maybe you guys should up your game and show the same intellectual rigor in disproving my points rather than making fake little “gotchas” because someone who actually put in the work hurt your feelings.

    • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
      3·
      2 years ago

      Yo that is some damning evidence right there. edit Wait is Paul J Sakai the same person as J. Sakai? edit In https://blog.pmpress.org/authors-artists-comrades/j-sakai/ there’s an excerpt wherein J Sakai appears to claim they were in high school in the 1950s, but this letter from MIS is from 1946. J Sakai does say they were a veteran. If they were in high school in 1950, the earliest they could have been born would have been 1932. I guess it’s possible these are the same people.

      Anyone want to try to get a FOIA request going?

      • gun
        21·
        2 years ago

        It’s hard to know for sure. For a normal figure, it would be pretty easy to prove/disprove if these are the same people. But I can’t find much basic information about J Sakai.

        Even if they are not the same, Sakai still has some sketchy connections. Skeptomai’s substack goes into better detail on this.