As I said in my response to aworldtowin, Sakai’s thesis is not that white people can’t be radicalized, his thesis is that it’s extremely difficult. White people are proletarians, and are still oppressed, and in some instances can be aware of that oppression.
I’m sorry, you are not describing Sakai’s points. I agree with your points, but these are not Sakai’s. Even in the title Sakai makes it very clear: Settlers: the mythology of the white proletariat
I do appreciate the shoutout to Silvia Federici though, which is why I think any good movement should have an intersectional character to it, but it doesn’t feel like a lot of lemmygrad people are quite ready to talk about that yet.
Oh please, comrade. If you think Lemmygrad people are not ready, it’s just more reason for you to talk about it. I agree with your views wholeheartedly. For years I was a male chauvinist myself, and there’s absolute need for revolutionaries to fight the male patriarchal subjectivity, just as much as the white supremacist subjectivity.
I agree with the propositions of your comment, comrade, but I feel like we’ve read two different books.
I think we might have interpreted it differently for sort of personal reasons. I’m not a particularly good person, I don’t think, so I’m used to being told to check myself. I don’t think that’s an indictment that I’m incapable of change, just that I’ve done stuff that I need to learn from. If I refused to recognize those things, however, it would make me pretty unappealing to be around. The list of things white socialists have done in the US seems pretty damning, but not impossible to recover from. And imo Settlers is the only marxist book really asking white socialists to check themselves without going at it from an anarchist or liberal perspective.
And imo Settlers is the only marxist book really asking white socialists to check themselves without going at it from an anarchist or liberal perspective.
I’m sorry, you are not describing Sakai’s points. I agree with your points, but these are not Sakai’s. Even in the title Sakai makes it very clear: Settlers: the mythology of the white proletariat
Oh please, comrade. If you think Lemmygrad people are not ready, it’s just more reason for you to talk about it. I agree with your views wholeheartedly. For years I was a male chauvinist myself, and there’s absolute need for revolutionaries to fight the male patriarchal subjectivity, just as much as the white supremacist subjectivity.
I agree with the propositions of your comment, comrade, but I feel like we’ve read two different books.
I think we might have interpreted it differently for sort of personal reasons. I’m not a particularly good person, I don’t think, so I’m used to being told to check myself. I don’t think that’s an indictment that I’m incapable of change, just that I’ve done stuff that I need to learn from. If I refused to recognize those things, however, it would make me pretty unappealing to be around. The list of things white socialists have done in the US seems pretty damning, but not impossible to recover from. And imo Settlers is the only marxist book really asking white socialists to check themselves without going at it from an anarchist or liberal perspective.
True, at least as far as I know of