The national question raised by imperialism is vastly different from brain dead “patriotic socialism”
Imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism, which means in imperialized countries it is more urgent to establish a national consciousness than a worker consciousness. MLs sometimes make a workerist error (i.e. the belief that the workers should be the focus to the exclusion of everything else) because they don’t first identify the chief contradictions. In imperialized countries there is a common struggle that unites the imperialized workers and the imperialized bourgeoisie (and the peasantry, the lumpen-proles, etc), which means national consciousness in imperialized countries is a progressive force that unites the masse. That’s been the basis of revolutionary forces from Algeria to Vietnam to China itself, and while working class organizations played a big role in all those cases it was under a national party line.
This is vastly different from trying to build socialism inside of the imperial core, so-called “patriotic socialism”. Here, we are the beneficiaries of imperialism. The superprofits of the empire are redistributed to workers in the imperial core in the form of welfare and reformism and artificially cheap commodities, which prevents a revolutionary class consciousness from ever forming. That also means that national consciousness can only ever be reactionary inside the imperial core, because it fools the workers into thinking they are united with their bourgeoisie against the imperialized masses of the world.
And don’t get it twisted, there are imperialized nations inside of the imperial core as well. The Black Nation, the First Nations, the transnational Latine diaspora, etc. They can hardly be said to be beneficiaries of imperialism, and instead, are superexploited the same as workers around the world. That’s why they fill the sweat shops and the prisons and the morgues.
As for the white working class, the beneficiaries of imperialism, then only by betraying the empire can someone actually call themselves a socialist and have it mean anything. Their patriotism only sides with oppression and empire and all its associated cruelties.
I’m drawing from Mao, Fanon, W.E.B. Du Bois to get to these conclusions. What the fuck are “patriotic socialists” reading? Tweets?
Anyway, all of that is to say, I guess I don’t just do this for fun. It’s also a useful exercise, because by shadow boxing with random encounters on the internet I can organize my thoughts and draw further conclusions I may not have otherwise. Online debate is exercise.
“Patriotic socialists” simply read Stalin. Their patriotism is a return to the ideals of MLs and MLMs, who were taught patriotism inside their doctrine. We can also look at the doctrine of the North Korean Communist Party.
It would be convenient if the ML, like the alt righter, could say that anyone who carries out the logical conclusion of their ideology does not represent it, it would be convenient if they could say that they were just posting online for the memes, but as I have seen Leftists endorse Julius calls for genocide with the same joking manner as the alt-right endorses David Duke, I wonder why the most functional and active portions of the far left are MLs or their logical conclusion the PatSoc.
So where does the line get drawn? Does the leftist actually believe in restorative justice, or do they celebrate the suicide of someone because they were not on their side?
The line gets drawn along the lines of class struggle. Kill the Boer and mocking our enemies when they kill themselves is a reflection of who our enemies are, because leftists don’t actually subscribe to universal humanism like liberals. Leftists are materialists, and if something materially benefits the class struggle then it is good.
Boers are settlers. Republicans are fascists. There’s a pretty clear line.
“Just because they were not on their side” oh honey, this person was part of the party that wants to kill me. It’s sad that someone like this decided to become my enemy, but the enemy party does not get pity it gets the Wall.
“Kill the Boer” is a call for ethnic cleansing. “Settler” is not an ethnicity. Supporting a far-right anti-LGBT person like Malema should not be “Leftist”… but here you are.
You’re just stating platitudes without any political theory behind it. Moralism.
I’m trans, but I also recognize that the empire uses people like me as totems to promote the empire and oppress people around the world. This, in turn, makes people around the world hate people like me. There are material reasons behind these beliefs, they aren’t just naughty baddies with bad ideas.
Also you’re right, settlers are not an ethnicity and that’s why I don’t care when they are targeted. It’s why I refuse to condemn Hamas. Settlers should stop stealing land and resources and wealth if they don’t want to be violently opposed.
Why are you okay with a call to ethnic genocide when it’s done by an anti-LGBT dictator? He doesn’t say “Kill the settler,” as meaningless as “Leftists” have made the word. He says “Kill the Boer.”
Do you believe babies have committed a sin and should be lumped in with the rest of the ethnicity? Your thirst for blood is indistinguishable from other fascists
Boers are white settlers, and they will be settlers until they pay reparations or otherwise stop being beneficiaries of thier settler heritage. That’s literally where they all come from, you can’t avoid that. I don’t necessarily endorse calls to kill all settlers but I don’t condemn it either. The same goes for crackers in America btw - settlers need to pay up.
As for babies and children, it’s the settlers that are forcing them into this world as settlers. They are innocent and if anyone deserves blame it’s the parents for making them complicit. They don’t deserve to die, but that’s why white settlers should either pay reparations so they can cease to be settlers or get the fuck out and take their children with them.
The US, and it’s complicated because on both sides of my family tree there are native women that were raped by settlers. I have white skin (11 months of the year) and have no connection to any tribes so I’d consider myself a settler, but the debt doesn’t come from the crimes of long-dead settlers that came here to steal the land and rape women and kidnap children. I’m not to blame for the sins of my forefathers.
My debt comes from the privileges I’ve experienced my entire life from my light skin and my ability to stealthily conform to white hegemony and from the generational wealth I benefited from throughout my life and from participating in this neocolonial system.
Generational wealth is real. White privilege is real. If you’re a settler and you want to be a leftist, you have to grapple with this shit.
This is where the fun part begins:
The national question raised by imperialism is vastly different from brain dead “patriotic socialism”
Imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism, which means in imperialized countries it is more urgent to establish a national consciousness than a worker consciousness. MLs sometimes make a workerist error (i.e. the belief that the workers should be the focus to the exclusion of everything else) because they don’t first identify the chief contradictions. In imperialized countries there is a common struggle that unites the imperialized workers and the imperialized bourgeoisie (and the peasantry, the lumpen-proles, etc), which means national consciousness in imperialized countries is a progressive force that unites the masse. That’s been the basis of revolutionary forces from Algeria to Vietnam to China itself, and while working class organizations played a big role in all those cases it was under a national party line.
This is vastly different from trying to build socialism inside of the imperial core, so-called “patriotic socialism”. Here, we are the beneficiaries of imperialism. The superprofits of the empire are redistributed to workers in the imperial core in the form of welfare and reformism and artificially cheap commodities, which prevents a revolutionary class consciousness from ever forming. That also means that national consciousness can only ever be reactionary inside the imperial core, because it fools the workers into thinking they are united with their bourgeoisie against the imperialized masses of the world.
And don’t get it twisted, there are imperialized nations inside of the imperial core as well. The Black Nation, the First Nations, the transnational Latine diaspora, etc. They can hardly be said to be beneficiaries of imperialism, and instead, are superexploited the same as workers around the world. That’s why they fill the sweat shops and the prisons and the morgues.
As for the white working class, the beneficiaries of imperialism, then only by betraying the empire can someone actually call themselves a socialist and have it mean anything. Their patriotism only sides with oppression and empire and all its associated cruelties.
I’m drawing from Mao, Fanon, W.E.B. Du Bois to get to these conclusions. What the fuck are “patriotic socialists” reading? Tweets?
Anyway, all of that is to say, I guess I don’t just do this for fun. It’s also a useful exercise, because by shadow boxing with random encounters on the internet I can organize my thoughts and draw further conclusions I may not have otherwise. Online debate is exercise.
“Patriotic socialists” simply read Stalin. Their patriotism is a return to the ideals of MLs and MLMs, who were taught patriotism inside their doctrine. We can also look at the doctrine of the North Korean Communist Party.
It would be convenient if the ML, like the alt righter, could say that anyone who carries out the logical conclusion of their ideology does not represent it, it would be convenient if they could say that they were just posting online for the memes, but as I have seen Leftists endorse Julius calls for genocide with the same joking manner as the alt-right endorses David Duke, I wonder why the most functional and active portions of the far left are MLs or their logical conclusion the PatSoc.
So where does the line get drawn? Does the leftist actually believe in restorative justice, or do they celebrate the suicide of someone because they were not on their side?
The line gets drawn along the lines of class struggle. Kill the Boer and mocking our enemies when they kill themselves is a reflection of who our enemies are, because leftists don’t actually subscribe to universal humanism like liberals. Leftists are materialists, and if something materially benefits the class struggle then it is good.
Boers are settlers. Republicans are fascists. There’s a pretty clear line.
“Just because they were not on their side” oh honey, this person was part of the party that wants to kill me. It’s sad that someone like this decided to become my enemy, but the enemy party does not get pity it gets the Wall.
“Kill the Boer” is a call for ethnic cleansing. “Settler” is not an ethnicity. Supporting a far-right anti-LGBT person like Malema should not be “Leftist”… but here you are.
You’re just stating platitudes without any political theory behind it. Moralism.
I’m trans, but I also recognize that the empire uses people like me as totems to promote the empire and oppress people around the world. This, in turn, makes people around the world hate people like me. There are material reasons behind these beliefs, they aren’t just naughty baddies with bad ideas.
Also you’re right, settlers are not an ethnicity and that’s why I don’t care when they are targeted. It’s why I refuse to condemn Hamas. Settlers should stop stealing land and resources and wealth if they don’t want to be violently opposed.
Why are you okay with a call to ethnic genocide when it’s done by an anti-LGBT dictator? He doesn’t say “Kill the settler,” as meaningless as “Leftists” have made the word. He says “Kill the Boer.”
Do you believe babies have committed a sin and should be lumped in with the rest of the ethnicity? Your thirst for blood is indistinguishable from other fascists
Boers are white settlers, and they will be settlers until they pay reparations or otherwise stop being beneficiaries of thier settler heritage. That’s literally where they all come from, you can’t avoid that. I don’t necessarily endorse calls to kill all settlers but I don’t condemn it either. The same goes for crackers in America btw - settlers need to pay up.
As for babies and children, it’s the settlers that are forcing them into this world as settlers. They are innocent and if anyone deserves blame it’s the parents for making them complicit. They don’t deserve to die, but that’s why white settlers should either pay reparations so they can cease to be settlers or get the fuck out and take their children with them.
What country are you a settler in, and how deep in debt are you to the people you settled
Because this is batshit insane
The US, and it’s complicated because on both sides of my family tree there are native women that were raped by settlers. I have white skin (11 months of the year) and have no connection to any tribes so I’d consider myself a settler, but the debt doesn’t come from the crimes of long-dead settlers that came here to steal the land and rape women and kidnap children. I’m not to blame for the sins of my forefathers.
My debt comes from the privileges I’ve experienced my entire life from my light skin and my ability to stealthily conform to white hegemony and from the generational wealth I benefited from throughout my life and from participating in this neocolonial system.
Generational wealth is real. White privilege is real. If you’re a settler and you want to be a leftist, you have to grapple with this shit.