This is a thought that I have been tackling for quite a while now, but in the event of a country or region undergoing decolonialization, how should settler populations, especially multigenerational populations, be handled?

For example in the example of Israel, once the nation is reestablished as a one state Palestine, what would happen to the settler population? Especially those that aren’t living or participating in illegal settlements or exploitation?

This question is complicated farther by multiple generations of people who were born in a location and have no ties to any other country or location. Those people don’t have anywhere to go and can’t be “sent back” to where they came from as they have no ties. For example if a person’s grand parents immigrated decades ago to a country as settlers, and then their children and then grandchildren were born and lived their whole lives in a location, what would you do with those grandchildren? You can’t just throw them back to the country their grandparents were from. This question is made even harder when the generations start spanning back much farther.

Another problem that I am running into is that many solutions including “leftist” ones essentially boil down to ethnic cleaning even if they do not say it outright. Or they completely ignore the question or resort to some fantasy scenario where the settlers magically disappear or all agree to move.

So how should these populations and people be handled?

  • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
    32·
    2 years ago

    a more multiracial world This is not a thing. Lord almighty, this is not a thing! Races are not real in the base. Races are superstructural. They are invented, they are the mechanism by which class war is waged. We are not progressing into a more multi-racial world. What’s happening is that racialized groups are continuing to do the arduous work of demonstrating the limits of the race paradigm.

    Especially given the history of genocide in settler countries like the US, many native people are mixed with settler blood

    This is also not true, especially of the US and Canada. If you were going to make this point, you would be studying the Mestizo movements, which are material movements that truly blur the lines of settler and settled and create opportunities for what is called plurinationalism. But in the US, “blood mixing” (what a disgusting perspective) doesn’t happen that much.

    Families are integrated, which opens up a whole other can of worms.

    Only if you assume what’s being discussed is an ethnostate, which is not what’s being discussed. That’s a European concept. Indigenous people are not interested in purity tests nor in one-drop rules.

    Not to mention, there are populations that live in imperial core countries because their home countries were colonized by said empire.

    Making it the responsibility of that empire.

    Do these populations deserve to be painted with the same settler brush?

    There are no desserts. Settlerism is not a moral position. It is a material one.

    In my personal experience, I’ve rarely encountered self-described Marxists who approach this topic with the nuance it deserves.

    Perhaps you are more worried about yourself than the analysis.

    Land back is a needed discussion that must be led by indiginous nations.

    Indeed.

    But just vulgarly saying “Kick all the settlers out” like I’ve seen some on the left advocate for makes me feel like those leftists and their analysis are divorced from actual reality.

    Perhaps you’re misinterpreting what is actually being said. You’re so focused on who “deserves” what that you might actually be missing the analysis, which is that settlers have no moral standing at all and that the indigenous bear no burden for their stewardship.