aqwxcvbnji [none/use name]
Isn’t the point of settlers that white people can enver be revolutionaries in the US, because they decent from colonisers, and thus only black and brown people are the “true” proletariat?
That sounds very defeatist, and you’re giving up on the majority of people in the country. I just don’t believe that 73.3% of a country has petit-bourgeois characteristics.
Yeah, and I’m also interested in how people who buy in to the thesis of that book explain white revolutionaries in Latin-America (Ché Guevare, Fidel Castro etc). They also live in regions where the genocide of natives happened, so by their logic it would also make them part of the privileged strata in their countries.
Everyone that doesn’t agree with me is a liberal!
I’m a marxist who doesn’t agree with your point. I’m not an American, so in practice it doesn’t make any difference to what I do political, but yes, it saddens me to see that comrades give up on 3 quarters of their population. That’s defeatism in your own country, and it weakens the support you can give to revolutionaries in other nations.
First of all, thank you for actually engaging in a productive manner and not just calling everyone who disagrees with you an idiot, like in some of the other reactions I’ve got here.
I don’t live in the US, so for my personal engagement with politics it’s irrelevant, but it saddens me to see that comrades give up on 3 quarters of their population. That’s defeatism in your own country, and it weakens the support you can give to revolutionaries in other nations.
Anti-imperialism is the single most important effort of the world today because anti-imperialist successes have genuinely resulted in the emancipation of countries from imperial rule.
This is true if you’re in the third world but if you’re in the US and you only limit yourself to solidarity with different peoples, you won’t achieve anything. If you want to engage in a large scale struggle you’ll need to talk about the issues close to home to the proletariat that you’re organising. Why are they living in poverty? Why do their lives suck? And then organise on the basis of their suffering. You have to start from their lived experience (sorry if that phrase sounds liberal), that’s what all succesfull revolutionaries always have done.
My own party always starts with doing surveys in the working class neighbourhoods about what people think is the most important issue that affects them. Before we did that, we only had a couple of hundrerds of members and we were irrelevant in every sense of the word. Since we switched in our approach we steadily growed and now we’re a major political player.
Let’s accept the premisse: the imperial core has been too strong to allow a revolution. You’d still have to grapple with the fact that the relative power of the imperial core is shrinking in comparison with the rest of the world, which in turn would make it possibel again. (Accept if you’re talking about absolute power instead of relative, but then the amounts of places where it’s possible has been shrinking and there’s probably nowhere left.)
I’ve been active in the Palestine-solidarity-movement for some time now, and I’ve learned that you can never, never make a comparison between the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians and their subsequent submission to apartheid conditions on the one hand, and the nazi’s on the other hand because immediatly you’re branded as an anti-semite.
There’s some merit to that argument, because the Holocaust actually was the worst thing humanity ever did: the industrial destruction of entire races is unmatched in cruelty.
But seeing how everyone is comparing Putin, and before that: vaccine mandates, to the nazi’s in much more stupid ways then I’ve ever seen in the Palestine solidarity movement, without their being any sort of pushback in the same fashion as against pro-Palestinian statements really shows a double standard.
