In the U.S. there is much more overt violence, but nonetheless the extreme right is fundamentally very liberal. The balance of forces is also very different from Europe: non-whites are a much larger part of the population and on the ideological level none but the most fringe fanatics would want to purge the U.S. of non-whites. Keep them in a subservient position, sure, but not erase them from the country entirely. Yet in Europe this is depressingly normal.
Millions of white labor aristocrats, not just the ones who voted Front National or likewise, feel deep in their hearts that all "those people" just don't belong here and things would be better if they were gone. Just gone entirely. They don't belong here, they're not of our group, get rid of them. Lots of people, even on the so-called "Left" (whatever that even means anymore), are at all times only a hair's breadth away from letting the mask of humanitarianism fall and advocate for full-blown destruction camps, and they inch closer every day.
Things seem better here because the remnants of the social imperialism born out of proximity to the USSR still keep the worst excesses of the prevalent ideology under wraps, unlike in the U.S., but nonetheless much like how Germany in the 20s was far from the most antisemitic state in the world yet gave rise to the holocaust, if we were to see honest to god extermination camps, I would expect them in Europe, not the U.S.
Edited by ultragauchiste ()
the current wave of overtly fascist political expression in the united states seems to be a very late and crudely developed import or parallel of the nouvelle droite or related tendencies
It is true that many of the people of migration background (those under threat), probably a majority despite all of their justified bitterness and disappointment, still desire integration into the social-imperialist system and aren't above kicking away the ladder for those that come after them, both on a very individual level as as a group. European capitalism isn't strong enough to manage this integration, I think. Even if it would be able to manage it, the coming economic crisis is going to radicalise large parts of the population, it's most likely going to be in the direction that they've been radicalizing in for the past decades, and we desperately need to take this seriously. I might be alarmist, but I feel like my analysis is pretty borne out by reality and it is unfortunately the people under threat themselves who don't want to believe that things have already gotten this far, who cling to the hope of integration against better judgement.
The far right is not confused at all about what class they are trying to win over, they have a very large base of support, they are actively preparing for what is to come. They openly find certain groups "undesirable" and would like to get rid of them. Imho we are only waiting for the first real pogroms to happen, and one could argue with the firebombings of centers for asylum seekers that the first steps have already been made.
blinkandwheeze posted:the current wave of overtly fascist political expression in the united states seems to be a very late and crudely developed import or parallel of the nouvelle droite or related tendencies
but there is a distinction in that the former is covert and presents an ideologically flexible veneer. the emergence of coherent overtly fascistic ideological expression (beyond the xeroxed mailing lists of survivalist communities or whatever) is relatively novel in the united states, but again is rather belated and underdeveloped compared to the parallel tendencies in western europe
the rise of such exterminationist ideology in both cases can't simply be dismissed or underestimated. it's a necessary part of the organisation of the extralegal auxiliaries of the security institutions, which enforce the terror-based regime of labour discipline in the subjugated migrant populations
blinkandwheeze posted:the extralegal auxiliaries of the security institutions, which enforce the terror-based regime of labour discipline in the subjugated migrant populations
this is going to be one of those topics that makes tenured careers for people who consider it paranoid conspiracy theory right now
blinkandwheeze posted:the emergence of coherent overtly fascistic ideological expression (beyond the xeroxed mailing lists of survivalist communities or whatever) is relatively novel in the united states
how can it be novel when it was already a massive presence during the interwar period. Re-emergence at best imo
Face au terrorisme islamiste, il faut répondre de manière très précise. Il y a clairement un problème avec la communauté tchétchène en France. Les tchétchènes qui ont une activité d'islamisme politique sur les réseaux sociaux doivent être retrouvés et expulsés. #JLMLCI
— Jean-Luc Mélenchon (@JLMelenchon) October 18, 2020
"There is clearly a problem with the Chechen community in France. Chechens who have a political islamist activity on social media need to be found and expulsed."
When even the 'leader' of the 'Left' completely agrees with the notion that These People Do Not Belong Here...
He's not an exception either, not in France, nor in its neighbouring countries.
chickeon posted:how can it be novel when it was already a massive presence during the interwar period. Re-emergence at best imo
yeah that goes without saying i just mean that there's no real direct lineage from that era so this particular form is relatively novel. i don't mean to imply that there's never been ideologically conscious fascist organisation in the united $nakes lol
https://mronline.org/2018/07/18/anti-imperialist-comeback-an-interview-with-torkil-lauesen/
A 1983 book published by a Marxist group you belonged to included a chapter with the title “What Can Communists in the Imperialist Countries Do?”. What’s your answer today?
We are a minority, but an important minority. The priority must be to support antiimperialist forces in the Global South; forces that have a radical anticapitalist profile and a popular base. These can be revolutionary political organizations, labor movements, or the remnants of the national liberation struggles in Palestine, Kurdistan, Western Sahara, and elsewhere. We must support these forces materially, practically, and politically. Solidarity means action and must be concrete. But it must also include analysis and the development of strategy.
Another important aspect is to make the imperialist hinterland less safe. We must oppose political and military interventions in the Global South. We must also fight racism and demand citizenship for refugees and migrants. We must support the free movement of people across borders. Solidarity is not based on citizenship but on class.
Finally, we need to develop viable forms of organization, practical skills, knowledge, and tactics for the struggles that lie ahead. We must think strategically: this means to think several years ahead, not just until the next election. This implies, of course, that we must be prepared for the repression we will face by an increasingly authoritarian state.
What role does the state play in the coming struggles?
Antiimperialist politics cannot be advanced without engaging with the state in some way. The state defines the political reality we live in. But seizing state power should not be the focus of our activities. Socialism in one country is impossible. The nation state is the champion of the political right, which ties in with its nationalist, racist, and chauvinist orientation.
It is also wrong to portray the welfare state as a bulwark against capitalism. The European welfare state cannot exist without imperialism; anyone who believes so denies the realities of the global accumulation of capital. What, for example, would an independent economy of a country in the Global North look like? Who would produce all the things that people have become dependent on? How many people in the Global North are still involved in industrial production? Most work in the service industry, in design, in advertising–in jobs that are dependent on other people producing what they consume.
There is nothing wrong with welfare. The problem is that the capitalist welfare state rests on imperialism, and that a global capitalist welfare state is impossible. Welfare for all requires a fundamental change of the system.
imo it does not. probably at one point it did, but that was under the conditions when class consciousness at all levels of society was much higher and when the mechanisms of global exploitation were much simpler and more legible. in the current moment, it seems to me labor aristocrats usually identify the mechanisms of imperialism which ultimately give them material benefit to be inexplicable waste (see, e.g., Donald Trump and his supporters insistence that US client states pay us for the "protection" provided by US military bases, which is mirrored on the soc-dem left by a desire to exploit a peace dividend for their own purposes).
so long as the bourgeois remains in charge this is irrelevant, as it is obviously very easy for support for imperialist projects to be ginned up on pretextual reasons, but if the labor aristocracy were ever to actually obtain power (leaving aside the question of how likely this is (NOT VERY!)) I find it very difficult to see it enacting any form of social fascism to maintain a form of imperialism whose methods are understood by, at the high end, perhaps one in a thousand people
but then i am limited in my analysis by the fact that i don't really enderstand how the fuckin things work either! so i offer these questions in complete good faith and openness to being corrected
thirdplace posted:I find it very difficult to see it enacting any form of social fascism to maintain a form of imperialism whose methods are understood by, at the high end, perhaps one in a thousand people
unless the idea is simply that it would not, that the imperial economy would therefore collapse, and that the state would subsequently be taken over by a different and explicitly fascist coalition?
thirdplace posted:e.g., Donald Trump and his supporters insistence that US client states pay us for the "protection" provided by US military bases, which is mirrored on the soc-dem left by a desire to exploit a peace dividend for their own purposes
The politics of the League did not support national liberation; they were not anti-capitalist or even anti-racist. The heart of their movement was the appeal of a false past, of the picture of Amerika as an insular European society, of an economy based on settlers production, in small farms and workshops. They feared the new imperialist world of giant industrial trusts and banks, of international production where the labor of oppressed workers in far-flung colonies would give monopoly capital a financial whip over the common settler craftsman and farmer. They believed, incorrectly, that the settler economy could be sustained without continuing Amerika's history of conquest and annexation.
-Settlers
I think strictly speaking, the US labor aristocracy isn't the same as a European labor aristocracy because of its settler origin. So, class consciousness among labor aristocrats here are divided between an urban multicultural liberal aristocracy who are pretty explicitly interested in a cosmopolitan empire that bombs "dictators" and a more or less non-urban settler labor aristocracy that want to "get while the gettin's good", and range from fullblown fascism to skeptical or even "anti-imperialist" depending on what period we're talking about. Compare say 2003 to Obama's interventions. Don't believe the "Iraq was a mistake" line from settlers, the difference between then and now is that the countries Amerika is targeting today can sink a carrier or two and leave 10k+ casualties in a war if it came to it. If whatever the equivalent is of thecollapse of the USSR and the subsequent vacuum happened again, I think the mood for invading 3 countries in 10 years would happen again for sure.
labor aristocrats usually identify the mechanisms of imperialism which ultimately give them material benefit to be inexplicable waste
Although the immediate post 9/11 period to me seems to contradict this, I've wondered before whether perhaps the most "conscious" settlers in Amerika today are the conspiracy theorists who see any government action as a move towards a global socialist state. They see the centralization of capital into trusts and cartels and central banks as socialism, as it's really the conditions upon which socialism will be built. They just confuse the antecedent and the consequent, because of their settler conditions.
Edited by solidar ()
Another important aspect is to make the imperialist hinterland less safe. We must oppose political and military interventions in the Global South. We must also fight racism and demand citizenship for refugees and migrants. We must support the free movement of people across borders. Solidarity is not based on citizenship but on class.
by "imperialist hinterland" do you think he means internal zones of weak state power in the core, or is he just talking about the periphery?
Edited by neckwattle ()
neckwattle posted:Another important aspect is to make the imperialist hinterland less safe. We must oppose political and military interventions in the Global South. We must also fight racism and demand citizenship for refugees and migrants. We must support the free movement of people across borders. Solidarity is not based on citizenship but on class.
by "imperialist hinterland" do you think he means internal zones of weak state power in the core, or is he just talking about the periphery?
My understanding is that he's talking about not only areas of weak state power in the imperial core, but nationally oppressed populations and other groups that are marginalized.
@thirdplace this is something that Zak Cope covers pretty extensively in Divided World Divided Class, he uses Britain, the US, Germany, etc to show how the labor aristocracy does have a class consciousness but it has evolved considerably over time. One of the best points that he makes is about the transition of racism from mercantilist capitalism to today's neoliberal imperialist capitalism and how it evolves beyond strictly racial bounds to become a cultural racism, we have to bomb people because they are too uncivilized to become part of the neoliberal world order, a "racism without races". The expression of class consciousness has changed dramatically because the material relationships have changed dramatically, even over the past 50 years, especially with the shift of productive forces from the core to the periphery.
Edited by pogfan1996 ()
solidar posted:dimashq posted:although the immediate post 9/11 period to me seems to contradict this, I've wondered before whether perhaps the most "conscious" settlers in Amerika today are the conspiracy theorists who see any government action as a move towards a global socialist state. They see the centralization of capital into trusts and cartels and central banks as socialism, as it's really the conditions upon which socialism will be built. They just confuse the antecedent and the consequent, because of their settler conditions.
this is an interesting point that seems to hold some truth. i think it ties in with the thinking that conspiracy theories/the conspiracy community has become (was made into?) a catch-all counter-culture, individualist trap that offers a lot of the same things that class consciousness/marxism might offer but is less challenging to a positive self-image and asks less from it's followers
i think it arises from a recognition that a more centralized capitalism is probably more likely to downsize the labor aristocracy
https://anti-imperialism.org/2016/06/28/class-struggle-in-the-parasite-states/
In the next decades I think we will see the development of a more and more polarized labor market in the “North” between the parts of the workforce capable of placing themselves in attractive positions in the global division of labor, and that part of the working class which must compete against the proletariat in the “South”.
The latter part of the working class will not passively accept this development. Naturally, in the years to come, we will see contradictions between this part of the working class in the “North” and capital intensify. The structural crisis of capitalism will sharpen this conflict. To keep up the rate of profit, capital must put pressure on labor everywhere, “North” and “South”.
In its struggle against capital, the working class in the “North” finds itself in a complex situation: On the one hand, neoliberalism is dismantling the welfare state that the working class had built up through the 20th century. On the other hand, this neoliberalism is a precondition for globalized production, which undergirds the rate of profit, and thereby capital’s ability to pay a high wage rate for the necessary work in the “North”, and thus the taxes, which allow for the maintenance of the welfare state.
The labor aristocracy finds itself in a double position in relation to capital. At the global level, the working class in “North” thus benefits from the way global capitalism functions. But to cash this advantage, the working class must engage in class struggle against capital at the national level. The labor aristocracy wishes to preserve capitalism, but in a form that continues to ensure them a privileged position. This is becoming more and more difficult.
To handle this difficult and schizophrenic position, the labor aristocracy has largely abandoned the identity of a working class and instead adopted an identity as citizens of a privileged nation. Politically, this is reflected in a movement away from social democratic and revisionist parties towards right wing national populist parties. This does not at all end the conflict with neoliberalism — on the contrary! Right wing nationalism is as much a drag on global capital as the old social democracy. It is important to understand the complexity and contradictions that the shared power between capital and labor produces in terms of strategies of both the contending classes.
pogfan1996 posted:To handle this difficult and schizophrenic position, the labor aristocracy has largely abandoned the identity of a working class and instead adopted an identity as citizens of a privileged nation. Politically, this is reflected in a movement away from social democratic and revisionist parties towards right wing national populist parties.
How long can this last? the labour aristocracy is disintegrating into a proletariat and even a lumpenproletariat. In many places in the privileged nations we can find neighbourhoods where the children are malnourished and people line up at churches for food parcels. This is a situation that grows bigger daily, it almost didn't exist 15 years ago but is now a large scale phenomenon. when the official politics of these nations is that economics has nothing to do with it, those people are just lazy and living luxuriously off handouts and should get a job, etc, i dont think they're particularly invested in thinking of themselves as privileged first worlders.
Maybe we should give organizing them a go. it would be a new and bold step for say, the british left, which has stuck to meaningless demos for the past 30 years.
I think I agree with Pogfan about the role of the communists in the core, but it doesn't have to be done with a vision of losing as slowly as possible. The victory of the colonized people of the periphery will be a victory for the communists in the core just the same.
Horselord posted:thats called internationalism and we all think its good
yeah I know we all agree on it that's why we should try to include it in a discussion of how to organize in the imperial core and why I brought it up in this thread lol
colddays posted:Horselord posted:thats called internationalism and we all think its good
yeah I know we all agree on it that's why we should try to include it in a discussion of how to organize in the imperial core and why I brought it up in this thread lol
I haven't read it yet, but Turning Money Into Rebellion is probably up your alley
There is one, and only one, kind of real internationalism, and that is—working whole-heartedly for the development of the revolutionary movement and the revolutionary struggle in one’s owncountry, and supporting (by propaganda, sympathy, and material aid) this struggle, this, and only this, line, in everycountry without exception.
Not sure this is really on track with the discussion but just my thoughts anyway, thought I'd say it cause I think it's a line of thinking a lot of people I come across have.
Everyone can see 1933 coming, France in particular is well on its way. In the early days of the Nazi occupation it were often jews who organized the earliest and most effective resistance cells. This is not the time to try and elect Hindenburg to save Weimar, it is time to organize so we aren't crushed as easily and comprehensively as the KPD and the German jews were.
state infiltration into the left is different, they're picking out the strongest and most dedicated people to leave the movement headless. they were able to cripple the CPUSA without turning fascist, it was explicitly done under a bourgeois democratic power structure by imprisoning the top people and using their rank and file spies to sow confusion.
pogfan1996 posted:the state infiltration of the far right in the us is actually making the right wing stronger. the cops are like wolves picking out the dumbest and slowest members of the group to create a lean gladio that knows to attack marginalized communities and leftists, not the state. all the stories that you hear of right wing terror plots are about weeding the dumbest motherfuckers out of the group who are just a drag on creating an effective fascist paramilitary.
state infiltration into the left is different, they're picking out the strongest and most dedicated people to leave the movement headless. they were able to cripple the CPUSA without turning fascist, it was explicitly done under a bourgeois democratic power structure by imprisoning the top people and using their rank and file spies to sow confusion.
topical link:
https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2019/jul/01/fbi-stormfront-missing-records/
One of the most interesting differences between revolutionaries in the imperialist core and the periphery is the relationship that the individual activists with identity, actions, and community. Within the core, activism is a method of self-expression and assertion of identity in reaction to the debilitating destruction of community.
https://rhizzone.net/forum/topic/1169
The Black Bloc is the Tactic of Radicalized White Youth
Ultimately however I do not believe that the black blacks tactic is revolutionary in any kind of serious manner. Firstly, the whole Black Bloc phenomenon is an overwhelmingly white petty bourgeois and labour aristocratic phenomena. Further, to borrow what Chairman Fred Hampton had to say about the WUO’s Days of Rage, the Black Bloc tactic is overwhelmingly individualistic, anarchistic (in the sense of chaos) and opportunistic. More often than not it is the adventuristic street fighting of radicalized white youth. Their willingness to fight in the streets belies a serious revolutionary analysis, especially on the topic of revolutionary organization and tactics.
Yes there are colonized proletarians who take part. I am certainly not saying that it is an exclusively white “left” phenomena, just that in my experience, in North America, it is overwhelmingly so. However, personal anecdotes of the occasional colonized participant aside, it’s been the case since as far back as Seattle that colonized radicals have questioned the rather pale faces behind the black bandanas and ski masks. It’s also incredibly telling that no apologist of the Black Bloc has ever attempted a defence against this critique beyond anecdotal stories of “well this one time I saw some Indians and an African at one Black Bloc!”
In this sense the defence of the Black Bloc on these grounds is eerily similar to the defence by white feminism of the recent flash-in-the-pan SlutWalk movement’s whiteness and uninterpreted white privilege against the rather blistering critique by author’s like Ernesto Aguilar of People of Colour Organize! Many a time in those back and forths the response of SlutWalk apologists was to show pictures of the SlutWalk in Vancoucer, or San Francisco etc and say “see, there are some of you coloured folk in there!”
Regardless, though, on the question of colonized proletarian participation, a few good apples in amongst the rot doesn’t change the overall nature of the phenomenon.
According to Thompson though, in order to regain their humanity the white petty bourgeoisie and labour aristocracy must act out on its rage and pass through redemptive violence – the Black Bloc being one particular manifestation. This idea, that through adventuristic violence petty bourgeois and labour aristocratic whites can be redeemed, is just pure white “left” romanticism.
The petty bourgeoisie is often radicalized – not withstanding what its complexion is. To see a petty bourgeois force in motion demanding revolution is not necessarily the same thing as seeing a revolutionary force in motion. The petty bourgeoisie is radicalized precisely because of the contradictions of imperialism. Precisely because of the contradictions of capitalism. Precisely because as a class force it is a dying force, and often the contradictions of imperialism accelerate its disintegration. Its impending death is something that comes to its notice and it is then thrust into motion.
In a society where all aspects of identity are in the process of being turned into a commodity, the riot is a tool to reclaim a non-commodified identity based on actions. This is one of the reasons you see such a debilitating lack of cohesion within the labor aristocratic left, the overall majority are looking to shape how others perceive them. This is heightened with the effects of social media, as perception and brand management is taught through chasing dopamine rewards.
Revolutionary movements do not work when identity is reclaimed through actions, consumer purchases, or any other individualization. All successful revolutionary movements have a community-based identity, where people's individual thoughts, feelings, actions, and goals are part of something bigger.
Our society won't become liberated through individual, fleeting moments of flouting state power, it comes from a determined, long-term strategy to consistently weaken the position of the imperialist core and strengthen the peripheral liberation movements. Replacing the false commodified and individualized identity with community identity could be one of the most impactful strategic projects within the imperialist core.
Sorry, reading that thread was frustrating and cathartic. Unfortunately those negative associations still linger with this place which is probably why I don't post that much anymore though I'm glad you still do pogfan1996.
