#6081
[account deactivated]
#6082
fretttttttttttttttttttttt me
#6083
Unpinning readsettlers.org was a Mistake and swampman paid for it with his Life (aka moderatorship)
#6084
[account deactivated]
#6085
the settler lens is so valuable to our understanding. but even without that, like, can you imagine a US socialist revolution that never addressed the land question? it would fail to transition from mass land ownership to free rent and public space. there's a lot of ideological groundwork to lay, probably starting by undermining the whites' claim to the land.
#6086
[account deactivated]
#6087
I don't even own a T... house
#6088
edit: nm, not worth it

Edited by toyot ()

#6089
if i own, i am responsible for settlers, if i rent, i am responsible for that one really liberal musical about aids
#6090
just summing up:
learn the history of the land you're on. the specific zip code. US small-town land history contains the transition from communal living, to race war, to settler homesteading, to commodification, to bank ownership. what i found was disgusting. it is important we understand and center the land commodification in our analysis, in order to change the racist US relationship to the land and liberate the rez, ghettos, barrios, and if you're white too, liberate ourselves from the nightmare nation we were born into.

Edited by toyot ()

#6091

Edited by parabolart ()

#6092
eh?
#6093
settlerists choosing to give their money to a nazi landlord instead of a nazi bank is just an aesthetic consumer decision afforded by being a settler in the first place i think.
#6094
the experience of property ownership, getting to call the cops to evict tenants, profit from a deed of land won in war, is a consumer decision like being a tenant. crazy marxist analysis but what the fuck ever.
#6095
ok so i dreamed that i ordered a crate (24 jars) of dolmio pasta sauce to be delivered to my basement flat direct from the manurfacturer and when i returned home an articulated lorry had wedged itself down the stairs to the flat including squeezing round some bends and now it was stuck. fortunatly at least there there was a ten gallon drum of dolmio pasta sauce sat on the kitchen surface next to the sink. whatchall talking about
#6096

toyotathon posted:

the experience of property ownership, getting to call the cops to evict tenants, profit from a deed of land won in war, is a consumer decision like being a tenant. crazy marxist analysis but what the fuck ever.


thinking that you can ameliorate your relationship toward white settlerist labour aristocracy by virtue of where you invest your money is a much zanier marxist analysis.

#6097
'yeah i found out i was wearing anne frank's bracelet, but it's so pretty, right? and it's not like if i take it off it'll bring her limp body back'

love hearing the endless white excuses for why they should own this land, 'it's just a consumer decision' is a new one to me though
#6098

toyotathon posted:

the experience of property ownership, getting to call the cops to evict tenants, profit from a deed of land won in war, is a consumer decision like being a tenant. crazy marxist analysis but what the fuck ever.


i thought the discussion was about being a person who rents vs being a person who owns their own house and lives in it, so isn't a landlord in the sense of collecting rent from other tenants or evicting them or what have you.

#6099
i don't see how you could possibly argue that funnelling money into the parasitic rentier class makes you any less culpable than any of the alternatives. most people are forced into that relationship by necessity but if you're actively making that decision you shouldn't pretend there is any particular virtue in doing so

Arguing that settlers can somehow undermine settlerism by giving their money to arch-settlerists, instead of actually leaving colonised lands or taking up arms to destroy them or whatever, is whitewashing and neutering the critique of settlerism not enforcing it
#6100
also it's bizarre to see identifying something as a consumer decision as some kind of defence. do you think anyone here sees consumer decisions as being innocuous? the point of reducing this difference to a consumer decision is that neither one meaningfully challenges property relations or capital flows. the difference is purely symbolic. if anything the profit margins captured by landlords makes the arrangement even more disastrous in terms of intensifying the housing question
#6101
as opposed to getting a 30-year mortgage and paying sticker twice, once as principal and once as interest to the imperial banks.

the point isn't to live under a mortgage or live under rent, the point is socialism. the path to socialism in america is via oppressed nations, who've made clear during the AIM occupations, New Afrika, and chicano/aztlan movement that their goal is land. refusing to own the land isn't neutering shit, it's centering their critique, the land is the source of white wealth and white oppression. now i'm going to other whites and telling them they also shouldn't own the land. in my experience what gets through their racist heads is the local history lesson about the land transition that they never learned in school. it's one thing to go "all the indians got killed" and it's another to know your local land history and be able to say "this band of 30 settlers banged on mexican general redacted's door to demand land, they went northeast where {well-known local family} enslaved 50, and dissatisfied with their work ethic, raped the women and killed every child. they were killed in revenge, an act met by the US army and the local militia setting fire to their village and winter food". tell them the true story where their wealthy neighbors are the enemy.

i'm cognizant that alone, this will threaten white dominance as much as vegetarianism threatens factory farming. the point is to draw a political line between the owners and non-owners and connect their profits to the US history of genocide, and lay ideological groundwork for a socialist change in our relationship to the land.

i don't care for socialist-defeatists and i don't care to defend this anymore, it's an obvious moral case and it's gross to hear supposed communists whine that the cause is helpless. if you have a better suggestion on undoing settlerism you can make it.

Edited by toyot ()

#6102

toyotathon posted:

refusing to own the land isn't neutering shit, it's centering their critique


it absolutely is neutering their critique if you are positing the defensible and justified alternative as continuing to occupy said land but doing so through a landlord who profits from their misery to exactly the same degree if not more

there is nothing socialist-defeatist about this, precisely because there is nothing socialist about deciding to sustain the livelihood of one rentier class over another

Edited by blinkandwheeze ()

#6103
i said in my post you were welcome to make better suggestions, i should make clear that i read your ideas for "taking up arms" and "just leaving"
#6104
you can read literally any of the anti-imperialist theorists you appeal to in order to find a starting point, none of which ever argue the moral virtues of renting an apartment on stolen land
#6105
would love to hear how you imagine "just leave" would shake out. leave to what land?

and taking up arms prematurely, before doing the ideological work, has been tried in the US. did not go well!

are you actually trying any of your suggestions, getting traction through other lines?

Edited by toyot ()

#6106
a mass exodus to the british isles is likely not feasible but at the very least it actually makes you less of a settler, in contrast to the delusional idea that you can somehow become less of one despite continuing to live on and profit off stolen land simply because you don't have your name on a deed
#6107
that delusional idea that there is a difference between property owners and non-owners, yes,
#6108
in terms of complicity with the material reproduction of settlerist white supremacy, what difference actually is there besides the purely symbolic? in what sense does someone who is in the position of being able to own property obstruct these mechanisms by choosing to fund a landlord's coke habit instead? the petit-bourgeois barons of new industry are overwhelmingly renting property in urban centres, do you think the families being pushed out of cities like oakland are glad that the new occupants of their homes decided to challenge white supremacy by living closer to work?
#6109
like, every attack on settlerdom in the US has had symbolic value. primarily. no idea what tradition of resistance you're calling from. how did AIM taking alcatraz challenge the material reproduction of white supremacy? it's not like there's food growing there. the republic of New Afrika primarily had symbolic value -- 150 some-odd people acting out a new nation.

we're living in a present where the FBI took those symbols challenging white supremacy extremely seriously and unfortunately destroyed them. history doesn't play out as a slow grinding of material gears torqued by classes and nations one way or another, at least not all the time. sometimes the gears turn in rapid motions from victories in the political struggle, harder than anyone expected looking at the ledger. so like i said, if you have better suggestions than symbolically challenging the material core of white supremacy, the land, then what are you waiting for?

Edited by toyot ()

#6110
i'm trying to figure out: what exactly are you trying to convince me of? that i'm wasting my time? do you really believe that? that i should stop talking to people about their local land history? do you want us all to think you're really smart? why are you even arguing against a small, overdue white challenge to settlerism?
#6111
Yes prisons have no role in the material reproduction of white supremacy my dude. i'm arguing with you because i think you are a lunatic for believing that you are challenging white supremacy by choosing to live in apartment.
#6112
personally i think there's good reasons to rent rather than own a house but it has nothing to do with settlerism.

i didn't read the last page of this thread btw
#6113

blinkandwheeze posted:

Yes prisons have no role in the material reproduction of white supremacy my dude. i'm arguing with you because i think you are a lunatic for believing that you are challenging white supremacy by choosing to live in apartment.



alcatraz prison had been closed for almost a decade before the occupation and by 1972 had no material role in reproducing white supremacy, just symbolic, my dude

#6114
*eyes glaze over* well if i get the opportunity to get a mortgage and buy a modest home for my family and the modicum of stability that comes with that, i will, and when the revolution comes i will still welcome it.
#6115

toyotathon posted:

alcatraz prison had been closed for almost a decade before the occupation and by 1972 had no material role in reproducing white supremacy, just symbolic, my dude



unless you're a particularly famous person or are part of a wider political movement im not sure that your personal choice in renting or not renting is going to have much symbolic impact, certainly not in the same way that a lot of people occupying a prison(closed or not) would.

#6116
i think if your symbolic gesture could be easily confused for the decision of someone wanting to shorten their commute & live closer to their cities nightlife then it's probably a useless one
#6117
blinkandwheeze you're confused about the call for US decolonization from your dual suggestions of leaving and buying guns. dunno who you're reading but the call isn't for whites to go home, it's to get rid of the shitty capitalist-imperialist system they imported and to change their relationship to the land. it means decommodification and living (depending on who's suggesting it) in socialism or indigineity. lots of whites treating their land gift like a mouse's head from the cat on your doorstep may mean a bunch more people renting or it may mean they are demanding and thinking about a different relationship to the land.
#6118
i don't know why you think i'm confused about this. taking up arms was an obvious shorthand for revolutionary struggle. i know nobody is legitimately calling for mass expulsion of whites, i am just pointing out that refusing to occupy colonised land is the only possible way you can undermine your character as a settler, renting your home does absolutely nothing to change it
#6119
again, no, settler isn't a thing you are, it's a relationship of simultaneous genocide and land commodification for the profit of the invader-owners. refusing to occupy colonized land isn't the only or even most realistic way to end settlerization, you can undermine the private property system it spawned by propagandizing against land ownership. to avoid the charge of hypocrisy, it is useful to be a renter while fighting land ownership, but that's the extent of it.

Edited by toyot ()

#6120
I should have been writing much more posts against land ownership if that's all that was necessary to hand in my settler card