Urbandale posted:urban areas would need to be ruled multinationally.
Hell, personally, I'm an internationalist, not a multinationalist.
EmanuelaBrolandi posted:Addressing whiteness isn't the same as identity politics imo. Or at least shouldn't be dismissed as such
Didn't mean to imply that. What I would say is that the 70s were full of trash analysis along primarily identity lines. There's an old story about the SLA driving around the bay area looking for a black homeless man to lead em cuz the theory was vulgarized BPP essentially
Urbandale posted:marimite posted:So basically, you believe that what J. Sakai argues is objectively true but you can't say it publicly. And it's all because you care so much about national self-determination. Sounds like narcissism~
The humor in the video isn't in calling black cops white supremacists. It's in a white guy saying the words. Why is a white guy saying it funny? Because he's not "letting" the cops have their opinions? No, BECAUSE HE IS NOT CREDIBLE IN THE SLIGHTEST.so the speaker isnt credible because hes white, than you go on to wonder why maoist groupings in the NCM failed. maybe identity uber alles isnt good socialist politics?
The thing is though, what you're arguing for and what Sakai argues for are identity politics. It's not liberal identity politics, but it is identity politics. Nations have a class character, and Euro-Amerikans, collectively, have petite bourgeois, or "settler" consciousness. This in itself isn't so bad I think, but then Sakai basically rejects cooperation with the petite bourgeoisie. This is very extreme, and is a deviation from both Lenin and Mao. And so out of this you get all sorts of problems that are right at the center of the failure you're speaking of.
But clearly the problems Sakai talks about are there, and there is a long history of failure in cooperation with the petite bourgeoisie so that has to be examined. There's still a lot of studying I need to do, but one of the big problems in my mind is white people not organizing among themselves. They see this theory and immediately imagine themselves leading the colored masses. It's fucking crazy and it looks crazy. As Euro-Amerikans it's our duty to go to OUR people and make the conditions for wider cooperation. Anything else is narcissism in my view.
marimite posted:They see this theory and immediately imagine themselves leading the colored masses.
what idea? something contained in sakai? wot?
EmanuelaBrolandi posted:marimite posted:They see this theory and immediately imagine themselves leading the colored masses.
what idea? something contained in sakai? wot?
Sakai's theory, particularly the aspects I mentioned literally just before that.
Urbandale posted:are you arguing that the focus on a multinational working class party is the result of settler consciousness?
It can be. A multinational working class party should be the goal I think, but that depends on whether Euro-Amerikans can apply the logic to themselves. It's not just something that can be assumed.
Bablu posted:sakai's book is primarily addressed to working people of colour imo. dun really care what white people do with it, even if they're the ones reading it a lot in 2016
Personally I think Settlers has been more informative for me than just about anything else I've read on the topic. and im a white labour aristocrat
EmanuelaBrolandi posted:but now you imagine yourself leading the coloured masses huh?
not so much, because i dont know any coloured masses. I imagine myself living as mad max, in the world of mad max. which is easy because i can see it outside my window already
Overall I think that after reading the core argument of white parasitism is proved again and again within the book, as well as sufficiently cited.
There were a couple of instances were Sakai made claims that were probably 100% true but lacked citation for further reading. On page 167 (4th edition) he relies on testimony from a Eugene Seward to claim that factory owners abducted blacks in 1919 to scab for white steelworkers in 1919. Knowing the history of the USA this is very likely, however there is no citation. But this is mostly negligible for the main argument.
Anyway it was a great read. Its cool that, back in the 80s, he predicted the mass of unproductive white millenials that are floating around now.
marimite posted:one of the big problems in my mind is white people not organizing among themselves. They see this theory and immediately imagine themselves leading the colored masses. It's fucking crazy and it looks crazy. As Euro-Amerikans it's our duty to go to OUR people and make the conditions for wider cooperation. Anything else is narcissism in my view.
i strongly disagree. sure, a lot of whites are dumb enough to read settlers and have savior fantasies, but the answer isn't to bang your head against the wall of white stupidity and narcissism hoping for a breakthrough.
http://www.indigenousaction.org/accomplices-not-allies-abolishing-the-ally-industrial-complex/
Suggestions for some ways forward for anti-colonial accomplices:
Allyship is the corruption of radical spirit and imagination, it’s the dead end of decolonization.
The ally establishment co-opts decolonization as a banner to fly at its unending anti-oppression gala. What is not understood is that decolonization is a threat to the very existence of settler “allies.” No matter how liberated you are, if you are still occupying Indigenous lands you are still a colonizer.
Decolonization (the process of restoring Indigenous identity) can be very personal and should be differentiated, though not disconnected, from anti-colonial struggle.
The work of an accomplice in anti-colonial struggle is to attack colonial structures & ideas.
The starting point is to articulate your relationship to Indigenous Peoples whose lands you are occupying. This is beyond acknowledgment or recognition. This can be particularly challenging for “non-federally recognized” Indigenous Peoples as they are invisiblized by the state and by the invaders occupying their homelands.
It may take time to establish lines of communication especially as some folks may have already been burnt by outsiders. If you do not know where or how to contact folks, do some ground work, research (but don’t rely on anthropological sources, they are euro-centric), and pay attention. Try to more listening than speaking and planning.
In long-term struggles communication may be ruptured between various factions, there are no easy ways to address this. Don’t try to work the situation out, but communicate openly with consideration of the points below.
Sometimes other Indigenous Peoples are “guests” on other’s homelands yet are tokenized as the Indigenous representatives for the “local struggles”. This dynamic also perpetuates settler colonialism. A lot of people also assume Indigenous folks are all on the same page “politically,” we’re definitely not.
While there may be times folks have the capacity and patience to do so, be aware of the dynamics perpetuated by hand-holding.
Understand that it is not our responsibility to hold your hand through a process to be an accomplice.
Accomplices listen with respect for the range of cultural practices and dynamics that exists within various Indigenous communities.
Accomplices aren’t motivated by personal guilt or shame, they may have their own agenda but they are explicit.
Accomplices are realized through mutual consent and build trust. They don’t just have our backs, they are at our side, or in their own spaces confronting and unsettling colonialism. As accomplices we are compelled to become accountable and responsible to each other, that is the nature of trust.
Don’t wait around for anyone to proclaim you to be an accomplice, you certainly cannot proclaim it yourself. You just are or you are not. The lines of oppression are already drawn. Direct action is really the best and may be the only way to learn what it is to be an accomplice. We’re in a fight, so be ready for confrontation and consequence.
If you are wondering whether to get involved with or to support an organization:
Be suspect of anyone and any organization who professes allyship, decolonization work, and/or wears their relationships with Indigenous Peoples as at badge.
Use some of the points above to determine primary motives.
Look at the organizations funding. Who is getting paid? How are they transparent? Who’s defining the terms? Who sets the agenda? Do campaigns align with what the needs are on the ground?
Are there local grassroots Indigenous People directly involved with the decision making?
I agree with that premise (not sure if it's marimites) in as much as any kracker intellectual can seize on a 'revolutionary' ideology of any sort as a backhanded way to reinforce white supremacy. This, I think is demonstrated in Settlers itself w/r/t the CPUSA in the 50's, etc... It's also the reason why I don't think white people organizing 'amongst themselves' will be or has been a solution to much. White on white organization more often than not manifests itself in a manner which is more like how fascist paramilitaries assumed the tactics of the Communists for their own purposes, often serving to protect and extend existing 'privilege' rather than fighting for 'rights.'
Actually attaining a broad proletarian organization requires awareness by whites and nonwhites of the basic sort of facts and contradictions represented in Settlers tho imo.
Edited by drwhat ()
if you want the hate amerikkka beat a bit more downtempo. you just got home, smoked some weed, you just want to hate amerikkka and chill. we got you covered too.
Edited by drwhat ()
Edited by drwhat ()
"Guilt is also a primary ally motivating factor. Even if never admitted, guilt & shame generally function as motivators in the consciousness of an oppressor who realizes that they are operating on the wrong side. While guilt and shame are very powerful emotions, think about what you’re doing before you make another community’s struggle into your therapy session. Of course, acts of resistance and liberation can be healing, but tackling guilt, shame, and other trauma require a much different focus, or at least an explicit and consensual focus. What kind of relationships are built on guilt and shame?"
People involved in real struggles don't necessarily have time or the resources to give white people therapy. And if they did make time to help us heal our minds, the basis of that is "explicit and consensual". That is, there needs to be independent effort on the part of white people. Obviously, to understand ourselves and take responsibility for who we are we need to listen to and study what colored people tell us. Something that particularly annoys me is when we take W.E.B. Dubois, Kwame Nkrumah, and Franz Fanon as just representatives of their people or the movement against colonization. Certainly they are these, but what is most important is that they speak the truth. They provide practical and creative explanations for how society works and by extension, who we are. And respectfully taking part in direct action is certainly one way people can learn. But this too requires independent effort.
If we need to make independent effort as individuals, then we need to make independent effort as a collective. Our minds our inexorably caught up in our relationships. If we want to take up de-colonization, we will inevitably come into conflict with our family and our peers and we will need to cope with this. And if we want to reconcile with our family and our peers, we will need to help them cope also. Colored people can provide us tools to help us, but they cannot lead us the whole way. And if we can't make explicit how we wish to liberate ourselves how can anyone trust us?
To take up quietism while waiting for some social movement to give you marching orders is evil.
White on white organizing has failed up to this point. But if you are white you literally have no alternative. Because you're white. You can't stop being white.
When posting in this thread, something that has particularly come to mind is MIM, who frequently named Sakai as a source for their positions. MIM literally started at Harvard. They wrote brilliant theory, but imagine if they acknowledged where they came from and made the necessary sacrifices.
