• @SaddamHussein24
    link
    -62 years ago

    Those “poor proles” are dead, from centuries ago. Their descendants have not evicted anyone, they are just trying to survive amid the low wages, inflation, police state and opioid overdoses, just like nonwhite workers are. Race is a social construct used, first to justify colonialism and the profits it gave to the bourgeoisie, and in the modern era is used to divide the working class and pit them against each other. When white workers go on strike, what do you do as bourgeois? You hire nonwhite workers who are more desperate and resent their white peers due to them being racist.

    But when white workers realize that racism only serves the bourgeois through the mentioned mechanism, they stop being racist. And when nonwhite workers see that white workers arent racist anymore and are fighting for them too, they will fight for them too and not work like scabs anymore. Thats the strategy CPUSA used in the 1930s and it worked. United the working class is strong, divided its weak. Racism only divides, racism only serves the bourgeoisie, it doesnt serve white workers.

    According to Wikipedia, whites are 60% of US population. If you say whites are all bourgeois settlers and cant be proletarian or revolutionary, you are literally saying that there cannot be a revolution in USA unless you kill or deport whites until they become a minority, which is a ridiculous ultraleft message. All workers have same interest, whatever benefit white workers might have gotten in the past from colonialism and imperialism is only a short term concession to divide the working class and strenghten the bourgeoisie, just like social democracy and imperialism in Bretton Woods era Western Europe.

    Long term, all workers have same interest, socialist revolution. The vanguard of the USAs job is to make workers see that, and unite, ditching away this ridiculous “race” idea. Like americans think “latino” is a race somehow, literally just another excuse to divide US working class and pit them against one another. Thats what the Trump people are all about, “illegal immigrants” are the problem. But instead of showing that thats bs and that all US workers have same interests, USA left says the problem are racist poor whites whose interest actually is being racist somehow and thus the solution is to cancel them. That is an unmarxist idea that wont work.

    Israel is a similar example, only rolled back in time. Israeli workers do benefit from exploiting and genociding palestinians, but this is again just a short term concession by israeli bourgeoisie to divide the working class of Israel/Palestine. The Communist Party of Israels position has always been to unify palestinian and israelis against the israeli genocidal regime, not to cancel all israeli workers as “bourgeois settlers”. Israeli and palestinian workers all have the same interests long term.

    With this in mind, the socialist patriotist position in USA would be to love all US workers and want socialism and equality for all workers, since that is their interest. Same in Israel/Palestine, one would want a united palestinian israeli state, where both languages and cultures are respected and all workers are equal, since that is their interest. It would also be important to pay reparations to victims of colonialism, to decolonize. But the mistake of people here is that such things should be paid by “settler workers”, meaning white and israeli workers. That is a ridiculous position. It was the US and israeli bourgeoisie that benefitted the most from such colonialism, so it is them that should pay it, not the workers.

    • Muad'DibberA
      link
      6
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Most indigenous eviction happened less than 200 years ago. And those people are still fighting the US government for return of land.

      they are just trying to survive amid the low wages

      So were poor proles from europe, that is not an excuse to genocide a people and steal their land.

      When white workers go on strike, what do you do as bourgeois?

      You hire them as overseers of slave plantations, or into the management layers, in a position above black, indigenous and latino workers. This strategy worked and is the cornerstone of US history. Social bribery and absorption of white workers into an oppressing labor aristocracy is thesis of both Sakai and Zinn, both of whom wrote the most popular left books on US history.

      Long term, all workers have same interest, socialist revolution.

      Also false, production has long been exported to low-wage countries, forming a global division of labor where imperial core “workers” are mostly in the service and transportation sectors, while global south proletarians are the ones actually engaged in productive labor, creating consumer products. That difference in the huge amounts of surplus value extracted from global south workers is the reason goods and so cheap in the US. US workers are entirely dependent on this arrangement, and imperialism is 100% in their interests.

      Things are not as simple as “wage work = proletarian”. US workers are more akin to the house slaves on a plantation, not producing exchange values, but only use values, living off the surplus value created by a much larger population of field slaves. The goal of the house slaves is to preserve the system, and their priviledged position; the goal of the field slaves is to burn down the plantation.

      Israeli and palestinian workers all have the same interests long term.

      Entirely false: Israeli “workers” ( we should really say civilians to be more precise ), want to keep the land their government stole from Palestine. Palestinians want the return of that land. This is a zero sum game, and those lands should be returned to their rightful owners; Israeli’s have no right to that land.

      Your response is essentially the finders keepers rule of land theft, where the existing survivors are told “tough shit”, when demanding that their land be returned to them. Interestingly I had to go through Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s crap recently, and in one of her rulings she 100% agrees with you: too much time has passed for land to be returned to its rightful owners, and the white settlers get to keep it.

      • @SaddamHussein24
        link
        -5
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        LMFAO you just said that its false that “all workers have the same interests long term, socialism”. Do you realize the implications of that? By saying that, you are saying that capitalism and imperialism is a sustainable system that will last forever, thus forever bringing benefits to the labor aristocracy ie white workers. This is “the end of history”, completely antimarxist and antidialectic, the world is not static, its constantly changing. If US white workers will always benefit from imperialism, why have living standards consistently gone down for them since Richard Nixon? It is simply impossible to keep bringing surplus value to the labor aristocracy forever, the laws of capitalism, the falling rate of profit, make it impossible. Sooner or later the bourgeoisie will start exploiting the labor aristocracy too, because just the value of the third world wont be enough to sustain capitalism due to the falling rate of profit. This is third worldism, this is maoist bs, this is not marxism wtf dude.

        Israeli workers dont want to “keep the palestinian land” unless misguided by the israeli bourgeoisie through chauvinism, but its not in their interests. This is the problem with this “settler” bs, it often fails to define the class charachter of things, just an abstract notion of “land”. Workers only want land to live on, but colonialism isnt about that, Israel isnt evicting palestinians because they wanna live in their house for some reason. The proletariat wants land to live, the bourgeoisie wants to land to exploit. Colonialism wasnt driven by an irrational drive to “settle white people”, it was driven to extract profits from the colonized territories, both in the form of natural resources and in the form of slave labor.

        Thus, for the bourgeoisie, land is capital, not just a place to live in. However, as i assume you know, by definition, workers do not own any capital, thats why they are exploited, at most they own the small house they live in (if even), but not any capital, nothing that produces wealth besides their own labor. Thus, it is the israeli bourgeoisie, by definition, that owns the palestinian land, not the israeli workers! Sure they may benefit from that now, but that is a temporary concession to divide the working class, and will not last forever due to falling rate of profit and the limits of capitalism and imperialism.

        Thus, decolonization involves abolishing private property, taking the means of production (an actual marxist term, much better than this abstract classless notion of “land”) from the colonizer bourgeoisie, and redistributing them to the workers, both colonized and “settler”, while taking into account the damages caused by colonialism on the colonized, which the colonizer bourgeoisie will repay, not the workers. It doesnt involve killing or deporting all “settler” workers. I mean seriously, even the bourgeoisie can be proletarianized, such as with petty-middle bourgeoisie during heavy economic crises, but somehow the labor aristocracy cant? Ridiculous! This is not marxism nor dialectics!

        • Muad'DibberA
          link
          4
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          “Israeli workers dont want to “keep the palestinian land”.”

          This is nonsense. Land is land, of course they want to continue living there. Ask any Israeli settler if they’re willing to give up their land for free to a Palestinian.

          LMFAO you just said that its false that “all workers have the same interests long term, socialism”.

          Baby-level understanding of class, where there are only two groups, worker and capitalist, and no gradations or levels in between. I tried to illustrate that there are, with my house vs field slave example, which you could only ignore. But here, lets listen to what Lenin says on this:

          For Lenin, superprofits derived from imperialism allow the globally predominant bourgeoisie to pay inflated wages to sections of the (international) proletariat, who thus derive a material stake in preserving the capitalist system:

          In all the civilised, advanced countries the bourgeoisie rob—either by colonial oppression or by financially extracting “gain” from formally independent weak countries—they rob a population many times larger than that of “their own” country. This is the economic factor that enables the imperialist bourgeoisie to obtain super-profits, part of which is used to bribe the top section of the proletariat and convert it into a reformist, opportunist petty bourgeoisie that fears revolution.

          If US white workers will always benefit from imperialism, why have living standards consistently gone down for them since Richard Nixon?

          OECD workers make on average 11x more PPP-adjusted than non-OECD workers according to the ILO. US living standards, while having gone down from their peak post-WW2, is still incredibly better than almost every other country. We are at a level of global inequality that is absolutely indefensible, and to deny this imperialist arrangement, or even worse, suggest that US workers get more of the pie than they already consume, shows where your allegiances lie.

          This is third worldism, this is maoist bs, this is not marxism wtf dude.

          These are convoluted and overlapping terms, but no, it is not “mlm / maoist”, to accept the current imperialist arrangement of the world into rich exploiter countries, and poor surplus-value producing ones.

          Thus, decolonization involves abolishing private property, taking the means of production (an actual marxist term, much better than this abstract classless notion of “land”) from the colonizer bourgeoisie, and redistributing them to the workers, both colonized and “settler”, while taking into account the damages caused by colonialism on the colonized, which the colonizer bourgeoisie will repay, not the workers.

          This is the very definition of class collaborationism. Why on earth should the settler troops of Israel or the US continue to be rewarded with cheap land. When we say decolonization, we mean that truly, and not in an anarchisty “abolish property rights!” way: we mean stewardship and ownership of the land need to be returned to those it was stolen from, without demanding they institute any given economic system. Its theirs to do what they want.

          Consider this a warning also: we allow some discourse around patriotism, but both you and @PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml are risking bans if you continue to say shit like: “Israeli settlers should be given land”.

          • @PolandIsAStateOfMind
            link
            0
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            if you continue to say shit like: “Israeli settlers should be given land”.

            Now this is fucking low of you, show me where did i ever said something like that.

            EDIT: And the four fuckers downvoting it too. Stop being anonymous, slanderous lumpens, show your lying faces.

            • Muad'DibberA
              link
              62 years ago

              There you continue, using this “land” unmarxist term.

              When you’re an Algerian FLN fighter trying to free your country and a french eurocommunist derides you for using the term land.

                • Muad'DibberA
                  link
                  52 years ago

                  The french population was an extremely small and rich minority (in Algeria settlers were 10% population, while in USA they are 60% and in occupied Palestine they are 70% in Israel and 30% in the West Bank, totally different situation)

                  So what you’re saying is the french just needed to kill and evict more algerians, then you’d support them? Guess what the european population was of turtle island before they colonized it? 0%, imagine that!

                  begging them independence

                  So pushing for independence and the right of self-determination is “begging” now?

                  If native or palestinian were to rise up

                  They have been, and are. They aren’t asking for the continued existence of israel, or the US like dumbshit patsocs are. They are demanding the return of stolen land, and the return of sovereignty.