Also why do you hate poor people for just existing?
How on earth did you get this from anything i’ve written?
They are at the mercy of the bourgeoisie forced to settle against their wills, that can’t be refuted.
Absolutely false, settlers aren’t kidnapped to colonize lands, they do so because of the promise of cheap or “free” land, and its in their material interests to do so.
They get little in return and naturally would want to revolt.
Why do you live so heavily on one book that proclaims anything against it settler apologia? We know barely anything about the author, why the dogmatic view?
I listed six other marxist-leninst books on the topic of settler colonialism, but yes, sakai’s analysis is extremely important and worth reading.
Muad, you say Maupin is fascist but you haven’t put any clips of him announcing fascistic remarks, and if this is true I would really like to see for my own eyes.
I never said this, but yes maupin has some absolutely dogshit takes. Here are a few of them:
Indigenous peoples polled in the US prefer the term indian above any other term ( take the american indian movement for example ). You don’t know this because you haven’t read a single thing written by any of them.
I would like to start off by thanking you for providing clips, I will respond to them when I can.
Muad, I admit that saying you hate poor people is exaggeration but you do discredit them to an extreme. I mainly wanna focus on your of definition of settling. You say, and rightfully so, that right now settlers are still settling, and the now is time I am referring to, sorry should have specified. So I ask you, where is this cheap land? I see no home ownership but of the bourgeoisie, and the dwindling middle class. But you claim all settlers are the labour aristocracy/petty bourgeois which is contrary to now! Not everyone got your cush life of the suburbs.
But let’s go back to the era of active settling you say “Absolutely false,folk tlers aren’t kidnapped to colonize lands, they do so because of the promise of cheap or “free” land, and its in their material interests to do so.”
That last part, sorta contradicts the first doesn’t it? The majority of settlers were from the lowest rungs of Britain’s social ladder, sure they weren’t “kidnapped” but they were forced between starving and poverty wages or getting land at the expense and bloodshed of the indigenous, they weren’t really in a position to make a choice. Not to mention the actual indentured servants. To ignore this class reasoning is to ignore all of history. Now when they actually started reproducing and getting accustomed to the privilege with land and genocide of the Indigenous peoples, the majority of settlers becomes of a petty bourgeois class, but still a minor proletariat. In the present day, the US settler state has grown so imperial that it has chewed away at the super wages keeping the workers in this labour aristocracy. In the beginning Britain’s proletariat where pushed to Indigenois lands, their numbers dwindled, but now the proletariat has emerged with class interests aligned with the Indigenous population, the overthrow the bourgeoisie!
Now you may be quick to say that settler and Indigenous interests are immediately clashing, but is it not similar to Western allies and the Soviet Union against Nazi Germany at worst, or the core proletariat and periphery proletariat at best?
Now when I say you hate poor people, it is due to you negating the pain and exploitation they face by ignoring their class as labours!
Now I have not seen your list of ML works could you please provide, I would be happy to look at them.
But Muad, the fact you know I was talking about “Settlers” shows just how much the book has been critiqued. Im not saying the book isn’t helpful, it is incredibly helpful and I will go so far that it is nessecary for those in the US settler state to read, but there’s lots of dogmatism following the book due to it being the most influential about the Settler state, and that dogmatism follows with the notion all settlers are petty bourgeois and benefit so much that they have no revolutionary potential. Imagine if we were all orthodox Marxists and believed there would be a synchronized over throw of the bourgeoisie!
Muad, I don’t really wanna play this game, I really don’t, it’s dehumanizing. In my life, in my town, we have a large population of Indigenous folk due to it hosting the largest Indigenous College in the state. In my experience, with these human beings who have to live through their own genocide, are deeply offended by the term Indian. Maybe the majority prefer it, sure, and if so I apologize for being nit picky. It is not for us to decide, but the ones around me treat it as a slur so I am cautioned by it, sorry for jumping the gun.
Muad my question about socialism bringing sovereignty, is one I am try to wrap my head under. If it doesn’t, are places like Kaliningrad and Tibet colonies? The book I was recommended and am reading “Decolonization is not a metaphor” states China as a communist empire? This is geniune, Muad, there seems to be some hole here that you may be able to point out, can you help please?
I am coming out to say, Muad I have no beef with you, I am just learning about movements like Land Back. And I’ll state it that everyone here wants sovereignty to the Indigenous, it’s just that this air of dogmatism is getting nowhere and the threatening purge of unlisted names will not aid in any attempted understanding and especially isn’t helping the Indigenous people. This isn’t an actual communist party it is a ML forum site, if we really wanna help the Indigenous and/or the Working Class this is not the way to do it.
Goodnight Muad, sorry things got heated I don’t want this to turn out like reddit.
How on earth did you get this from anything i’ve written?
Absolutely false, settlers aren’t kidnapped to colonize lands, they do so because of the promise of cheap or “free” land, and its in their material interests to do so.
I listed six other marxist-leninst books on the topic of settler colonialism, but yes, sakai’s analysis is extremely important and worth reading.
I never said this, but yes maupin has some absolutely dogshit takes. Here are a few of them:
Indigenous peoples polled in the US prefer the term indian above any other term ( take the american indian movement for example ). You don’t know this because you haven’t read a single thing written by any of them.
Absolute banger of a post
Holy shit I didn’t know he spent time around Dugin lmao
Removed by mod
I still don’t know why Dugin is so popular in the West, in Russia he is generally regarded as a niche,weird and overall irrelevant old dude
Yeah exactly. Western leftists think hes the new Hitler when in reality hes just some weird conservative boomer.
I would like to start off by thanking you for providing clips, I will respond to them when I can.
Muad, I admit that saying you hate poor people is exaggeration but you do discredit them to an extreme. I mainly wanna focus on your of definition of settling. You say, and rightfully so, that right now settlers are still settling, and the now is time I am referring to, sorry should have specified. So I ask you, where is this cheap land? I see no home ownership but of the bourgeoisie, and the dwindling middle class. But you claim all settlers are the labour aristocracy/petty bourgeois which is contrary to now! Not everyone got your cush life of the suburbs.
But let’s go back to the era of active settling you say “Absolutely false,folk tlers aren’t kidnapped to colonize lands, they do so because of the promise of cheap or “free” land, and its in their material interests to do so.”
That last part, sorta contradicts the first doesn’t it? The majority of settlers were from the lowest rungs of Britain’s social ladder, sure they weren’t “kidnapped” but they were forced between starving and poverty wages or getting land at the expense and bloodshed of the indigenous, they weren’t really in a position to make a choice. Not to mention the actual indentured servants. To ignore this class reasoning is to ignore all of history. Now when they actually started reproducing and getting accustomed to the privilege with land and genocide of the Indigenous peoples, the majority of settlers becomes of a petty bourgeois class, but still a minor proletariat. In the present day, the US settler state has grown so imperial that it has chewed away at the super wages keeping the workers in this labour aristocracy. In the beginning Britain’s proletariat where pushed to Indigenois lands, their numbers dwindled, but now the proletariat has emerged with class interests aligned with the Indigenous population, the overthrow the bourgeoisie!
Now you may be quick to say that settler and Indigenous interests are immediately clashing, but is it not similar to Western allies and the Soviet Union against Nazi Germany at worst, or the core proletariat and periphery proletariat at best?
Now when I say you hate poor people, it is due to you negating the pain and exploitation they face by ignoring their class as labours!
Now I have not seen your list of ML works could you please provide, I would be happy to look at them.
But Muad, the fact you know I was talking about “Settlers” shows just how much the book has been critiqued. Im not saying the book isn’t helpful, it is incredibly helpful and I will go so far that it is nessecary for those in the US settler state to read, but there’s lots of dogmatism following the book due to it being the most influential about the Settler state, and that dogmatism follows with the notion all settlers are petty bourgeois and benefit so much that they have no revolutionary potential. Imagine if we were all orthodox Marxists and believed there would be a synchronized over throw of the bourgeoisie!
Muad, I don’t really wanna play this game, I really don’t, it’s dehumanizing. In my life, in my town, we have a large population of Indigenous folk due to it hosting the largest Indigenous College in the state. In my experience, with these human beings who have to live through their own genocide, are deeply offended by the term Indian. Maybe the majority prefer it, sure, and if so I apologize for being nit picky. It is not for us to decide, but the ones around me treat it as a slur so I am cautioned by it, sorry for jumping the gun.
Muad my question about socialism bringing sovereignty, is one I am try to wrap my head under. If it doesn’t, are places like Kaliningrad and Tibet colonies? The book I was recommended and am reading “Decolonization is not a metaphor” states China as a communist empire? This is geniune, Muad, there seems to be some hole here that you may be able to point out, can you help please?
I am coming out to say, Muad I have no beef with you, I am just learning about movements like Land Back. And I’ll state it that everyone here wants sovereignty to the Indigenous, it’s just that this air of dogmatism is getting nowhere and the threatening purge of unlisted names will not aid in any attempted understanding and especially isn’t helping the Indigenous people. This isn’t an actual communist party it is a ML forum site, if we really wanna help the Indigenous and/or the Working Class this is not the way to do it.
Goodnight Muad, sorry things got heated I don’t want this to turn out like reddit.