Apologies for the late post! Jerboa still isn’t working for me, and things have made it tough to finish this first bit in time.

I read the pdf (Part One: End the Occupation), as my book is still on the way. There’s a lot that I think is good here, but some things that confused and frustrated me. I think I see where the author’s going, and mostly agree with it.

Who is the Red Nation:

This bit of the pdf covers who the authors are. They state that their areas of struggle are indigeneity, liberation, resistance, and coalition. The quote “like our hearts, our politics are down and to the left” is a little corny, but I didn’t see that sentiment show anywhere else.

They also discuss their 10-point program here. I think this program is probably a great entrypoint for a sympathetic liberal, but I found it a little frustrating. I very much think the authors are “hiding their power levels” here as they have some more liberal/reformist demands, but end with demanding an “end to capitalism-colonialism”.

What is the Red Deal:

This section lionizes AOC and the Green New Deal a bit, but I guess that makes sense if their target audience is sympathetic to that. They assert that they’re not calling for a “Red New Deal” but for the old deal to be respected, regarding treaty rights and more.

I’m confused by the section “From Theory to Action” where they talk about it being necessary to struggle for reforms, but also assert that voting is ineffective. They mention a need to fight for “non-reformist reforms”, and I don’t really understand it. It echoes the points from Gloria La Riva’s presidential run, but I don’t think I understood it there either. If reform is ineffective, why fight for it? Is it just to show the public that the capitalists won’t enact popular reforms? It feels like fighting for reforms is sort of a revolutionary dead-end, but maybe there’s more I need to learn there.

Divest: End the Occupation

This section covers specific areas that are priority targets for “divestment” as they cause the most harm to the planet and humans. They include areas like “defund the policy”, “end border town violence”, “abolish incarceration”, “abolish U$ occupation everywhere” and “abolish imperial borders”.

I’m not sure if there’s disagreement in a group of authors, or if they’re trying to lighten up their actual points for a non-communist audience. The bits on respecting treaty rights seem to contradict an end to global capitalism and imperialism which they call for. If we’re calling for the downfall of the U$ (and it seems like, obliquely, they are) why respect treaties the treaty writers never respected?

I very much like how these areas are formatted with a clear section on each on “what needs our urgent attention” and “what can you do about it”. I think there’s a lot to learn here for writing succinct calls to action in the modern age.

All-in-all there’s a lot to think about in this. I don’t think the authors are necessarily wrong about anything, but there’s plenty that seems contradictory to me or that I don’t understand as fitting together. I’m excited to get the full book to find out more!

I do think any U$ communist should read material like this, maybe even including this. Decolonization seems like it is and will be important.

I’m looking forward to the next section!