(Thread here: https://nitter.fdn.fr/RodericDay/status/1666063389733298176#m) They have some decent stuff, but they are also tailist patsocs. It’s probably better to just read the Black Agenda Report article than buy the book.
(Thread here: https://nitter.fdn.fr/RodericDay/status/1666063389733298176#m) They have some decent stuff, but they are also tailist patsocs. It’s probably better to just read the Black Agenda Report article than buy the book.
I think this is a severe misrepresentation of their position. They have each expressed support for both of the things you claim they don’t believe in. What they have criticized are liberal versions of those ideas, that is the misuse of those slogans to advance a neoliberal agenda under the guise of radlib language.
Speaking on Rainer: He criticizes “Liberal” positions on Land Back and Black Liberation while forming unity with Libertarians (actual Liberals) on anti-Imperialism while calling Black Agenda Report’s refusal to work with that crowd “wrecker” behavior. He calls Horne and Sakai “wreckers”. Centering external facing Imperialism as the primary contradiction over internal Imperialism brings you to politics such as this.
Who’s to say these folks are “Liberals”? Do we just take Rainer’s word for it since they call out that his dead end politics are resorting to working with white supremacists?
He shows no serious attempt to advance the decolonial movement, but like MWM is more than willing to work with open PatSocs. 🤷🏾
He’s willing to work with reactionaries that are unhappy with the US Imperialism and the fact that it is taking away from working class conditions. Through this these allies are platformed as “MLs” that are Settler Nationalists, anti-Indian, anti-Black, extremely transphobic, anti-“Globalist” (🐕 😙), calling people “d*generates” and white haters. They agree with Vaush far more than any MLs.