i’m a cup of coffee

Black in the Empire

  • 12 Posts
Joined 1Y ago
Cake day: Mar 23, 2022


idk where this magical coalition is at

Cousin look at the fish wars, noDAPL, prison abolition movement. What significant gains have the settler politics gotten us? If they were capable of liberating us then we wouldn’t need to be working for it ourselves. Settler mass politics is incapable of freeing us. Let some Florida settler nationalist die in the Rockies trying to prevent the indigenous nations from reasserting their water rights. I doubt many settlers will want to do that for something they’ve never come into contact with.

You keep mentioning morals as if that has shit to do with our oppression. Scientific Socialism finds solutions without bending to settler morality.

Settlers are in fact, a bourgeoisie toward the colonized peoples.

“I will give up my external colonies but I will not give up my internal ones!”

The opposite of white supremacy isn’t indigenous supremacy, it’s the sovereignty of the colonized masses.

Colonizers do not deserve sovereignty in their colonies, even if they were born in them. Sovereignty meaning the exception on violence and the exercise of law. And I didn’t say they wouldn’t have democracy or representation, but that like every AES they won’t immediately have one person one vote, a political version of from each according to their works. Settlers, like AES workers, will have political rights in their workplaces and other revolutionary institutions that advance the interests of women, youth, LGBTQ+, artists, students, etc., and will have rights to manage their territories through democratic means. Their common interests with other nations will be decided through the decolonial state, where they will have representation (like how Taiwan province will be integrated).

We will only deport white supremacists, as necessary to defend the revolution. Though, land usage changes and conservation efforts will be strictly enforced, so many people will relocate into denser neighborhoods.

If you aren’t American, be a bystander then. When the Israelis become the majority after killing enough Palestinians should they get to keep their stolen land?

You have zero understanding of the American conditions. The Black and Migrants joining with the political structures of the indigenous nations alongside radicalized working class de-settlers will defeat the white supremacist system.

also why should a small minority of people control the majority of the land thats like the whole thing that we are against here.

It’s their land, it was stolen. More people doesn’t mean more land. You realize you’re just looking to let the Americans keep their Lebensraum right? We will dismantle their Lebensraum.

You know that it isn’t occupied because it is reserved for extractive industries right, the state gives extraction rights to private corporations. And 17% of total land is for agriculture which most of it goes over seas for food dependency imperialism or is wasted rotting in dumpsters in settler communities. Y’all don’t even own that shit it is locked up by your kulaks who are direct descendants of the settlers who killed for the land. We will help you expropriate their land and we are taking most of it. 🤷🏾

White people can absolutely be radicalized and we expect many to be. We just have higher expectations of settler communists than they currently set for themselves.

Many indigenous American households don’t have running water or electricity. The extractive industries on their lands do. This is the contradiction we are talking about.

I’ve explained before that US Imperialism around the world can’t exist without US Imperialism within its own borders. We can’t fight US imperialism from the outside.

“Might is right”

“They conquered you because they are better”

Look at the state of settler politics, reason enough to continue working for our own liberation. Your pessimism in us is really just your optimism for the settler masses who have yet to lift their boots from our necks.

We really don’t care. Anything short of land back is genocide so we are going to fight against the reaction. The Americans are not ready to feel the frontiers again and the frontiers are ready to fight back. The US military collapses if the Black, Latino, and indigenous soldiers mutiny. I’ve pointed out that Americans occupy less than 25% of the lower 48. Winnable odds, much more winnable than any existing attempts of radicalizing the white workers. This country runs on us.

If population means share of land then we might as well give a fifth of the world to China.

And the Americans still benefit from settler colonialism. I pointed out Alaskan drilling and the hydro-electric battery being built on Yakama land against the tribe’s wishes. Homesteading ended in the 70s and the American landlord class is made of those settlers who got free land. Americans as a people do not need or intend to live on a vast majority of the lands they own, we are taking them back.

You are in effect making the argument that their interest is best served by holding on to all of the land since that enables their system to continue.

If this was the case then what the hell would we all be doing on anti-Imperialism forums? The Americans do benefit from colonialism and imperialism. The contradictions with their Bourgeoisie are being hidden through the consumption granted by the empire. Even if the systems of oppression benefit settlers, they don’t have any freedom to meet human needs. If they are content with finishing our genocide rather than working towards internationalism then let them be consumed by history.

Decolonized Buffalo is an educational working group and probably the most radical. There are extant groups of Panthers and AIM. We are really in the educational phase of needing to radicalize our families and communities. Getting CPUSA and PSL to recognize the primary contradiction. The water seems to be heating up though. There are in the ML sense spontaneous protests against the colonial conditions, but there isn’t an organization that really guides these moments yet.

The military occupies these territories, and has since they were taken through the Indian Wars, which lasted into the late 1890s. Armed occupations of rivers in Washington State, the Wounded Knee site, and physical occupations of the DAPL and KXL pipelines and Alcatraz occurred in the 1900s and 2000s. The plains and plateau tribes put up the biggest and longest fight against the US and British through extended guerrilla campaigns because they could live off the land, especially the buffalo. The US army (consolidated after the civil war) and states sponsored settler civilians to exterminate the buffalo, killing tens of millions and driving them to near extinction where they remain today. This ended the Sioux Nation’s contest with the Americans. For the Yakama in the inland PNW, if there were more than 2 Yakama males together in a group it was considered a war party and soldiers and settlers were encouraged to lynch them.

It’s actually less than that. A quarter includes agriculture, where a fifth of it is sold to our colonies over seas:

Less than 6% of US land is considered developed. Let’s also look at how they “developed” that land:

De-colonization is not just about people, it’s about our non-human neighbors as well. If I may share a tweet of mine: https://twitter.com/probablykaffe/status/1662860482360020992?t=-px_6GplvTFzoPrXTOH9zQ&s=19

There’s a level of American Exceptionism that occurs in the decolonial reaction. This myth that the Americans seriously control the vast territories within their border. They really live far beyond their means and bringing them back to balance is really the only goal we can have. Half of Americans live in single family suburbs. This is unacceptable land use and they will consolidate their space.

California has over 10x the population of Nevada. Should California be entitled to 10x the land of Nevadans? No, it’s nonsense. The population of a people is dependent on the resources which they have access to. Americans are not entitled to their annexations, most of which is reserved for future exploitation while they suck the rest of the world dry.

Read Our History is the Future and Bordertowns by Nick Estes, one of the authors of Red Deal. He’s not a Marxist (yet) but an expert in the history of the Oceti Sakowin (Sioux Nation) and the character and evolution of American settlements bordering indigenous reservations.

You literally do not understand that the American nation “owns” 98% of the land but occupies around a quarter of it. This land is owned only for the purpose of extraction which allows Americans to live far beyond their means. This territory, the majority of territory in the US and Canada, will be taken from them. If you’d study the land question in the US you’d understand what we’re talking about. This is a matter of state and sovereignty, the Americans aren’t entitled to their own sovereign state, only a decolonial one. There is no point in time to return to. The conservative, reactionary position is settler sovereignty over the lands.

There is no idealism or moralism except the white guilt and entitlement, to land they don’t even use, felt by settlers. The Americans are already genocidal, and we know that they will seek a final solution to their Indian and Black problem. There are tens of millions of us colonized, and there will be tens of millions of white comrades to fight with us.

Every revolution is a fight for survival. Ours has been constant.

Using pre colonized borders for the confederacy?

Borders are a colonial construct. Indigenous claimed territory was specific to the territory’s economic function and specific resources. The confederations’ granting of territorial use-rights may not necessarily take the shape of precolonial relations, but it’s fine to look at it as a blurry model of the future.

When you say “white domination is the settler majority system itself”. Does that mean that the land having a vast majority of the population being settlers + one man one vote is the problem? You intend to only have a vangard party rule that made of people that support land back, decolonization, and unionization of all industry?

Yes in the same way as “one person one vote” is necessarily not existing at this moment in AES countries as well, or in any theoretical ML state which would intentionally subjugate its vestigial Bourgeoisie and proletarianize them. Though most land in the US is not settled by Americans but reserved by the federal government for future extraction. Much of this will be immediately expropriated by the existing indigenous nations. Most homesteaded land works the same, it has basically been reserved under private ownership until the haute Bourgeoisie expropriates it and sometimes de-classes the settlers depending on the price. Beverly hills hillbillies being the successful image of that process for the petty bourgeois settler. Every town in America has a class of real estate agents who’s wealth came from selling their family’s stolen land, ala Primitive Accumulation. In simple terms just because your Bourgeoisie stole property doesn’t mean you’re the one entitled to its expropriation, the rightful owner is in the people it was stolen from.

Well first of all the indigenous nations as cultural and political entities still exist and still claim territory stolen by the settlers. The majority of settler owned land will be taken back into indigenous sovereignty. Many nations including the Americans and Black people will want to use the same resources. They can share through agreements reached in decolonial states. In my prediction, these states will be confederations between the peoples that inhabit and use the lands and resources in question. Equality of nations rather than equality of individuals will necessarily be the lower stage of Decolonization where individual equality will be gained towards the higher stages as the decolonial states wither away. Africans in the Americas are nations born into world through their struggle against slavery and colonization, but we must be careful reactionary ideas such as a Black Belt state as there are indigenous nations who claim and live in that region still.

Any system where Americans exercise political supremacy over colonized groups will necessarily reproduce settler Colonial relations. There will be no reforming the American annexationist system, only the the de-fanging of their previous annexations and thus their access to further annexations and Imperialism.

It’s not done history, it’s ongoing as I mentioned in other comments. Most recently the drilling project in Alaska. Pretending it’s done is the same as pushing the “So-called Primitive Accumulation” stance, which Marx made fun of. Stolen land is still stolen resources and supremacy over these resources is the source of white supremacy and US Imperialism.

even in the context when political power is materially in the hands of previously colonized peoples.

Yes as in the lands claimed by the Americans will largely be returned to sovereign indigenous nations. The overall territories of the US, Canada, and Mexico will be governed by confederations of indigenous nations, the Black nations, and the settler descended peoples. Through the withering of the decolonial states will this occur:

If the material conditions supporting white domination stop supporting that domination, how does that domination still exist?

Those material conditions being sovereign access to stolen territory. Voluntarily or by force these will be reclaimed. Force will be necessary to defend the transfer though, even if largely voluntary. White domination isn’t only in the form of inequality under the settler majority political system, white domination is the settler majority system itself. Settlers cannot have equal individual power to the colonized individuals, i.e. the American system. We will not be assimilated. We will take control over our systems.

Or is it that you want 0 political power for the descendants of colonizers?

Only in the way that the Bourgeoisie loses political power as a class, they earn it back by working for socialism. Americans will still control what they work and their settlements, and where interests interact with other nations it will be resolved through the decolonial states.

The Americans grew as an annexationist society, their power comes through their constant annexations. This ability will be de-fanged in the form of Land Back.

Learn what wars subjugated the tribes that inhabited your home town. Learn how they were removed and how the American workers were involved. Learn where they are now and what they have to say about the current environment. Even if they are not Marxists, they know more about American Imperialism than you do. They live it every day. Their natural inclinations are closer to reality than the average settler Communist’s theories, who doesn’t even know their name.

Sakai isn’t the only nor even close to the best analyst of settler Colonialism, but he’s the boogyman for settlers.

Revolutionary defeatism for Americans means bringing about the destruction of the American settler colony.

I’m saying we should address internal Imperialism, by focusing on working for the internal decolonial movement lead by the colonized nations. I said the Americans have never defeated their outward Imperialism. It has always been defeated by their victims themselves. This begs the question of why they are ineffective at defeating external imperialism? Because they fail to analyze their own inward imperialism as society that enables the outward Imperialism.

Think about how the US sanctions have been targeted at oil states like Russia, Venezuela, Iraq, and Libya, our internal colonization of oil extraction was accelerated by Bush and Obama which allowed us assault these nations. Which is more effective? RAWM like protests or the struggle by the internal colonies against the extractive industries? Dollar dominance from controlling oil prices allows the US to keep developing countries in a dependency trap. America’s wealth is here, extracted here. Pull the weed by the roots.

RAWM does nothing and half of that “movement” was made of China Hawks. It’s good to advance such positions, but most effective when tied to anti-colonial solutions which can actually solve the problem.

He supports land back only in the nominal sense. His focus on building an anti-Imperialist coalition with liberals and white supremacists is enough proof that he is at a cul de sac in his development, and the reason why he needs to listen to colonized radicals about his legitimizing of settler nationalism.

The standard of a Communist in this country needs to be a person with deep knowledge of the historical materialism that created and developed the US settler empire.

Rainer’s protaganism is leading him into seeking validation from reactionary settlers. Americans have never defeated their own imperialism, every time their victims won for themselves. Outward Imperialism is a necessary contradiction to analyze and propagandize, but it is secondary, and fueled by the complete indifference to, erasure and exploitation of, indigenous nations. Failure to analyze the boujified nature of the Americans in the settler system leads you down the path of cultivating anti-Indigenous and anti-Black stances in your audience.

If the material basis in employment opportunities, housing, healthcare, wealth, ability to raise a family are available to everyone independant of their ancestry as a settler or not, in the same matter, nobody is a settler at that point.

This isn’t true. The land is still stolen by one nation from another. The settlers can still dominate the colonies politically and decide things for them. Ancestry is not important outside of the racialized black context, and even black people can be settlers. It’s a national question and the indigenous nations have their own national political systems to define who is and isn’t indigenous. Again you misunderstand and overstate the importance of the American nation. Signing treaties of equality in a confederated context between all nations on this continent is a necessary precondition to Socialism. Political supremacy over land will be taken from the settlers and placed into the hands of a decolonial government. This decolonial government will bring about the eradication of the settler nationality as it itself withers away. The settlers maintaining power and “releasing” the imprisoned nations is tantamount to reforming the settler system, it isn’t a revolution for us.

The primary contradiction is settler Colonialism. Not the bourgeois-proletarian contradiction between settlers. This is proven by the history of this country and the consistent collaboration between settlers against colonized groups. Black Wall Street, the wealthiest black-oriented community in US history, was founded by Black land grabbers who got indigenous land for free and sold it to white settlers. Even when Black people joined in on the settler system, the white settlers destroyed it.

What Liberalism advocates Decolonization at all. Liberal Decolonization is the propertied nation giving nominal rights to their colonies, i.e. neo-colonialism. Any system that gives the settlers political or economic supremacy is going to maintain settler Colonialism.

I’m uninterested in what the settlers deem socialist, because they don’t even understand their own settler relationship to the colonized peoples. They are overwhelmingly illiterate in the history of how we became colonized.

Building socialism necessarily includes black and indigenous sovereignty, not something given to us afterwards. It is the path towards Socialism. Our Bourgeoisie is nothing without their ongoing colonization of Indigenous land and their comprador settler workers who labor those resources. Ideally the American workers’ movements wake up to this contradiction and exercises it, otherwise the fight against Colonialism will take other, less ideal forms.

Yes and you misunderstand. The indigenous people are not marginalized groups of Americans. They are not Americans, they are their own nations, their own political and cultural bodies. Black Liberation comes in the form of becoming an independent nation and indigenous liberation comes in the form of total sovereignty over stolen land. We literally cannot wait for settlers and white supremacists to change their minds and treat us better, we will fight for sovereignty with or without them. Asking us to be subjugated into a settler socialism is assimilation and genocide. We will have white allies, not white saviors.

Anarchism and herrenvolk democracy cannot guarantee our safety and emancipation.

If you believe that a Vanguard can lead a revolution then you must understand that the political beginnings of a Vanguard confederation of decolonial states is a much more realistic and material goal than performing a cultural revolution on American settlers while still under bourgeois rule. How could we ever know if a white supremacists has changed their views? Is it their views that matter or their ability to exercise bigotry through access and adjacency to power?

How do you expect a bourgeoisie with this many nukes to allow that to happen? I’ve pointed out in this thread the US increasing internal Imperialism to massively expand oil production to maintain dollar imperialism. It’s frankly a Trot opinion to think America will die from external causes. Block America’s access to internal wealth and you can choke Imperialism from within. I don’t know how much protesting Ukraine aid is gonna hurt Imperialism, but the no DAPL protests certainly did. The Cop City protests prevent international states from studying urban occupation.

Our Bourgeoisie thinks they can survive a nuclear war. They can’t survive one if we are sieging their neighborhoods. Necessarily we owe it to the world to end America, we don’t have the privilege to sit it out.

You mention that America’s imperialist contradictions will increase revolutionary potential and reaction. Which direction do you think will work best in our favor? Bending to reaction at the expense of the colonized peoples, or guiding them towards the decolonial movement?

It’s nothing to do with morals. It’s ending the colonial relationship to land and depriving the settlers of landed property rights. The struggle for indigenous sovereignty won’t end until this happens so it doesn’t matter if white Americans build their national socialism they’ll have to fight off attempts of the indigenous and Black nations asserting their sovereignty.

Frankly we are soon heading towards the settler nation abandoning large swathes of territory due to their own economic practices. California was settled by the refugees of the self imposed Dust Bowls who were given Californian farms managed by Japanese migrants who were interned by the settler states during WW2. There is no new West to bail them out of their contradictions. It’s not listening to indigenous, it’s working for them. The decolonial government will take sovereignty over the lands out of the hands of the colonizer class. Political supremacy of the settlers is a continuation of white supremacy. I have no interest in respectability politics if the audience is settler nationalist, we do not politic for the settlers, this is not their liberation (nor was American Liberty calling for the emancipation of slaves). There will be millions of Americans who will follow us, I’m sure of it, but we are right to select them ourselves, and set standards for working together.

We are not trying to convince reactionaries of our cause, we will work with those who are not. Those who’d rather be approachable to the reactionaries than work with colonized revolutionaries are preparing themselves for the dustbin of history.

Someone recently said something like (paraphrased): Many of us Communists will end up going to prison. For you White Communists, you will be forced to chose between the White gangs and the Communists/Brown folks. If you think there is tactics in pretending to be a white supremacist to save yourself, you are not a Communist, you are an enemy.

The US will be destroyed by the fourth worlders. I’ve posted elsewhere in this thread why American Communists absolutely need to be decolonial revolutionaries. MWM meeting white supremacists halfway leads them away from the decolonial movement, let’s them keep their reactionary views, and puts them into opposition to our liberation. Instead of platforming indigenous and Black revolutionary voices they party with white supremacists like Haz and Hinkle.

Well I mean, we have 400 years of colonization and worker’s movements already existing to study. It’s beyond the point in time to notice the most effective attacks at the US state have come from indigenous and Black nations. American Communists are overwhelmingly illiterate in how the colonized nations of North America came to be subjugated by the settler state. Nobody says the American workers can’t advance Decolonization, but centering the movement on their struggle is counter revolutionary while they are historically illiterate to the territories they inhabit. This is why pushing potential comrades away from decolonial voices is dangerous as Rainer and MWM are doing it.

He says he does, but his focus on external imperialism forms coalitions with anti-Indian and anti-Black white supremacists. This allows settler white supremacists to dominate any “Communist” movement that forms out of the US and negates any good “intentions” towards the imprisoned nations. His actions speak much louder than his words. We are not going to allow ourselves to be locked into a system of settler political supremacy, because that is the existing system we will liberate ourselves from. Rainer hasn’t read any history about how each nation actually became imprisoned, because he calls the researchers in that space “Liberals” and “wreckers”. He pushes any potential comrade away from the decolonial voices. Whenever I mention land theft and genocide his followers pick examples of indigenous people owning slaves or warring against other tribes, or indigenous and Black people serving the military, without any Marxist analysis to contextualize these facts. As Communists in America we need to be literate in the history and processes of American Colonialism, not this book worship that Rainer and the PatSocs get into.

I also want to point out that many of our comrades here who disagree with our takes on Decolonization are being good party members and holding the lines that their and many parties around the world are holding, hope in the American workers. But these parties especially the ones in the settler colonies of North America have not done the necessary investigation of their settler society and land and resource theft. Many of them are petit/semi (landed) bourgeois, educated, and through this have privileged entrance into Marxist theory, me included. We know that Lenin and the colonized comrades had an uphill battle against European Chauvinism within the international Communist movement which is what crystalized Marxism Leninism in the first place.

There is no reason to abstract internal colonization as either finished or different from external colonization, even calling it internal colonization makes it seem like the solution for the colonized Africans and indigenous nations is to absorb them into the settler nation. No, the settler states exist on stolen resources that they use to dominate the rest of the world, but its connection to wealth is here, inside its borders. It needs settlers to take land and hold it for the bourgeoisie to later expropriate. It needs settler dominated unions to build and work the environmentally extractive and damaging infrastructure that only benefits the settler masses. I posted about armed indigenous resistance (backed by the Panthers) to racist fishing enclosures in the 1960s that sparked the American Indian Movement, and that post had far less traction than this one about MWM.

American comrades, find out what tribes inhabited the places you have physical connections to. Learn how they came to no longer own that territory and why you and your people now do. You will learn far more about capitalism and America than through studying other movements, because our conditions are not the same. Apply the methodologies of MLism to the history of this continent, stop importing the solutions from others.

Like confused men they don’t understand that the system of oppression can hurt them while still overwhelmingly benefit them

Uncritical platforming of Haz is the most recent example. He called everyone who criticized him for that Liberals. Haz is anti-Land Back and a settler nationalist.

And look, I overall have a positive view of RBN, but Nick is the one I’m most worried about. It’s coming to the point where he’s either in it for clout or fails to differentiate clout from correctness.

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.

His content sits almost entirely within the corporate media landscape, as in he’s either siding with one or reacting to it.

He’s outside of the democrats now but still limits himself to discussions within that space.

I want to point out that the trend of Imperialism being the primary contradiction over Settler Colonialism, so we should form unity around anti-Imperialism, is ignoring the huge flaw that Settler Colonialism is what gives the US the ability to maintain global dominance. The US achieved energy independence and reasserted dollar supremacy under Bush and Obama by massively increasing resource extraction on indigenous and stolen lands. The indigenous nations were at the forefront of trying to stop the expansion in environmental exploitation, DAPL, KXL, etc. Just a few months ago Biden approved a massive project in Alaska on indigenous territory where the people there don’t even have running water or electricity, this was just so the US could replace the gulf states’ oil output to depress prices enough to harm Russia. (Also want to mention Cop City in Atlanta, where an ancient indigenous forest is being razed to build a mock city for states all over the world to practice occupying urban centers. An indigenous protestor was murdered by police there while trying to block construction.)

This doesn’t ignore that Canada and Australia are two more settler colonies that use their own stolen resources to boost the US Empire. If we are to attack the empire from within, doesn’t it make more sense to damage its extractive capabilities rather than engage in unity politics to, what amounts to, reforming the Imperialism? Contesting land within the US is far more crippling for the glass cannon that is the US empire.

He’s a journalist/podcaster that relies on audience donations to stay in business. He may not be a grifter in intentions but he relies on grifters to grow his platform. He’s ultimately a tailist, but what’s the qualitative difference between a tailist and a grifter?

A decolonial vanguard government cannot be ruled by the colonizer class, end of. White supremacy needs to be destroyed in its political-economic form, landed property, and the developing white proletariat needs to shed it or it will be consumed by history.

Unity slogan for the colonized masses is asking us to work for our colonizers. America will be destroyed. The Americans will no longer have sovereignty over the land, but they will have use-rights.

MWM (Eddie) and Rainer Shea are crypto patsocs. They don’t believe in Land Back and Black Liberation, they believe Settler Colonialism in the US is over and thus the decolonial movement doesn’t apply.

They are dogmatists who refuse to do any historical research of North America, and are class reductionists (who ignore that racism and colonialism are class systems in the first place).

Video covering the (very recent) colonization and enclosure of the waterways of the PNW, specifically Washington. The Indigenous struggle over fishing rights and environmentalism culminated into "The Fish Wars" of the 60s-70s. It also covers the settler State governments seeking to redefine indigenous such that none to very few indigenous people were "actually indigenous" and therefore unprotected by treaties. This comes after decades of boarding schools and institutions like the Child Protective Services and fostering (modern boarding schools) seeking to force assimilate the indigenous population.

The anti-nuclear movement must be a big oil operation.

Archive Link: https://archive.ph/3mAVd *emphasis* [mine] >WASHINGTON — Classified war documents detailing secret American and NATO plans for building up the Ukrainian military ahead of a planned offensive against Russia were posted this week on social media channels, *senior Biden administration officials said.* > >*The Pentagon is investigating who may have been behind the leak* of the documents [find the snitch], which appeared on Twitter and on Telegram, a platform with more than half a billion users that is widely available in Russia. So these leaks are real, and the Pentagon is looking for the mole. >Military analysts said *the documents appear to have been modified* in certain parts from their original format, *overstating American estimates of Ukrainian war dead and understating estimates of Russian troops killed*. > >The modifications could point to an effort of disinformation by Moscow, the analysts said. *But the disclosures in the original documents*, which appear as photographs of charts of anticipated weapons deliveries, troop and battalion strengths, and plans, *represents a significant breach of American intelligence in the effort to aid Ukraine.* > >Biden officials were *working to get them deleted* but had not, as of Thursday evening, succeeded. So the only part they claim to be doctored is the estimates for the casualties in the conflict. They say the documents being leaked are significant, so much so that the Biden team is trying to get them scraped off the internet. >To the trained eye of a Russian war planner, field general or intelligence analyst, however, the documents no doubt offer many tantalizing clues. *The documents mention, for instance, the expenditure rate of HIMARS* — American-supplied high mobility artillery rocket systems, which can launch attacks against targets like ammunition dumps, infrastructure and concentrations of troops, from a distance. *The Pentagon has not said publicly how fast Ukrainian troops are using the HIMARs munitions; the documents do*. One aspect of the pro-Ukraine casualty estimates that never made sense was how so many Russians could be dying from Ukraine's lack of artillery, to maintain this narrative the Pentagon never talked about how many shells Ukraine launches per day. >*One of the slides said 16,000 to 17,500 Russian soldiers had been killed while Ukraine had suffered as many as 71,500 troop deaths. The Pentagon and other analysts have estimated that Russia has suffered far more casualties, and that closer to 200,000 soldiers on each side had been killed or wounded.* > >Nonetheless, *analysts said parts of the documents appeared authentic and provide Russia with valuable information* such as the timetables for the delivery of weapons and troops, Ukrainian troop buildup numbers and other military details. These estimates seem a little low balled, analysts such as Col Macgregor put Russian dead in the 20-25k range and Uke dead in the six digits. This seems more like the values pre-Bakmut siege. BBC calculated around 16k from Russian obituaries so maybe they were closer to reality than given credit for, or the numbers in the document are confirmed KIA only and MIA is not included. The [document in question.](https://lemmygrad.ml/pictrs/image/34ae53e0-cc33-4732-9e62-f39df7740fa6.jpeg) More from: https://twitter.com/AZgeopolitics/status/1644122549909848070?t=J87R-_jIb11q9sFMfcB-XQ&s=19 >The leak is the first Russian intelligence breakthrough that has been made public since the war began. *Throughout the war, the United States has provided Ukraine with information on command posts, ammunition depots and other key nodes in the Russian military lines.* Such real-time intelligence has *allowed the Ukrainians to target Russian forces, kill senior generals* and force ammunition supplies to be moved farther from the Russian front lines, *though U.S. officials say Ukraine has played the decisive role in planning and execution of those strikes.* ["plausible" deniability] > >But *early on during the war, Ukrainian officials were hesitant about sharing their battle plans with the United States, for fear of leaks*, American and European officials said. As recently as last summer, American intelligence officials said they often had a better understanding of Russia’s military plans than of Ukraine’s. > >*The intelligence sharing between Ukraine and the United States loosened up considerably last fall*, and the two countries have been **working closely** on options for a Ukrainian offensive. So now the US is running the show. I wonder if the mole is related to Sy Hersh's source on Nord Stream?

Azov got destroyed in Mariupol and this last week the Imperialist rags have been talking about Azov building up for an offensive.

Scholar who advocates increasing unemployment is shocked that Americans are dying early due to poverty
It's actually worse than that, this guy served as Treasury Secretary in 1999-2001 under Clinton and director of the National Economic Council under Obama. He is literally the man responsible for the austerity measures imposed on the working class of the US and many other countries, dubbed the Great Recession, in response to the bank collapse. He was also the President of Harvard, in charge of reproducing Bourgeois ideology.

It's the first American edition. Found it while browsing a local used bookstore. It seems to be in good shape. ![](https://lemmygrad.ml/pictrs/image/c48702dc-eaf7-46e8-b826-b39aa99d64a7.jpeg) ![](https://lemmygrad.ml/pictrs/image/5b2b0af3-d9fa-419d-a5df-177f3dfee3b8.jpeg) ![](https://lemmygrad.ml/pictrs/image/83e4297e-e183-41fa-bc65-f6e339a8b008.jpeg) ![](https://lemmygrad.ml/pictrs/image/587aff61-bc7a-4b9a-a50f-cbb1e3c820eb.jpeg)

ChatGPT on the allegations of TikTok Spying
A common idea in the Western world, especially the United States, is that TikTok is spying on American (and others) citizens for the PRC. I decided to ask ChatGPT to gather some information about this allegation for me, because I'd rather not search through a bunch of MSM articles with shallow sourcing. Q: What evidence is there to suggest that TikTok is sharing data with the Chinese government? >There have been concerns raised by various governments and organizations about TikTok's data practices and whether they are sharing user data with the Chinese government. **However, it is important to note that TikTok has repeatedly denied these claims and has stated that it stores all US user data in the United States and Singapore, with backups in the United States and other countries.** > >**Here are some pieces of evidence that have been cited to support the claim that TikTok is sharing data with the Chinese government:** > >1. Chinese ownership: TikTok is owned by ByteDance, a company based in China. This has raised concerns that the Chinese government could have access to user data through ByteDance. > >2. Chinese laws: Chinese national security laws require companies to provide access to data to Chinese authorities upon request. **Critics argue that this could apply to TikTok and that the Chinese government could potentially use TikTok to access user data.** > >3. Data collection practices: TikTok collects a large amount of data on its users, including their location, device information, and search history. **Critics argue that this data could be used to create detailed profiles of TikTok users, which could be of interest to the Chinese government.** > >4. TikTok's response to government requests: There have been reports that TikTok has complied with government requests for user data. For example, in 2019, TikTok was fined by the US Federal Trade Commission for violating child privacy laws, **and there have been reports that TikTok has provided data to the Chinese government in response to censorship requests.** > >**It is important to note that while these pieces of evidence have raised concerns about TikTok's data practices, there is no definitive proof that TikTok is sharing user data with the Chinese government.** TikTok has repeatedly denied these claims and has stated that it stores all US user data in the United States and Singapore, with backups in the United States and other countries. So there's no evidence that alleges TikTok has ever shared data with the Chinese government. A lot of weight is being placed on the natsec laws in China "potentially" giving China access to data. Q: Where does TikTok store user data, and why would the Chinese government be able to access it? >TikTok stores user data in various locations depending on the region where the user is located. For example, **in the United States, TikTok stores user data in the United States and Singapore, with backups in the United States and other countries. In Europe, TikTok stores user data in Ireland and Singapore.** > >The concern is that TikTok is owned by a Chinese company, ByteDance, and that the Chinese government has a history of using its national security laws to access data from Chinese companies. **This has raised concerns that the Chinese government could potentially access user data collected by TikTok.** > >**Although TikTok has repeatedly stated that it does not provide user data to the Chinese government and that it stores user data outside of China, critics have argued that the Chinese government could still access the data through ByteDance or other means.** > >It is worth noting that TikTok has faced scrutiny and legal challenges over its data practices in various countries, including the United States, **where it has faced accusations of collecting and sharing user data with the Chinese government. TikTok has denied these allegations and has taken steps to address these concerns, such as hiring a Chief Information Security Officer and establishing a transparency center to allow external audits of its data practices.** So the data is stored between the EU, Singapore, and the US. This leads me to two questions: Q: Has Bytedance accessed data from TikTok before? >**There is no evidence to suggest that ByteDance, the Chinese parent company of TikTok, has accessed user data from TikTok. TikTok has stated that it stores user data outside of China, and that its data practices are separate from those of ByteDance.** > >However, there have been concerns raised about the potential for ByteDance to access user data from TikTok. **Some critics argue** that ByteDance could potentially access user data through its ownership of TikTok or through other means, **despite TikTok's claims that user data is stored separately from ByteDance.** > >To address these concerns, TikTok has established a transparency center to allow external audits of its data practices, and has hired a Chief Information Security Officer to oversee its data security practices. TikTok has also stated that it does not provide user data to the Chinese government, and that it would refuse any such request if it were made. > >Overall, while concerns remain about the potential for ByteDance to access user data from TikTok, there is no evidence to suggest that this has actually occurred. TikTok has taken steps to address these concerns and to assure users that their data is being stored and protected appropriately. So no, there is no evidence to suggest this. TikTok doesn't share data storage processes with its parent company (which is the norm within the social media industry). TikTok also bent to pressure to open more transparency into their data collecting processes. Q: Has China ever asked for user data from companies outside of China? >There have been cases where the Chinese government has requested data from companies outside of China, **although the extent and nature of these requests are not entirely clear.** [Kaffe: so no evidence...] Chinese national security laws require companies operating in China to provide access to data to Chinese authorities upon request, and this has raised concerns about the potential for Chinese authorities to access data from Chinese-owned companies operating outside of China. > >One well-known example of China requesting data from a company outside of China is the case of Apple and its iCloud service in China. **In 2018, Apple announced that it would be partnering with a Chinese company to store Chinese iCloud users' data on servers located in China, in compliance with Chinese regulations.** This **raised concerns** that the Chinese government could potentially access user data stored on these servers. > >Another example is the case of LinkedIn, which was temporarily blocked in China in 2017 after the company refused to comply with requests to censor content on its platform. **LinkedIn had previously agreed to censor content in compliance with Chinese regulations, but the Chinese government reportedly requested that LinkedIn censor additional content that was deemed politically sensitive.** > >**It is worth noting that the extent of the Chinese government's requests for data from companies outside of China is not entirely clear, as these requests are often confidential and not publicly disclosed.** However, the concerns around data privacy and the potential for the Chinese government to access user data from Chinese-owned companies operating outside of China remain a point of contention. So China has *allegedly* asked for data stored *within* China, evidence for such requests has not surfaced. It has raised questions, but no answers, to whether China can use these laws to access any data outside of China. Apple stored Chinese user data in China, because it was required to by Chinese regulation, but there is no evidence to suggest that China has requested to access this data. China asked LinkedIn to censor content (publicly available) according to Chinese regulation. Q: What Chinese law allows the government to access user data held within China? >The Chinese law that allows the government to access user data held within China is the **National Intelligence Law of the People's Republic of China, which was enacted in 2017.** > >**Article 7 of the National Intelligence Law states that "any organization or citizen shall support, assist, and cooperate with the state intelligence work in accordance with the law, and keep the secrets of the national intelligence work known to the public."** This means that any Chinese organization, including internet companies, may be required to provide assistance and cooperation to national intelligence agencies. > >Additionally, the **Cybersecurity Law of the People's Republic of China**, which was enacted in 2016, requires network operators in China to cooperate with the government on matters related to national security and public safety. **This law also requires network operators to store certain types of data within China.** > >These laws have raised concerns among foreign companies and governments about the potential for the Chinese government to access sensitive data held by these companies within China. **The Chinese government has stated that its laws are necessary for national security and that they are not intended to target foreign companies or individuals.** So internet companies have to work with Chinese authorities on matters of natsec and public safety. There is still no evidence that any of this includes accessing user data that isn't already available through the public interface of these services. We do know of a case of Facebook within China where the government asked for [FB to censor information about riots](https://techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/china-blocks-access-to-twitter-facebook-after-riots/) occurring in the Xinjiang province. So Facebook refused to work with the Chinese government on matters of public safety and natsec, so it was suspended. Q: Is Facebook required to work with American intelligence agencies? >**Yes, Facebook, as a company based in the United States, is required to work with American intelligence agencies when requested to do so. Like all US-based companies, Facebook is subject to US laws, including those related to national security and surveillance.** > >**The US government has the legal authority to compel Facebook and other companies to provide access to user data under certain circumstances, such as when investigating national security threats or when conducting criminal investigations. The USA PATRIOT Act, which was enacted after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, expanded the government's surveillance powers and gave it broader authority to obtain user data from companies.** > >Additionally, **Facebook and other companies are required to comply with court orders and warrants issued by the US government, which may require them to provide access to user data.** > >It's worth noting that **Facebook has publicly stated that it carefully scrutinizes all government data requests and only complies with those that are legally valid and within the scope of the law.** The company also publishes transparency reports detailing the number and types of government requests for user data that it receives. Heh... So following Patriot Act regulation, companies based in America like Facebook are required to share data with the US government. Does this apply to companies *operating* in the US but that are not *owned* by US firms? Q: Has TikTok shared user data with the US government? >**TikTok has shared user data with the US government in response to lawful requests made under US law.** > >In September 2020, the US Department of Commerce issued an order that would have effectively banned TikTok from operating in the United States over concerns about national security and the potential for the Chinese government to access user data. **However, this order was put on hold after TikTok filed a lawsuit challenging its legality.** > >As part of the legal proceedings, **TikTok has provided user data to the US government in response to lawful requests made under US law.** In a court filing in October 2020, **TikTok disclosed that it had received over 150 million user data requests from US law enforcement agencies, and that it had provided data in response to approximately 91% of these requests.** > >It's worth noting that TikTok has stated that it stores US user data in the United States, and that it has implemented technical measures to prevent the Chinese government from accessing this data. Additionally, TikTok has announced plans to establish a transparency center in the United States to allow external audits of its data practices. > >**Overall, while TikTok has shared user data with the US government in response to lawful requests, the company has stated that it takes the privacy and security of user data seriously and has implemented measures to protect user data from unauthorized access.** Okay so there is no evidence that TikTok has shared any data with the Chinese government, but it has provided access to 91% of the 150 million data requests from the US government. There's very little evidence suggesting that China is spying on users around the world through TikTok, not even evidence that TikTok shared data with Chinese authorities voluntarily, **but it is a fact that TikTok has shared data with the US government.** In fact, the reason why TikTok is storing data in the EU is due to EU regulations that require user data to be stored in the EU. TikTok has also complied with Irish authorities by allowing them access to TikTok's data collecting practices and even shared data with them. This is the evidence (or lack thereof) that the US is using to justify the [Restrict Act](https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2023/03/29/tik-tok-bills-could-dangerously-expand-national-security-state/) which according to the Responsible Statecraft (Liberal think tank): >The bill would grant the executive branch **unprecedented new national security powers over commerce in information and communication technologies, and by extension, speech**. Where: >Domestically, Section 11 of the bill **establishes draconian penalties for American citizens who violate it by attempting to evade or help others to evade new restrictions** on foreign-owned information and communications technologies. While it is somewhat ambiguous how far this could go, it could lead to American citizens being prosecuted for accessing information on foreign-owned technology platforms such as WeChat. And: >The ACLU has already stated its **opposition to the bill on freedom of expression grounds.**

Fascist Ukraine State is evicting the Ukrainian Orthodox Church from its historic location within Kiev
The Ukrainian Orthodox Church used to be in a union with the Russian Orthodox Church in Moscow. It broke ties due to the war, which the Russian branch supported. However, this isn't enough to escape persecution from the Fascists in Kiev. The church is still under assault: https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20230325-monks-at-historic-kyiv-monastery-defy-eviction-order There is a religious war underneath the civil war in Ukraine. The Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, which collaborated with the OUN-B, the Plast organization, and the Nazis, is well represented within the Ultra-Nationalist movement and is attempting to solidify a national-religious Ukrainian identity centered on the church. The assault on this church is part of the De-Russification campaign of the Maidan regime.

Peep the documentary too: https://youtu.be/wwVUp4IWEKw

Someday I hope to go over how critical this "news" outlet is to the current Ukraine narrative, and their involvement in the Maidan. Today they are on reddit whipping Imperialist support to their favorite audience.

Video form with Yanis: https://youtu.be/NicE0-N9ux0?t=130 TL;DR: Europe may copy Greece's energy cap solution. In energy markets where auctions are held in a *pay-as-clear* structure, meaning the highest price required to provide the necessary energy output is the price paid to all selected providers regardless of their bid price, renewables are being sold at the same price as gas. In example, this means that if 1/2 of your energy needs are provided for at 50 euros in renewables, and the other half is in gas at 100 euros, then you will pay all providers the highest price accepted (known as the *marginal clearing price*) at 100 euros. You will pay 100 euros to the renewables providers as well, meaning they get an extra 50 euros in profit. The alternative auction structure is known as *pay-as-bid*, where each accepted bid is paid at their respective bid prices, i.e. you only pay 50 euros for the renewables, no extra revenue is made. Energy producers (make power) and energy retailers (sell and deliver power) are different companies, but often owned by the same parent. This model was implemented by Thatcher in the UK, and has been adopted in almost every privatized energy system in Europe. So, in Greece the government implemented a price cap to this process, which on the surface sounds like a benefit for the consumers. However, the price caps formula still include the energy market auctions, so in *pay-as-clear* auctions, the price cap is set at the inflated price of gas, so you will still be paying extra money to the cheaper competitors to gas. The way the caps deal with this is by paying the full *marginal clearing price* to all providers, and then ask for the difference between the cost of renewables and the cost of gas. Then, they give it to the energy retailers, instead of returning it to the people (through the state). In cases where a company is both a retailer and a producer, the state gives the money right back to them. The states will have to borrow this money, collect it in taxes, or cut spending to cover this. A new front has opened in the class war.