• 168 Posts
Joined hace un año
Cake day: mar. 04, 2022


White people will not be an underclass. Indigenous people have been and currently are highly oppressed and the point is reparations. I’m going to stop talking to you now, as you don’t seem in good faith, and I think you’ve said you aren’t even USian, so there’d be nothing to gain from convincing you.

I can suggest the Geopolítical economy report, Guerrilla history, Decolonized Buffalo, Turn Leftist, and also, maybe, Programmed to Chill (They’re a little too close to a red-brown alliance type TERF named Brigid from the probably cancelled podcast, but I have heard anything directly bad from Jimmy, I think he’s a Marxist, and he talks about parapolics and fascist history, if you want to listen start from the beginning).

Kaffe literally just said that settlers deserve democracy but we don’t have a right to a sovereign state. Just as in Palestine Israel has no right to exist. Jews can live in Palestine and have peacefully for millennia, but that doesn’t mean they can just start up a monopoly on violence (state) and start stealing land and killing people, neither should a Zionist entity exist at all after that one dissolves.

wtf. and are u seriously pretending u cant think of a single case where white people made treaties with indigenous people granting them certain places and then broke said treaties and took the land anyways and built cities there thats like the entire history of the usa.

What does that have to do with what I said? If you’re suggesting First Nations would subject colonizers to the same treatment they suffered under you’d be wrong, falling for the trap of colonial ideology and “white genocide” fear mongering.

As I already said, natives are not gone, they are just silenced and deprived of their rights. What is your alternative? A settler socialism where we continue to rule only we are internally more equal? In that case you may as well be an imperialist socdem. The “magic coalition” is possible. If you read the BAR articles about “black rage” you will understand the revolutionary potential of Black USians. Fanon shows us the most oppressed are the most willing to fight. The most oppressed here are Black people, colonized peoples, and immigrants. There will be settler allies, people know capitalism and settler colonialism is messed up, especially poor white people which are greater in number than most assume. I myself am a settler ally, willing to fight for decolonization.

They’re not saying that white people don’t deserve sovereignty or democracy, they are saying they don’t deserve to control this land just because they conquered it. Might does not make right. These people deserve reparations for the genocide inflicted upon them. We settlers should not have control over indigenous people and their land just because there are more of us. “To a former oppressor, equality feels like oppression.” You know how the Soviets got to implement their system in the land liberated from the Nazis? I think this situation is somewhat analogous. I have never heard a single indigenous person suggest displacing large amounts of non-natives. When the people at the Red Nation were asked about it they said they hadn’t even considered, people who ask questions like that are just afflicted with settler ideology. The same line of thinking that leads to great replacement theory. You say landback people want to take back whole cities, do you have any sources on this? All I can think of is First Nations people protesting the Dakota Access Pipeline as it runs through the land that should be theirs, is very damaging, and steals further from them. Another example of landback movements would be the “water is life” movement trying to take back water ways that are legally theirs to stop environmental degradation. I’m starting to think you’re debating in bad faith, with how little you seem to consider my points.

@QueerCommietoPhysical EducationLet's talk yoga
un día

I think they’re just pointing out the absurdity and orientalism of suggesting that as yoga has been distorted and popularized in the West, Indians must be backward and not doing enough yoga, or at least not correctly (correct being the coopted version).

Have you not be reading Kaffe’s comments? Settlers only live on a very small part of this continent. Very little of this land is actually in use beyond unsustainable resource extraction, yet indigenous people are barred from living the way they have for thousands of years. Even where non-native people do live a lot of the space is wasted. Around one fifth of cities is just parking. People are spread out in highly inefficient and environmentally damaging suburbs. If public transportation and better housing and agriculture is invested in we have plenty of space even for a decent expansion of settler population with good living standards without expanding. No one needs to be kicked out. It is the settler colonial mindset of our people killing and deporting others that makes us think that if the other side could they would. In fact that was part of the original genocidal alibi. We also get into “white genocide” and “great replacement theory” territory. They are not like us, they are better.

Maybe the question should have been. “Are you pale and the Nazis wouldn’t have killed you, or are you pale and they would have killed you?

Indigenous people didn’t go extinct or leave. They are alive across the continent in reservations and in settler communities. I’m not defending their right moralistically, it’s materially necessary. It is settlers and the horrible land use and environmental practices inherent to settler colonialism that is driving us into the ground. The only reason we’re still existing is because immense amounts of resources stolen from the global south. If we are going to face our great environmental challenges like climate change the people who have lived here for millennia who understand how this land works will need ownership of the resources.

Is this article mostly meant to help newbies?

I’m well. I just have a few annoying finals, but then I’ll be free during summer vacation.

This guy is a nightmare. If I were to say some things I’d say, if markets are so great and the state is so bad then why is Lybia not paradise right now? It’s got a fail state with no power and the market is so “free” that there’s an open air slave trade. If profits are a measure of how good an institution is for society then why aren’t libraries highly profitable? (Then, of course these types probably don’t even believe in libraries). If supply and demand is so great then what should the price be when there is equal supply and demand? You can measure quality of life, it can be shown through literacy, poverty, longevity, and other statistics, all of which are far better. If increasing internet access is good, who cares if the effort could have been used on something slightly better? I could go on but I won’t. Understand the desire to have the last word, but it’s not worth your time. Just say “you’re too dogmatic to consider anything I’ve written because you are trapped in a fantasyland divorced from reality. Thus, I will cease to discuss with you, as you are not worth the energy.” They’ll either cope with a couple more comments saying “what!? Debate me!” Or they’ll assume they won, and either way it should not matter to you.

That’s the book covered in the most recent season of Marx Madness. The podcast is great if you want a more in depth and radical version, though it’s over 30 hours in total.

They seem obnoxious. I could say how to address the arguments, but honestly you’re probably wasting your time debating a neoliberal deep in the comment section of a deleted post on r/India.

I highly suggest the Decolonized Buffalo, Red Nation, and Marx Madness podcasts.

As an operative for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, I cannot wait for the results!

It seems like most people especially patsocs ignore those who actually have revolutionary potential. We should be focused on organizing the colonized, the homeless, certain sections of the lumpen proletariat, and so on.

Exactly, most USians own nothing. If you’re lucky you own a house. Very few own large tracts of land. Land back means taking the land from the colonial government and bourgeois landlords and landholders like Bill Gates.

True, that’s why I think the six downvotes are funny. I imagine them saying “no, MWM is perfect!”

Midwestern Marx= Marxist publisher/think tank/content creators They’ve been known to platform patsocs. Carlos Garrido wrote the purity fetish and the crisis of western Marxism, which brushes off anti-Americanism and acknowledgement of labor aristocracy as things by puritans.

I don’t think patsocs fall into the “purity question” at all because they are simply neither communists nor leftists of any sort.

I think you’re right about criticizing them doesn’t make you a purist, but I think at least some of them do believe in communism or leftism, though they are a severe right deviation, not understanding dialectics, material conditions or the character of nationalism.

Tbf as others have said, they’re mostly crypto-patsocs. I’ve primarily seen the good takes on China and Venezuela and assumed they’re alright. When I watched the purity fetish interview there were some dog whistles, but I brushed them off. Only recently was I told of the “in defense of patriotism” article (from Marx madness), and I only happened upon this thread because I finally found Zikato’s Twitter.

I’m sure there’s a few kids who just wanna free Assange that these tailists can get on their side, but we shouldn’t abandon progressives.

(Thread here: https://nitter.fdn.fr/RodericDay/status/1666063389733298176#m) They have some decent stuff, but they are also [tailist patsocs](https://www.midwesternmarx.com/articles/in-defense-of-us-proletarian-patriotism-a-comradely-response-to-danny-haiphongs-marxist-polemic-on-patriotic-socialism-by-kayla-popuchet). It’s probably better to just read the [Black Agenda Report article](https://blackagendareport.com/western-marxism-loves-purity-and-martyrdom-not-real-revolution) than buy the book.

I disagree, I’ve heard some decent comrades like Gerald Horne criticize J. Sakai. I do think it’s good to be very skeptical of people that who are suspiciously upfront about hating the book, or use it as a way to differentiate themselves from other MLs. Critics of Settlers are fine as long as they explicitly acknowledge the large part settler colonialism plays in North American material conditions, and/or don’t completely disregard the book.

Huh, I may have been misremembering, so idk. I’ve personally read a summary book of capital and grundrisse, and have a copy of vol 1, but am scared to open it.

Chapters, they said that’s where the essential stuff is if your not going to read the whole thing.

Did you read the comment? Russia didn’t do it for profit they did it for pure spite./s

I agree with most of the comments. It’s good to give constructive criticism but Rainer just likes to shit on everyone but his own crypto-patsoc group. He’s read his theory, but I’m not sure how much he understands the actual material conditions (not that I do much better).

That (the TYT clip) is where I got the idea for my comment. Y’know the caller was right, I was a progressive and now I’m a Marxist. Also, “China is capitalism on steroids” or is it socialism on steroids? Does not the government and private companies both do lots of stuff? If the US is already socialist then why are they calling for socialism?

When the government does enough stuff. The US government is the most communist bc of all the subsidies it gives to corporations, the large surveillance state, and the massive military.

True, I just want to have the last word. Should I stick to “you’re dogmatic and unMarxist and it would not be productive for me to waste my energy on you?”

I don’t plan on giving another reply after this one. I just want to debunk them, and say they are dogmatic and unMarxist, as to not look like their arguments were too good, so that I could not defend myself on my own post.

I don’t consider them to the left of us either. I can respect an anarchist who is willing to work with us, but most are just radical liberals. They see us to the “right” of them because they think “authoritarianism” is a right wing characteristic. Like the right libertarians whose political spectrum is lib to auth rather than left to right.

I usually think of ultra-leftists as people who are at least somewhat idealist and consider themselves to the left of ML (the type who call us revisionist or authoritarian). The ideologies I’d consider Ultras most of the time are Trotskyist who are idealist in that they think we can have world revolution in one go, and anything less isn’t internationalist enough, Leftcoms who look for the ideal revolution where everything was pure and Marxist, Maoists who are sectarian and look for perfect ideologically revolutions as opposed to what actually works and has a positive impact, and anarchists whose whole ideology is based on a blanket opposition to doing anything because other people tell them to, and think that organizations are too authoritarian, so we just need a spontaneous revolt that will magically get rid of all governments and everything will be fine.

From what I can tell he just seems like some libertarian who wants to pick fights. His top song (cover above) is called [genocide](https://youtu.be/d697eVYYOlc) and features exclusively people that seem to be implied to be Soviets. I expected some horseshoe theory, but the songs just him complaining about haters plus some Nazi related jokes. He’s got a song called Chinese propaganda (feat. MKULTRA), and at first it seems like he could just be responding to the haters on Twitter by joking about his XI Bucks, but then he talks about Taiwan and “our supreme leader” and I’m not sure. If he knows what MKULTRA is maybe he’s not totally ignorant. He also has a song called Isis type beat, which seems like a respectable shitpost, and it reminded me of Yugopnik talking about Isis edits going hard. I did some googling, and all I got of his politics are he is representative of the ambiguous “American melting pot.” Thoughts? Edit: weird YT short of his-https://youtube.com/shorts/W4PrmKB0FX8?feature=share

Did anyone else have a weird introduction to theory?
I know every Marxist space has their reading list of essentials, and I’ve read some of those, but I started on a completely different path. The first theory book I read a Gaddafi’s Green Book because I was reading people on Quora praising his achievements. It was decent especially the second part, sort of “libertarian socialist” in a preferable way. I was definitely lacking some of the cultural context for the family and political structure, but overall not a bad book, but not the normalest intro book. The second I read of Reform or Revolution by Rosa Luxembourg, on the Deprogram’s recommendation, which was valuable, but again not the most orthodox. I think the third theory book I read was Imperialism by Lenin (I got a paperback for christmas), which I seemed to lack some context for and it was very information dense, but I love his writing style and dunks on Kautsky. A good introduction for imperialism. Anyone else have a similar experience?

Opinion on Engels’ position that the distinction between rural and urban should be abolished?
I could see removing smaller buildings and replacing them with more greenery, and maybe building some sort of self sufficient sky scrapers in a wilderness of food forests that used to be monoculture. However, I don’t think it’s practical or necessary to remove existing urban infrastructure and build vastly more across all wilderness. In addition vertical farms and forests can be made in cities, so again not exactly necessary. Obviously we should make sure rural people have everything they need within biking distance, but we don’t need to take it to the absolute extreme.

Who are the best and worst people you share a personality type with?
As an INTP my best are: Albert Einstein, Friedrich Engels, Rene Descartes, Abraham Lincoln, and Edward Snowden. Worst are: Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman, John Locke, Albert Speer, and George Soros. If you don’t know what type you “are” just look up Myers Briggs test. (Disclaimer: this stuff’s basically pseudoscience, but it is interesting to think about who might have though kind of like you)

How to sway idealists?
I’ve been talking (texting) to a relative a lot in the past few days since the topic of Marxism came up in physical discussion. I feel like there’s some progress being made, but she’s very annoying, and I don’t know how worth it it is. To start, I think I’d classify her ideology as doomer anarchism-pacifism with Christian characteristics. She says she’s for some sort of communism, but she seems to think that means only literal communes or reformism. She thinks all real revolutions have just been people imposing their ideology onto people, and that as soon as physical violence is inflicted it’s “impure.” As soon as you kill one person for any reason you just go mad and start killing people for no reason. Anything that can be achieved through violence is not worth it. I have shown her that China is at least a little better than the US and media lies about DPRK, but she seems to think that’s at *expense* of political freedom. She thinks AES is very socially conservative, and when I point to evidence toward the contrary she says I’m just cherry-picking evidence, and that somehow the fiction she’s consumed and her feelings matter more than any fact I lay down. She pointed to the book ‘gulag archipelago’ and I pointed out that the author was a Nazi and gulags were just normal prisons, but apparently that makes me on par with holocaust deniers. I say we need to look at failures and successes from the past to learn what’s best for the future instead of idealizing history, but it’s “impure” so that’s not allowed. She sort of accepts that they were just prisons, but then again she thinks all states are evil bc a state killed Jesus, so none could ever be half decent so why try. She thinks all humanity is evil and you can never trust a group, even though she’s read the Graber book that is basically the anarchist answer to the human nature argument. She’s also watched azure scapegoat(?) vid on it. I try to find the limits to her limits on pacifism, and she’s for self defense in theory, she can’t deny Soviets fighting in WWII was justified, but she won’t listen to arguments for organized resistance in any other situation. She doesn’t get that the implicit structural violence in capitalism is bad enough that revolution is self defense. I ask for evidence of any condemnation of AES, and she just says art and her individual thoughts and feelings, so I end up just straight up condemning individualism, bc everything is connected and your thought don’t come out of nowhere. I don’t think that helped. I say I’m a materialist and utilitarian so I try to see the world how it is, not based on abstract ideas, but of course I’m just an arrogant kid listening to commie propaganda. Idk if this is a rant or question post anymore, but any advice? Edit: she just said the anti-communist consensus in the west can’t be from a conspiracy, so it’s obviously right.

Focusing on productive labor
Patsocs tend to want to focus on productive labor and suggest working with students, lumpen proletarians and the average service worker is inefficient. I’ve heard the defense of this that blue-collar workers, truckers, etc are the ones who actually have the power to shut stuff down, and are therefore the most powerful for revolution and so on. Is that a valid line of argument? Is it a good strategy to focus on organizing those workers?

This is the writing of a “Marxist” anti-vaxxer. They obviously (and somewhat reasonably) don’t listen to mainstream media, so it’s more difficult.

Made the mistake of looking up communist pickup lines
cross-posted from: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/628221 > Most of them don’t really make sense or are just anti-communist “jokes.” > The best two I found were “Roses are red and so is the state, let us be comrades because I think you are great” because it’s sweet and not necessarily romantic, and “Hey good looking. Are you the government? Because I would totally like to make you fall for me” because it’s just good. I also found one that I made up independently “are you the means of production? Because I want to seize you.” Which is just funny because it’s absurd. > Are there any good communist pickup lines you know or can think of?

Free vegetable on the side of the road
If you’ve found knotweed growing near you it sucks, but at least there’s some food at no cost.

How to respond to this?
![](https://lemmygrad.ml/pictrs/image/d4f87453-0341-4639-979b-4b7eeac84248.png) ![](https://lemmygrad.ml/pictrs/image/6b656778-cc6d-4234-9a4c-c2ab0edda6c9.png)

I didn’t realize PCUSA were such settler chouvanists.
In a recent call on the national question someone asked about how some people say the United States is not a legitimate nation because of settler colonialism and he said he knew it was obviously wrong but was wondering what their mistake is. Someone claimed that “landback” people never have a clear policy proposal. And I was shocked and hoping it could be rectified. Next was said in response that it’s true as Stalin said that the US became a nation when it left Britain because it was a specific group of settlers, but it expanded through brutal means and that should be rectified. After a while into the call eventually the issue was returned to. The fact that there are still many indigenous tribes within the US and therefore should be given their original land and sovereignty was said. In response people said that it would make them to isolated from the union and they have the option to have that sovereignty from their reservations, but obviously choose not to, which is absurd because these states should also get lots of aid and solidarity from other socialist areas (as this would be after the revolution and it would be different to now). I thought it was bad enough but after it was said that primarily settler colonial nations need their histories rectified they said that they don’t even oppose the existence of Israel anymore. Then the gensec said that people are ignoring “dialectics” that things change. People move in and out of territory- (though usually not by genocide)- and therefore the US is no different and we should not try to change that. “All the slaves are dead.”-Though people are still affected by that history, native Americans are still under special oppression by the state, and in the case of Palestine people are still alive that can remember having their land stolen and have physical evidence that it belonged to them- according to another “some Marxists read Marx and Lenin and come to the opposite conclusions” suggesting those bad Marxists are the “land-back” people. Whoever warned me that they were PatSocs are right. What should I do? Is there hope of convincing them? Should I leave ASAP? Should I wait? It’s been mentioned here that we should follow the leadership of BIPOC people, does anyone know the modern equivalent of the White Panthers or AIM I should join? Edit: I forget to mention the made the point that refugees are coming here now and if we do landback there would be refugees from here-like, sure people’d have to move but we’ve got space, and aren’t our birth rates declining anyway? It’s not like there’ll be an anti-white trail of tears. With socialist central planning we can allocate resources to support evicted settlers. Also, there’s a whole lotta land that’s privately owned that could easily be expropriated for indigenous people along with national parks which they’d manage far better. I think they also suggested that we need to integrate Native Americans as much as possible because their sovereignty won’t help. Finally, apparently they would’ve supported the new Afrikan struggle in the 30’s, but since I guess they don’t think you can fight fascism and racism and colonialism at the same time.

Poll: are you spiritual?
Please only comment on existing ones to explain something specific. Upvote my comments on the post if they apply to you. Upvote comments on comments to acknowledge them (ie even if they don’t apply to you). Ive noticed polls can get clogged with more detailed explanations, so I think having my comments be designated as the only poll options to insure the accuracy of the poll. Please don’t downvote things that don’t apply to you.

::: spoiler spoiler /j :::

Poll: Did you join Lemmygrad because of the Genzedong purge?
Upvote the comment that applies to you. Please don’t double-vote.

I’m probably going to buy it

Gender demographics
Has anyone else noticed how communists, it seems are mostly men, and then there is also a disproportionately high amount of trans-fems? Does anyone have any theories why? How many of you are cis-women and I haven’t noticed?

undefined ::: spoiler spoiler For the record, I don’t know shit about styles of beyond, just that they’re in the one fort minor Song. :::

Books on North Korea?
Are there any good books on the DPRK? I’m currently trying to convince someone that they’re good, but with any short article or video I send they just say “I get they were crushed by American imperialism, but how do I know the stuff about them doing relatively well now isn’t just propaganda?” I’ve tried sending documentaries like Loyal Citizens of Pyongyang In Seol, but they don’t like watching things, and would rather read. So, what are some good sources?

What is the threshold for cancellation?
At what point does someone who is mostly reasonable, with a few bad takes become someone not worth listening to? Also, can we separate the art from the artist? For example with Badempanada, he has a couple bad China takes and is kind of toxic online, but he’s well researched, so it really depends whether ML’s I’ve met listen to him. Do you listen to Maoists who are good 95% of the time, but might have a bad Gonzalo take from time to time? Or is there enough agreeable content on the internet that you can just listen to those you agree with? Are certain bad takes just too bad? Will you stop listening to someone after they say something transphobic, even if they’re good the rest of the time like Paul Cockshott? Or if someone is willing to talk with someone like a Larouchite, are they automatically a right deviationist with nothing worthwhile to say, or are the just forming a United front on a specific issue?

The probably cancelled podcast is probably the most “conspiracy theory” prone Marxist podcast I listen to, but this is a little far. Their claims are the following: -bill gates’ bunk science “philanthropy” is a front for ibm (who have historically been involved in eugenics) to depopulate the third world (which I believe) -Fauci doesn’t know anything about the science that would be relevant to fighting pandemics, he was involved in trying to stop good hiv treatment from becoming accessible -the Covid pandemic may have been planned, suspiciously similar to simulations, intentionally planned to be used for suppressing lefty information (said watch event 201) -ventilators are difficult to operate, and most people that were being put on them died, so it’s sus they were calling for more -the common medication used in the US is bad, -hospitals have monetary incentives to attribute hospitalizations to Covid -ivermectin is effective at treating Covid, demonized as “horse paste” when it’s actually often used on humans, (which I’m sympathetic to, as it was commonly used in Latin America) -hydroxychloriquin treats Covid, tests saying otherwise were using intentionally bad methodology -according to VERS a lot of people are being harmed by Covid vaccines (which I’m very suspicious of, as correlation doesn’t equal causation with vers, but many I listen to too many libs) -masks are making people sick (which I’m very suspicious of, bc I’ve gotten sick wayyy less since I’ve been wearing a mask daily) -boosters are a scheme to make more money bc with actual vaccines it’s supposed to develope anti-bodies once and you’ll be fine -the vaccine causes blood clots etc, (which I’m very suspicious of, but maybe lib debunkings are wrong?) I would like to know what you, comrades think of these claims.

IG alternatives?
Are there any good websites like nitter or teddit for accessing Instagram? There’s some good content on there, but I don’t like using the app, and online requires an account.

Evidence of COVID-19 as bio weapon?
Ive seen it referenced before, and all the evidence I’ve seen is that the West was talking about coronavirus in China before they were even talking about it. Is there any more evidence?

https://www.sm28.org/articles/j11-the-return-of-the-cuban-proletariat/ I’m wondering your thoughts on this. I think they are ancoms and/or leftcoms, so obviously I took everything with a grain of salt. They have both been to Cuba in the last few years, and talked to people there. I’m pretty sure they are talking about “#soscuba.” This is what they claim: -the Cuban people have become disillusioned with communism -since the economy is mostly based on tourism the state puts a lot of money into resorts for foreigners instead of caring for their people, Cuba therefore basically already has capitalism, especially because most of their economy relies on exports and trading with companies like nestle -the people were originally supportive of the revolution, but since Fidel died stuff has gotten worse -Cuba really peaked in the 90s when people took care of each other and there were cool farming programs and stuff -since, the farming stuff has ceased and most people are food insecure -the government is bureaucratic and is very strict not wanting people to do anything they don’t directly approve of -at this point the Cuban people don’t even care about political ideology, they just want an end to it -one claimed most people on the street will express disapproval of the gov, while the other claimed most people say they want capitalism -they say Cuba has a very small amount of crime and then claim that they have a high incarceration which is mostly political prisoners -the Cuban anarchist they interview claims there was no cia involvement, but if there were they would have welcomed it My assumption was that the sanctions on Cuba are what is causing most of these problems, but they deny it as the underlying problem. They acknowledge the “Stalinist” talking points that Batista was worse, etc and say they’re right, but that doesn’t mean Cuba’s gov isn’t bad. Then they say something about Communism naturally coming to be hated by people in places like Cuba and the USSR, (of course they think their own specific brand of communism would be better), and this rubs me the wrong way, as the people of the USSR didn’t want it to end, in fact they almost voted the communist party back into power after the undemocratic dissillusion. So, what do you think? Is the US’ strategy of sanctioning countries til their people get desperate working? Is cuba a degenerated workers state?


Great interview