this post was submitted on 09 May 2022
0 points (NaN% liked)
GenZedong
5286 readers
52 users here now
This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.
See this GitHub page for a collection of sources about socialism, imperialism, and other relevant topics.
This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.
We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.
Rules:
- No bigotry, anti-communism, pro-imperialism or ultra-leftism (anti-AES)
- We support indigenous liberation as the primary contradiction in settler colonies like the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel
- If you post an archived link (excluding archive.org), include the URL of the original article as well
- Unless it's an obvious shitpost, include relevant sources
- For articles behind paywalls, try to include the text in the post
- Mark all posts containing NSFW images as NSFW (including things like Nazi imagery)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm not discouraging anyone to read it, but do it with a more critical eye. The way people get emotional when someone criticizes the work Settlers should be an indicative that a critical discussion over it is seriously lacking.
There are many excerpts from the book that are actually very informative and useful, the author surely spent many years researching for this work. But the general thesis of the book is that white workers are inherently reactionary and counter-revolutionary, and they always act under the premise of being white, always protecting their white privilege. The main argument of the book is that white workers are just as much enemies as the bourgeoisie itself. J. Sakai does not present a coherent understanding of labor aristocracy, and he treats all white workers as if they were all labor aristocrats.
In contrast, the Marxist(-Leninist) attitude towards race was to first consider class relations, and work to overcome racism through class solidarity. This was exactly what the Chinese communists under the leadership of Mao Zedong did in China. In China, from Mao's time until today, there has been a Han ethnical majority. This was Mao's attitude to Han chauvinism:
This is in line with Mao's understanding that Han chauvinism (or racism) was an ideological issue. In no way Mao portray Han people as inherently racist and incapable of overcoming racism. It follows Mao's teaching to "cure the sickness to save the patient":
In Mao's China, the Han people was an ethnical majority. There was racism against ethnic minorities to the point even party cadres presented this reactionary tendency. One can argue that this may be only adequate to the conditions of China. But this attitude towards fighting racism by treating it as an ideological issue also was a part of the US revolutionary movements. Famously said Fred Hampton,
This was the reasoning behind the Rainbow Coalition, which united organizations representing several ethnic backgrounds, including Chinese, Latin American, white southerners, blacks, Native peoples, etc. This is what actually threatened the US establishment, racial solidarity towards a socialist struggle. J. Sakai's work just promotes race essentialism which actually preserves racism and bourgeois power.
Here is another good point-to-point critique of Settlers. And another. And yet another