To put it as plainly as possible, if the proponents of the U.S. settler-colonialism theory are correct, then there is no basis whatsoever upon which to build a multinational working class communist party in this country. Indeed, such a view sees the “settler working class” as instruments of colonialism, hostile to the interests of the colonized people, rather than viewing all working and oppressed people as natural allies in the struggle against imperialism, our mutual oppressor.

A shame, a sad sad shame. For anyone that's read settlers, or knows about the history of labor zionism, or prioritizes any kind of indigenous voice in their praxis, this is really bad. No peace for settlers! Settlers cannot lead the revolution! I hope we see an end to any respect given to this "settler colonialism is over" politic soon.

  • bubbalu [they/them]
    ·
    3 days ago

    This type of defeatist third-worldism is even worse white man's burden. If genuinely nothing can be done in the imperial core, than all that remains is to wait for revolutionaries in the Global South to establish JDPON. Unless you are going to put up and join in with the 'legitimate proletariat' in the Global South, you are basically saying you are entitled to do the intellectual work of revolution while revolutionaries there do all the fighting and dying. This seems like a sublimated justification for inaction.

    From 'A Critique of Maoist Reason' by J. Mouffawad-Paul:

    What ultimately disqualifies [third-worldism] from correctly representing [revolutionary] reason is that it has no logical basis upon which to develop its theoretical insights. If there is no proletariat in the imperialist metropoles, and thus no proletarian movement, the first world third worldist cannot make a correct assessment of anything since it cannot practice the mass line.

    I would be interested to see a single vibrant organization in the Global South that upholds this line. If you know of any, please share.

    • StalinistSteve@lemmygrad.ml
      hexagon
      ·
      2 days ago

      I think it can give us a guide for revolutionary praxis here in America that avoids the many problems other settler communist parties or organizations tend to have. Settlers aka yt people aka those who benefit from imperialism abroad and settler colonialism at home are a different class and don't have the revolutionary class consciousness that a native person or a black person in the ghetto does. I'm no third worldist and certainly no maoist but rather I support efforts for decolonial marxism and smashing the imperialist war machine, and I think if we were to have a real revolutionary party it should take the form of something similar to the EFF or the BPP.

      Organizing and working among the hyper-exploited and poor in our own communities is possible, and despite the mass of treats from abroad, conditions for many people here are horrible and can/should be seen through a revolutionary organization. I just believe that having settlers lead this organization who don't experience the bulk of this oppression, mostly lack non-capitalist communal structures, and actively have a stake in the continuation of the flow of jobs/housing opportunities they are much more privy to is one of the major problems plaguing our efforts.

    • IHave69XiBucks@lemmygrad.ml
      ·
      3 days ago

      Its a very all or nothing take too. Like lets assume that theres a 0% chance of any successful revolutionary action in the USA. There are still actions people in the USA can take. Things they can do to take the pressure off the global south. Every soldier in the states fighting rebels, every bullet, and bomb not made in the factory workers walked out of. Is one less weapon for the empire to use against the rest of the world.

      • bubbalu [they/them]
        ·
        2 days ago

        But how is the ideology prerequisite to taking those actions going to form if all white workers are principally settlers? The point in the FRSO article isn't that racism doesn't exist or that racially/nationally oppressed people aren't exploited at a higher rate. It's that settler-colonialism is a specific stage of development where the dominant force in the economy is the primitive accumulation of indigenous wealth. Whereas now the "USA" is mainly an imperial power characterized by the export of capital. Calling the main economic paradigm of the "US" settler-colonialism is not an accurate or useful characterization.