Did everyone coordinate? Was there some incitement?
This again? American Socialist Twitter seems to be on a kick with this, where they say "American patriotism" is good, actually.
If that's not what you're referring to, please link an example.
We're getting ready to go to war with China. Getting the Succ Dems on board with various mental gymnastics is part of the process. Usually it's shit like "workers are patriots, you gotta be with them" or "it's to spread democracy, those people over there are regressive savages who must be shown the Light".
Uh, maybe? I'm not on twitter, I've just seen a few on youtube (a "good" source of second-hand discourse): Peter Coffin video Bad Faith Luna Oi and Hakin Infrared and Caleb Maupin
Obviously, there is a longer tradition of socialist discourse regarding nations, but why now
An American on Twitter (can't remember which) said "I am a socialist. I am an American Patriot." or something like that and got roasted.
Jackson Hinkle
He roasted Vaush in a debate so badly that he ragequit so I thought he might've been okay but I guess it wasn't meant to be
Peter Coffin video
"A popular misconception is that communists hate America. This is wrong. We just don't like the US state - and no one else does, either!"
citation: William Z. Foster "Toward Soviet America"
oh hey, it's that guy who is literally used as a model for class traitor white unionism in Settlers
Foster's lynch mob oratory was only restrained by the formality expected of a Euro-Amerikan "communist" leader. His white-supremacist message was identical to but more politely clothed than the crude rants of the Ku Klux Klan. He warned that the capitalists were grooming Afrikans as "as race of strike-breakers, with whom to hold the white workers in check; on much the same principle as the Czars used the Cossacks to keep in subjugation the balance of the Russian people." It's easy to see how Foster became such a popular leader among the settler workers.
https://readsettlers.org/ch6.html
Both the strike leadership and the bourgeoisie cleverly promoted this hatred, encouraging the European immigrant and "native-born" settler alike to turn all their anger and bitterness onto the Afrikan nation. Perhaps the most interesting role was played by William Z. Foster, the chief leader of the strike. He was one of the leading "socialist" trade-unionists of the period, and in 1920 would become a leader in the new Communist Party USA. From then on until his death he would be a leading figure of settler "communism." Even today young recruits in the CPUSA and Mao Zedong Thought organizations are often told to "study" Foster's writings in order to learn about labor organizing.
William Z. Foster had, as the saying goes, "pulled defeat out of the jaws of victory." Foster based the strike on the A.F.L. unions, despite their proven record of treachery and hostility towards the proletarian masses. That alone guaranteed defeat. He encouraged white supremacist feeling and thus united the honest elements with the most reactionary. Despite the great popular support for a nation-wide strike and the angry sentiments of the most exploited steelworkers, Foster and the other A.F.L. leaders so sabotaged the strike that it went down to defeat. The one "smart" thing he did was to cover up his opportunistic policies by following the capitalists in using Afrikans as the scapegoats.
In his 1920 history of the strike, Foster (the supposed "communist") repeated the lie that Afrikan workers had "lined up with the bosses." In fact, Foster even said that in resolving the differences between Euro-Amerikan and Afrikan labor "The negro has the more difficult part" since the Afrikan worker was becoming "a professional strike-breaker." And militant white workers knew what they were supposed to do to a "professional strike-breaker."
Foster's lynch mob oratory was only restrained by the formality expected of a Euro-Amerikan "communist" leader. His white-supremacist message was identical to but more politely clothed than the crude rants of the Ku Klux Klan. He warned that the capitalists were grooming Afrikans as "as race of strike-breakers, with whom to hold the white workers in check; on much the same principle as the Czars used the Cossacks to keep in subjugation the balance of the Russian people." It's easy to see how Foster became such a popular leader among the settler workers.
No longer was it just a question of some Afrikans not following the orders of the white labor. Now Foster was openly saying that the entire Afrikan "race" was the enemy. Could the imperialists have asked for more, than to have the leading "communist" trade-union leader help them whip up the oppressor nation masses to repress the Afrikan nation?
The Cossacks were the hated and feared special military of the Russian Czar, used in bloody repressions against the people. Only the most twisted, Klan-like mentality would have so explicitly compared the oppressed Afrikan nation to those infamous oppressors. And was this message not an incitement to mob terror and genocide? For the poor immigrants from Eastern Europe (much of which was under the lash of Czarist tyranny) to kill a Cossack was an act of justice, of retribution. The threat was easy to read.
In case Afrikans didn't get Foster's threat (which was also being delivered in the streets, as we know), Foster made it even more plain. He said that if Afrikans failed to obey the decisions of settler labor: "It would make our industrial disputes take on more and more the character of race wars, a consummation that would be highlv injurious to the white workers and eventually ruinous to the blacks."
Do people here actually take infrashite, cuckleb maupin, or peter cuckfin seriously? These assholes are purely cynical manchildren who exploit socialism as a means of getting money.
peter coffin was useful to me in the past as he does a decent job explaining society of the spectacle. The problem is that he doesn't ever put forward a path to revolution, and just says "wow, this is bad. read my book."
is doesn't require the CIA to make the American labor aristocracy support their political program. Their material class interests are aligned, you're going to see more woke "social democrats" soyface at patriotism than say the word "segregated nazi ghettos"
It was being talked about a lot on (American) left Twitter a week or two ago, not sure if it's still going on but that prompted a lot of YouTubers to make their thoughts known on the issue
Probably related to the end of the war in Afghanistan and/or 20th anniversary of 9/11 (which america deserved)
I haven't seen any of this content though so I have no idea what I'm talking about
Idk what started it but rev left radio did a short episode on this too. Good shit as always
sorry i didnt hear about this on citations needed
the bad faith episode was pretty frustrating though. gerald horne being all "amerika is a settler colonial project and NOT an experiment in democratic governance, can't you see that the whites aren't waiting for left politics to mobilize them, they are organizing themselves in class-collaborationist fascist formations" and bri being all "yes american history is problematic but can't we build a multiracial coalition to do good things with some 'new patriotism'?"
It's an interesting question. Like if the left in the US won how do you deal with the fact that so many areas don't have any industrial capacity or much to trade or how do you manage to field a large enough force to deter counter revolutionary forces from other western countries? Would we enter a sort of HK situation where the groups wanting to claim independence are crushed by the material reality that HK was completely dependent on mainland trade and resources? If we decided to abandon nationalism when at the controls, could we?
