Yes because we all can afford to move abroad and not try to improve material conditions. Also, not trying in first world countries will just give governments like the US and UK more leeway to oppress AES and third world countries. BE isn’t even apart of an org either.
I don't think moving is giving up, intrinsically. I think moving to the the peripheries could be good if done on an organizational level to get comrades with money and skills cooperating on projects internationally and boost up places that need it. I think people moving from the US to like Denmark or Canada is basically giving up. I can't really judge people for doing it in the short term simply because telling them they need sacrifice themselves for hope isn't necessarily going to make the world any better.
I don't like turbo-Sakaist analysis of the imperial core though. It seems to take a neolib understanding of GDP, wealth, etc. and then come to the same conclusion as those neolibs that everyone in the imperial core is beyond wealthy because of capitalism and everyone's benefitting from it. It seems Sakaists think that wealth is from unequal exchange and neolibs think it's due to the peripheries not adopting capitalism hard enough. If everything imperial core workers own is by debt and they can lose everything due to injury, economic downturn, landlord greed, etc. at any moment then they're not actually rich. And people are actually smart enough to recognize this, generally, when asked to think about it.
i wanna make clear that i agree with you that moving doesn't necessarily mean giving up, especially under the conditions you're outlining. my ire was more directed at grandiose statements like the one in the title; shit like "THE WESTERN LEFT WILL NEVER LOVE AGAIN" or whatever both flattens the nascent movements that do exist and deserve praise/support and discourages participation (under the logic that "there's no point anyway")
deleted by creator
Agreed.