this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2024
36 points (83.3% liked)

GenZedong

4322 readers
51 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.

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:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] redtea@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This seems to be a category error. Settler and white aren't synonyms even if there is significant overlap in a white supremacist system.

[–] ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml -3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Then who is a settler in the United States at this point? For Israel the distinction is easy. The lines are to muddied in the US.

Yes it is a white supremacist system, but settlerism is entirely obsolete save for the vestiges of colonial policies that are still maintained.

[–] Pathfinder@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think determining who is a settler is like our Marxist definitions of class - it’s not meant to categorize every single person into a category, its only meant to describe a group that doesn’t have firm boundaries. White people in the US are settlers. The fact that who is “white” has a very fuzzy and fluid definition doesn’t take away from being able to identify a group (white people) and classify them as settlers.

By any definition, I’m white. I’m a settler. That doesn’t mean I should just take myself out of the game and stop organizing. But that does mean I should be aware of my own privilege and be careful to check my own assumptions and thought. And when my non-white comrades call me out on something, I am 100% going to really take what they say to heart.

[–] bubbalu@hexbear.net 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What is your definition of settler?

[–] Pathfinder@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

More or less someone who takes land away from an indigenous population and treats it as their own, OR the descendants of those who did so long as there is a material benefit received by the settler’s descendants.

But of course this definition leaves gray areas; even situation is different as the material situation is different.

[–] ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Wouldn’t quite literally every single person in the United States fit the first definition?

Unless you mean directly which means that the population percentage which fits that definition drops to a tiny tiny amount.

[–] Pathfinder@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

No. It wouldn’t apply to, for example, African Americans; whose ancestors were brought to this country by force and can hardly be said to have benefitted from the original stealing of the land.

Settlement involves the forcible appropriation of land (and the ethnic cleansing that involves), then removing all the indigenousness of that land and making it “your own”. What this creates is a settler class that enjoys in perpetuity the fruits of that appropriation.

White people in the US are settlers. Because it was white Europeans who stole the land and committed genocide. This settlement created an entire social strata that benefitted from this appropriation. And the benefits accrue to successive generations of white people. I saw a stat somewhere that said ~25% of all wealth in the US today can be traced to the Homestead Act, which excluded black and indigenous people.

Look, I’m a settler. I’m also middle class / labor aristocrat. This is simply a material fact. But none of that means I cannot devote my life to breaking the system that allows settler colonialism, white supremacy, and capitalism to persist. The history of communism is littered with class traitors and others who recognized the privileges they had and sought their destruction.

[–] Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Even the American liberals realise that vast differences exist in the wealth of the different races in America that are the direct result of explicit discrimination that existed just 2-3 generations ago and implicit discrimination that still exists today. The existence of a settler class in America is undeniable.

Finding out which individual belongs to which class is one the other, almost always a pointless endeavour since classes are an emergent phenomena in groups of people.

[–] ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Again, you are conflating race and settlerism. The US is a white supremacist state, but you are using settler and race interchangeably.

Who is a settler?

[–] Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Again, you are conflating race and settlerism

Race is entirely a product of settlerism in the first place.

Who is a settler?

The settler class as a whole inherited humongous amounts of real estate wealth (which then exploded exponentially further under neoliberalism) and live in the more developed neighbourhoods of the country.

Think of suburban single family homeowners. These people are settlers in the truest sense of the word. They are the urbanised version of the settler yeoman farmer. They use more land, water and energy than basically any non-bourgeois class on earth, and by a long shot.

Their lifestyle and luxury is fueled by government subsidies (distributed on a racial basis) to the massively inefficient infrastructure and agriculture needed to sustain them.

When I say that the US and Canada continue to practice settler colonialism and still have a settler mode of production, I mean it quite literally. North american suburbs are notorious for their urban sprawl, that is, uncontrolled expansion, which is/was fueled by tearing apart dense developments suitable for the lifestyles of the proletariat. Not to mention that the urban proletariat's production is siphoned off to the suburbs via the government.

[–] ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 1 week ago

I agree wholeheartedly with your point.

The only problem is that utterly massive portions of the black community, Latino community, Asian communities, and other races all participate in that “suburban settlerism”. Making race based division in this case pointless.

[–] redtea@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It is muddied, I agree. The question is who maintains those policies and by what processes of production and reproduction. Legislators don't achieve anything by writing a new policy or law; it takes thousands to carry out their will, either consciously or accidentally.

Two other important points are that (1) settler isn't necessarily a permanent description—settlers can choose a different path—and (2) in the US context, settler-coloniser involves internal and external relations (in terms of inside and outside the US)—being a US settler means e.g. demanding a redistribution of wealth to provide social services and healthcare without acknowledging that most of that wealth flows in from the periphery and much of the 'domestic' wealth creation is clever 'value added' accounting.

Doing something about the problem is a quick way of negating the description of settler even for those who objectively and clearly fit it (e.g. middle managers in arms factories, officers in the military, the police, and haute bourgeois ranchers on the border of reserves). Things that can be done:

  • reading revolutionary theory and educating others about necessary changes
  • organising to prevent the continued pollution of and resource extraction on land that is still clearly designated as native land
  • going on strike over issues of institutional racism and/or imperialism
  • getting involved in prison abolition
  • not voting for and therefore supporting the very people responsible for no tolerance policing in racially targeted zipcodes
  • getting written signatures on a petition to fairly fund schools
  • attending government meetings and repeatedly asking, 'what about reparations'
  • striking in solidarity with workers in the global south who are in the same value chain as one's industry
  • not compromising on shipping weapons when one's transport union is on the verge of winning a pay rise
  • campaigning against the interference of US capital in other countries
  • doing anything to oppose the US military industrial complex

There are a lot of ongoing manifestations and practices of settler colonialism. It's difficult to pick out and articulate the role of specific individuals who are settlers but it's not impossible to consider the system as a whole and then analyse any individual's or group's position/role in the system.