42

This is something I've wondered about but never really seen an official leftist position on, and it's gotten a lot more relevant with the ongoing Palestinian uprising. Also curious if there is any good reading out there on this subject.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] drinkinglakewater@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago

There wasn't any systematic deportations as far as I know, so I don't see how else to categorize it. I understand what you mean about social pressures leading to them leaving, but ultimately leaving is an individual decision without a central mandate. Like with Cuban land reforms, the gusanos left because they lost economic privilege, there was no order to deport them and some still stayed and integrated into the new Cuban society. I'm saying all this to support that decolonization doesn't mean "whitey go home", but some whiteys will go home anyway.

[-] zifnab25@hexbear.net 8 points 1 year ago

ultimately leaving is an individual decision without a central mandate

That's horseshit. Might as well tell the folks in Greensboro or Tulsa as much.

Like with Cuban land reforms, the gusanos left because they lost economic privilege, there was no order to deport them and some still stayed and integrated into the new Cuban society.

A much better example, but it can't be understated what the backlash looked like immediately after the Revolution. And then again, following the Bay of Pigs fuckup. People were angry and rightfully so. You didn't need a government policy to organize a lynch mob or freeze out untouchables.

decolonization doesn't mean "whitey go home", but some whiteys will go home anyway.

Accumulated trauma among locals can make peaceful coexistence impossible, at least in the short term.

[-] drinkinglakewater@hexbear.net 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Might as well tell the folks in Greensboro or Tulsa as much.

Just to be clear, I'm talking entirely in the context of decolonization. POC leaving under a white supremacist settler state is different due to the state having an interest in them being displaced. Palestinians may make "individual choices" to leave under the Israeli state, but that's the goal of Israel and its various state apparatuses which ultimately makes it systematic.

And yes, I agree social tensions don't evaporate overnight and are inevitably the cause of violence in a new society.

[-] zifnab25@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago

POC leaving under a white supremacist settler state is different due to the state having an interest in them being displaced.

The Palestinian state has a real interest in removing settlers from disputed territory. And practically every inch of Israel is in some kind of dispute. The negotiated territory lines were all compromises made while Palestine was in a weakened state.

Even then, all of this is functionally a moot point, given that the Israeli response appears to be going full Korean War on the Gaza Strip. If the rest of the Middle Eastern states stand back and let this happen, its going to be a full blown genocide on national television.

this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2023
42 points (100.0% liked)

askchapo

22748 readers
365 users here now

Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.

Rules:

  1. Posts must ask a question.

  2. If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.

  3. Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.

  4. Try !feedback@hexbear.net if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS