101

Just listened to a conversation with amber where she basically makes excuses for Fascists for 40 minutes (hexbear.net)

submitted 3 weeks ago by Crustpunk3435@hexbear.net to c/chapotraphouse@hexbear.net

237 comments fedilink hide all child comments

stuff like "Well you call them the scum of the earth, why wouldnt they hate you"

Why are parts of the left like this? Seemingly caring more about courting the psychopath incel who wants a white ethnostate rather than stand in solidarity and antiracism with POC?

i always get disgusted and disillusioned when i come upon it

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 21 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

What does “agitate” and “arm” even mean here? What does “betray” even mean here? You’re talking in the most vague generalities.

Okay, so Fanon talks about how white French nationals were able to smuggle guns to Algerian patriots because the French colonial police wouldn't search their belongings. That's a concrete example of what "betray" meant in that context.

Once a white French national understood the Algerian struggle (or was made to understand it) they disposed of racialized colonial paternalism and, in effect, become Algerian. That's where our agitation comes in within our own settler-colonial context.

That's why I think Settlers is too pessimistic, and didn't actually recommend it. I think the privileged caste of workers can be awoken to the anticolonial struggle and become very useful to it.

But I do think that we can't have a workers' struggle until the settler-colonial situation is dealt with.

Listen if you don’t like Amber, you can not like Amber. You don’t need a real reason not to like someone. Trying to elevate whatever the reason you don’t like Amber using political theory is very silly.

I bought her book and shit, it's not like I hate her or anything. She's fine.

[-] _pi@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

[removed by mod]

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 27 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Cool, what does a concrete example of “betray” look like for Amerikkka and why does it matter.

Nice try FBI.

Kidding. But seriously, I think I was pretty clear about what it takes for crackkkers to become traitors to the settler-colonial project.

Okay so, I’m again frustrated by the lack of anything except reading Fanon back to me. The most charitable case I can make here for how this applies to Amerikkka, is you’re going to claim that there are and there are Amerikkkans and you’re going to explain to Amerikkkans how they need to be .

There are internally colonized peoples within the US who have been racialized as an inferior caste and there are whites that have benefited from that colonization and racialization, but have no actual historical or material understanding of their own place within settler-colonialism.

Unless a cracker is a direct agent or beneficiary of colonialism, a cop or finance bro or some shit, they can actually be made to understand the colonial situation.

And it's happening. Whites in the US are awakening to the colonial situation in Israel, and that's not far removed from awakening to the colonial situation in the US.

In fact Fanon is much more loosey goosey with this shit than Maoist Thirdworldism is because under Maoist Thirdworldism there is no “becoming Algerian” there is no permanent alliance based on culture/ethnicity.

There is no permanent alliance when settlers are nationalized either, this only makes sense in the stage of the struggle against colonialism. This is merely the recognition of the primary contradiction and the struggle against it, and once the colonial situation is dealt with the situation changes. Mao had the same position.

The problem here is that ultimately this is the same struggle with different rhymes. “dealing” with settler-colonialism is actually an even more difficult struggle because the workers struggle is postmodernist (e.g. workers are a newly manufactured unified people, the proletariat) in nature where the settler-colonial struggle is modernist because it must deal with a moralistic re-alignment of a caste system of preexisting peoples.

Do you think settlers aren't a manufactured unified people? Racialization into castes is a project of settler-colonialism, it's not a preexisting part of society that must be realigned and it's certainly not moralist. That's why a settler can betray colonialism and become Algerian in the national struggle.

You can't build a workers' movement until you deal with the contradictions between colonized and colonizers, because white workers will work against the international workers' movement for their own special interests. A union that shuts down the ports for all commercial traffic except for Israel is a fucking problem, because colonized people see that shit and conclude union isn't for them.

Not only that but you’ll find it really hard to explain to your average Amerifat how they’re settler colonists in 2024 without them saying “Get away from me weirdo”.

That's why you heighten the contradictions and make the reality of colonial conflict an unavoidable and undeniable reality. Again, Israel is doing the hard work for us. It is making the contradictions easy for everyone to see. Our job is to agitate and stop Zionists from obscuring or occluding the contradictions again.

It's why I'm not pessimistic.