|
i have obvious opinions about this but id recommend checking out the branch closest to you 
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 02:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 01:56 |
|
|
The actual material economic lives of minorities in the US is already heavily integrated into the wider US system, and the level of cultural integration is similarly quite high, and thankfully increasing. Things aren't perfect, but there definitely isn't enough grounds to argue that that definition is satisfied. Really, though, your only difference with The Saurus here, is the minor factual minutiae on what exactly you consider a nation. You just see many where he sees one. For me, it doesn't really matter, but for you, it's critical to whether or not the current state is just. Homework Explainer posted:i'm in agreement with urbandale on this one and wouldn't want the us to balkanize but uh malcolm x was hardly a fringe figure in the civil rights movement
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
the material economic lives of the nationally oppressed are that theyre thrown in jail to perform work for free that isnt illegal because of the wording of certain constitutional amendments. it is also forcing hundreds of thousands of people who lived here to be deported so their jobs can be freed for a newly impoverished white labor force, and then only bringing them back into the country under labor contracts that force them to work for less than minimum wage doing work white people dont want to do. you also seem to be talking about the civil rights movement in an effort to avoid talking about what would become the black liberation movement, built to address the failures, not the victories, of the civil rights movement after its leaders were murdered in the streets. for their efforts, the black liberation movements leaders were also murdered (or still sit in jail), but that doesnt mean they didnt exist Urbandale fucked around with this message at 02:29 on Aug 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 02:25
|
|
|
The Soviet Union and Yugoslavia are prime examples of why national autonomy within a communist state is flirting with disaster. The moment you stop suppressing nationalist sentiment, the threat of separation and civil war becomes unbearably real. Nationality only exists within the context of an existential threat of foreign exploitation. Without a foreign threat to contextualize the existence of the nation, it loses meaning. The goal of any truly revolutionary socialist project is to smash the false consciousness which creates division among the people, and to guarantee the autonomy of all communities, not national ones. Black or Chicano nationalism makes sense within the context of a white supremacist empire, it doesn't make any kind of sense in the context of an emancipatory socialism. National autonomy is a worthy pursuit in preparation for the revolution, but it cannot be tolerated in the formation of a socialist state.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 13:43
|
|
|
a leninist and an anarchist (im assuming, based on your name. you could also be a left communist of some flavor) disagreeing about nationalism is honestly a little dull and not particularly productive. we could rehash the old argument, but i dont really feel like just blockquoting lenin or reading whoever you choose to blockquote respond to me with, and i dont think we're going to convince each other of the relative merit of each others positions, since our personal position on nationalism is integral to other aspects of our politics. if youre cool to march and more against nazis or war or democrats, youre cool to me. e: that said, i agree with the thrust of your argument 100% if you replace most instances of the word socialism in your post with communism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 15:11
|
|
|
In other words, you have no comeback for the point he just made. I also like how you made a really deep analysis of someone's political views derived from their username "Pener Kropoopkin" Lenin was of his time, he wrote about how to pursue socialism in early 20th c. Russia, it wasn't some inalienable how-to for communism from now unto forever. He specifically said that national self-determination was A) as a temporary concession and B) Because the bourgeoisie of Russia's subject nations were not yet developed enough to have allied with the Russian imperialist-capitalist interests, and could therefore provide an ally of the Russian proletariat. The Saurus fucked around with this message at 07:05 on Aug 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 07:00
|
|
|
Fredrik de Boer leaves blogging. "I haven’t been an activist for over 10 years, but for a long time I still believed in political progress. And one day not too long ago I woke up and realized I just don’t. Not anymore." http://fredrikdeboer.com/2016/08/18/thats-my-time/ You know, I remember him once ranting about how his progressive opponents -- who were too wrapped up in identity politics -- were destined to burn out and become politically-disengaged conservatives around age 30. Funny that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 15:16
|
|
|
Wikkheiser posted:Fredrik de Boer leaves blogging. "I haven’t been an activist for over 10 years, but for a long time I still believed in political progress. And one day not too long ago I woke up and realized I just don’t. Not anymore." I really like his writing, and I think he has a really interesting, unique perspective. that said, it seems his mental health has been deteriorating in the past 4~ months, so I think this is really good for him.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 15:27
|
|
|
I've been listening to Eugene Puryear's new radio show/podcast and its pretty good. He also is doing new episodes like crazy
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 15:32
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:I also like how you made a really deep analysis of someone's political views derived from their username "Pener Kropoopkin" It wasn't an unfair assessment. Ideologically I am an anarchist, but my politics are communist because I view Leninism as the baseline for successful revolutionary praxis. A lot has happened in the century since Lenin was in his prime though, and we have to deal with the facts that lead to the Soviet Union's failure, and the triumph of false consciousness. Russian and Serbian chauvinism proved toxic for their respective states, so the nationalism question should be an extremely contentious one for us in the 21st century.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:The Soviet Union and Yugoslavia are prime examples of why national autonomy within a communist state is flirting with disaster. The moment you stop suppressing nationalist sentiment, the threat of separation and civil war becomes unbearably real. The only disaster for Yugoslavia was when Tito died and the Serbs/Croats subsequently going after the Bosnians and all the other ethnicities he protected. Europe would be a far shittier place if every clique secessionist movement had their way. Dead Cosmonaut fucked around with this message at 18:25 on Aug 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 18:23
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:The only disaster for Yugoslavia was when Tito died and the Serbs/Croats subsequently going after the Bosnians and all the other ethnicities he protected. So...A direct result of nationalist sentiment then?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 18:37
|
|
|
What I would say is that it's wierd to push the narrative that oppressed nationalism in the USSR is what ended up with a dominant Russian culture. Its weird because it's largely backwards - 'great Russian chauvanism' was a creation of the empire, and many nationality policies they passed were done in order to deemphasize Russian culture among nations inside the former empire. There really werent a lot of ethnic seperatists in the eastern bloc til imperialist countries started giving rebels guns, and even then it only really caught on in places like georgia and yugoslavia, and only after the collapse. Yugoslavia specifically had lots of issues though, and pushed nationalism as a matter of building their state, federalizing themselves and pushing more and more reform until it exploded when the IMF came calling Urbandale fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Aug 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 18:50
|
|
|
You're wrong on all three points. The vast, vast majority of minorities are not, in fact, in jail, and it seems a little racist to imply that they are. When we're talking incarceration, we're talking figures around the ~2% or less, and how minorities have a relatively higher figure. A problem, but definitely not the dominant mode of relationship. Undocumented migrant workers are, by their nature, impossible to treat as part of the body politic. You can't 'repeal' deportation without totally undermining the entire concept of border controls, something I think even you're little soviet-inspired federations are going to be very keen on having. So it's 100% hypocrisy to talk about granting nationhood to people who, bureaucratically, do not exist and violated the law of the land in getting there. Imagine if we were to apply that same standard worldwide, how open to abuse that kind of ruling would be. I'm sure China would love to grab some islands in the south china sea. Finally, the black liberation movement existed, but it didn't leave much of a legacy behind it, and it's not actually clear that, had they succeeded, things would be any better off. Like white people don't have a monopoly on genocide or ethnic cleansing, and racial or ethnic states have a little tendency to get murder-happy. Eg- You'd think jews would be a little keyed into the dangers of prejudice, yet they're happy to perpetuate their own bigotry when they're in power. Post-colonialist states start killing each other after europeans leave. India wants to make life as miserable for its local muslims as possible. That's all nationalist forces. Trying to throw up a magically dividing line of good-nationalists and bad-nationalists is self-delusion. It's the same poo poo. Which is why a break-up should always be seen as a method-of-last-resort, because it generates new problems. Obviously, none of the colonialists forces had any intention of integrating their mainlands with their captured territory, it was a one-way relationship of exploitation. Clearly, independence had to be won. That's simply not the case with the United States, and any of the groups you've decided to call nations. Talking about balkanizing the US is applying a theory from one context, to a different context, where none of the original assumptions are true. Like it's just totally out of touch. Here's an idea: Lenin's theory of imperialism worked for the bolsheviks, because it allowed them to exploit their environment to gain power. It's not necessarily the correct perspective to have today, or in a country like the US, which is not structured at all like Tsarist Russia. Maybe that stance on national liberation was one chosen out of political necessity and opportunity, rather than moralistic debates.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
I'll tell you what - I'll write a response to that if you can tell me where I said the majority of oppressed nations are in jail or tell me what 'the dominant mode of relationship' means
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
Right here:Urbandale posted:the material economic lives of the nationally oppressed are that theyre thrown in jail to perform work for free that isnt illegal because of the wording of certain constitutional amendments By your logic, the upper and lower classes of every single country on earth are separate nations. It's impossible to deny their lives are very different, yet it's impossible actually consider them different nationalities altogether.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
look its been a long time since i posted here but i did not expect anyone reading that to go 'he must be saying a majority of oppressed nations are in jail' when i said nothing of the sort. what i did say is that prison serves as part of the economic basis for the continued oppression of various nations, because someone asked me if the black population fit stalin's criteria of a nation. e: the black nation is thrown in jail to perform labor for free and its legal because of the wording of certain constitutional amendments, but i didnt say the majority of black people (or anyone else) in the US were in prison. Urbandale fucked around with this message at 19:31 on Aug 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
Forced labor through the prison system seems like a stronger basis for proletarian solidarity than ethnic solidarity.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
i agree with you that class unity is the goal, but you dont arrive at class unity without smashing white supremacy, and you certainly dont get it by ignoring that most prison labor is performed by black males. does this site still have a prison thread?
Urbandale fucked around with this message at 20:09 on Aug 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
Urbandale posted:What I would say is that it's wierd to push the narrative that oppressed nationalism in the USSR is what ended up with a dominant Russian culture. Its weird because it's largely backwards - 'great Russian chauvanism' was a creation of the empire, and many nationality policies they passed were done in order to deemphasize Russian culture among nations inside the former empire. I'm not sure where you got that impression, because I was saying the exact opposite. The Soviet Union easing up on nationalist repression is what caused Russian chauvinism to develop, and for other member republics to desire separation from a Soviet Union that favored Russians over other ethnicities. The Nagorno-Karabakh War started in 1988, and the Red Army's inability to deal with Azeris and Armenians trying to kill and rape each other exposed how weak the central authority was at maintaining control. That was a race war developing in what was a nominally anti-racist Communist state, because not enough was done to suppress reactionary nationalism. How much do you actually know about the dissolutions of Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union? Because the USSR was hemorrhaging Republics all throughout 1990-1991. It wasn't happening after the collapse, it was the collapse. quote:Yugoslavia specifically had lots of issues though, and pushed nationalism as a matter of building their state, federalizing themselves and pushing more and more reform until it exploded when the IMF came calling After Tito died, there wasn't a unifying core to maintain the consensus necessary to run the League of Communists. The federal territories wanted more autonomy and democratization, but that was suppressed by a Serb-led government which wanted to more thoroughly centralize Yugoslavia under the control of Belgrade. When Milosevic took power, it became clear that the Yugoslavian state would primarily serve Serbian interests, and the state slowly fell apart. I'd still rather vote for the PSL than any other party though, because the autonomy issue for oppressed nations isn't even a big deal for the United States. It'll only ever be an issue on paper, because for an oppressed nation to exist - they actually have to identify themselves as a nation. That may be true for the Native Americans, who already have their own autonomous governments, but blacks, Latinos, and Asians don't think of themselves as separate nations within the United States. Racial separatism is now a completely fringe issue in American politics, and the vast majority of oppressed groups aren't going to want autonomy, they're going to want full integration.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 22:35
|
|
|
rudatron posted:You're wrong on all three points. The vast, vast majority of minorities are not, in fact, in jail, and it seems a little racist to imply that they are. When we're talking incarceration, we're talking figures around the ~2% or less, and how minorities have a relatively higher figure. A problem, but definitely not the dominant mode of relationship. The amount of young black men who end up in the system is way, way higher than that. The numbers have improved since 1999, but not dramatically, as we've done almost nothing to address the issue. Most important figure to establish the context here quote:Nearly one in three (32%) black males in the age group 20-29 is under some form of criminal That represents a lost generation where they have been treated as a problem to be policed as a group. How many of the 68% who escaped that know someone who didn't? To say nothing of the impacts on black women and children related to them. The racist justice system does not ONLY impact the 2.3% incarcerated at any given moment and it's kind of ridiculous to imply that. atelier morgan fucked around with this message at 22:52 on Aug 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
The problem with SomethingAwful being a liberal-sjw echo chamber is that it causes small differences to lead to a large amount of bitterness and bile between posters. I'm talking to a Libertarian friend-of-a-friend on facebook right now and he's literally telling me that the 8 hour workday was just a natural result of the industrial revolution, and was nothing to do with organized labour fighting for its rights. He also said that general educational standards were better before we had public-funded education because "read a letter from back then and tell me they were uneducated"  So, just wanted to say that I appreciate everyone who supports the power of the working class no matter what, and we should all try to unite and vote for the most left-wing option available, as well as agitating for an end to oppression and stuff. Also, I'm sorry for saying dumb racist poo poo that hurts solidarity between workers. The Saurus fucked around with this message at 23:35 on Aug 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 23:23
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:The problem with SomethingAwful being a leftist echo chamber lmao
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 23:30
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:The problem with SomethingAwful being a leftist echo chamber is that it causes small differences to lead to a large amount of bitterness and bile between posters. i for one appreciate your i hope earnest apology. i dunno about this being a leftist echo chamber tho lol
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
I meant in the american sense of liberal/robocop leftist really, but you're right I should change that part. the only way it could be a real leftist echo chamber is if homework explainer spent his entire existence renewing 6 hour probs
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
Liberals making the same lame jokes that have been repeated a million times since the Paris Commune, keep my hatred pure.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 23:37
|
|
|
Hillary Clinton is a proud leftist who supports the right of two gay wal-mart workers to get married at the county clerk's office and then share a take and bake pizza, providing their supervisor allows them the shared time off.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:I'm not sure where you got that impression, because I was saying the exact opposite. The Soviet Union easing up on nationalist repression is what caused Russian chauvinism to develop, and for other member republics to desire separation from a Soviet Union that favored Russians over other ethnicities. The Nagorno-Karabakh War started in 1988, and the Red Army's inability to deal with Azeris and Armenians trying to kill and rape each other exposed how weak the central authority was at maintaining control. That was a race war developing in what was a nominally anti-racist Communist state, because not enough was done to suppress reactionary nationalism. my apologies, i dont often hear the argument that the soviet union needed to implement more repression.  i agree about the problems of festering nationalism inside a socialist state after the rev. fanon's got good ink on the subject. but i'm talking about nationalism in the lead up to a socialist revolution, not afterwards. most every socialist state that has existed formed from anti-colonial or anti-imperialist struggle that leaned on nationalism, and they implemented different policies regarding that after the formation of the revolutionary government. vietnam did pretty well, yugoslavia got torn to pieces. one thing though - a nation doesnt have to recognize itself to exist, thats really metaphysical imo. if it manifests or is treated as such than it exists. id agree that you wont get a slumbering nation to push for a national liberation struggle though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
Urbandale posted:one thing though - a nation doesnt have to recognize itself to exist thats really metaphysical imo. if it manifests or is treated as such than it exists. Yeah it does, dude. A nation doesn't manifest until its constituent parts become conscious of their nationality. There's no such thing as a "slumbering nationality," the nation either exists or it doesn't. You'll never be able to convince a Georgian, that their nationality is Georgian and not American - no matter how hard you insist.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
theres no georgian nation in the united states though, just a diaspora. inside the former russian empire or ussr, there was a nation.
Urbandale fucked around with this message at 00:17 on Aug 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 00:13
|
|
|
Urbandale posted:theres no georgian nation in the united states though, just a diaspora. inside the former russian empire or ussr, there was a nation. I knew that was a bad state to pick. You're never going to convince a Louisianan that they're part of a Louisianan nation, and aren't American. You couldn't even convince Cajuns that they're not really Americans.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
theres no louisiana nation either. i feel like maybe youve forgotten what criteria i was going by to define a nation earlier in the thread. i dont mean that as a judgement call, i just think rereading stalins' bit and then thinking about possible nations inside the US would help. for example, the panthers implemented this idea when they organized the young patriots. they were largely unemployed youth from areas around the appalachia hit in the coal bust who moved to chicago (and other major urban centers in the now-forming rust belt) and lived in extreme poverty. they flew the confederate flag and united with the panthers into the rainbow coalition. thats a possible example of a nation. idk if id fully go along with it but its definitely An Argument for a nation inside the US that i hadnt mentioned before. 'states', as in administrative districts under the purview of the united states federal government, arent nations. Urbandale fucked around with this message at 00:39 on Aug 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
That's not what he was saying, he was saying that people in the United States have different cultures and dialects regionally, but they still consider themselves to be American. You can't call a group of people a nation if they have no concept of the nationality you're trying to impose on them from outside. What makes hispanic and black people part of a separate nation, but not Cajuns or Acadians? Why would Creoles be part of the same nation as other african-americans? Simply because their skin colour is the same, despite a huge difference in religion, culture and language?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 03:28
|
|
|
 ill say, unread post count
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 03:34
|
|
|
420/69 Hail Stalin
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:That's not what he was saying, he was saying that people in the United States have different cultures and dialects regionally, but they still consider themselves to be American. You can't call a group of people a nation if they have no concept of the nationality you're trying to impose on them from outside. What makes hispanic and black people part of a separate nation, but not Cajuns or Acadians? i didnt say anything about cajuns acadians or creoles though, and i dont see an argument from anyone else that they constitute a nation, so wheres all this coming from?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 09:53
|
|
|
Al! posted:
what a coincidence, folks in here were just discussing how socialism and nationalism are actually super compatible
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 11:20
|
|
|
i forgot goons considered themselves better arbiters of socialism than the black panthers
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 13:02
|
|
|
Urbandale posted:i didnt say anything about cajuns acadians or creoles though, and i dont see an argument from anyone else that they constitute a nation, so wheres all this coming from? Cajuns fit just about every definition of what could be considered a nation, except for the key fact that they don't consider themselves one. You can say that you don't like how "metaphysical" the recognition of national identity is, as a key element of nationhood - but that's how it works. If black Americans develop a national identity which they distinguish from the rest of Americans then that will be that, but there's not a "slumbering nation" because you like to think there is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 14:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 01:56 |
|
|
Constant Hamprince posted:what a coincidence, folks in here were just discussing how socialism and nationalism are actually super compatible https://twitter.com/dril/status/473265809079693312
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 17:08
|
|
