Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
BrutalistMcDonalds
Oct 4, 2012


Lipstick Apathy

Toph Bei Fong posted:

I have never understood how positioning the white working class on the side of the bourgeois and upper classes would result in any sort of positive change, when there aren't overwhelming numbers on Sakai's side such that the loss of the white working class wouldn't demographically matter.
i think the danger here is that you start trying to wish socialism into existence by telling a different and more positive story about the western world, as if we can just "renarrate" the world and achieve positive results that way, while sakai at least attempts something of a material analysis about why the white working class hasn't really been interested in it, and often been quite hostile to it, which is because of land, and that has created a kind of labor aristocracy.

but i'm actually not so sure how true it still is, seems like it has decayed a bit since sakai wrote settlers. remember that he wrote it in the early 1980s when, if you were a depressive maoist type on the downslope of the NCM, then things would've probably seemed really doomed and blackpilled with a really ugly and unstoppable reagan counterrevolution powering to victory after victory.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

BrutalistMcDonalds
Oct 4, 2012


Lipstick Apathy
like if you trace the process of primitive accumulation in the united $nakkke$ it looks something like

army clears indians off the land --> armed settlers move in behind them and settle it --> several generations down the line, sell the land to banks (profit) --> upgrade to suburbs --> get stuck with 30-year mortgages which on paper make you look wealthier as asset prices rise while you're falling deeper and deeper into debt --> generation after that are converted into renters as capitalism enters its moribund, parasitic financialized stage --> socialism???

but then you also have new fascist movements emerge because that labor aristocracy knows their days are numbered

Crowsbeak
Oct 9, 2012

by Azathoth
Lipstick Apathy

CANON posted:

I was wondering how long till someone called Sakai a spook and the thread does not disappoint

He is. Telling who actually believes the dogshit he writes . Outside of it also being poorly researched.

lobster shirt
Jun 14, 2021

what's up with spelling it amerika, like what is the actual reason people do this? good faith question i am very curious about it!

AnimeIsTrash
Jun 30, 2018

lobster shirt posted:

what's up with spelling it amerika, like what is the actual reason people do this? good faith question i am very curious about it!

It's the euro way of spelling the world. The cool way is Amerikkka.

Gazpacho
Jun 18, 2004

by Fluffdaddy
Slippery Tilde

lobster shirt posted:

what's up with spelling it amerika, like what is the actual reason people do this? good faith question i am very curious about it!
spelled like germans spell it to imply that the US is a fascist state

skipmyseashells
Nov 14, 2020
Probation
Can't post for 8 hours!
goons on every thread of c-spam: demon cracker nation

guy makes book saying Amerikkka is a demon cracker nation: umm he’s wrong and also cia

Idia
Apr 26, 2010



Fun Shoe
I read it and didn't find it particularly eye opening nor do I understand why it gets under certain leftists skin so much?
The earlier parts of the book, on the formation of the labor aristocracy was interesting but that's about it.

Pentecoastal Elites
Feb 27, 2007

PawParole posted:

Id love to read it, but the shipping time from Langley to my house is outrageous.

I’ll probably read some other CIA psyop that’s ahistorical and race-essentialist, like any good Anglo “””socialist””” I want an excuse as to why It’s Good Not to Achieve Anything.

AnimeIsTrash
Jun 30, 2018

Idia posted:

I read it and didn't find it particularly eye opening nor do I understand why it gets under certain leftists skin so much?
The earlier parts of the book, on the formation of the labor aristocracy was interesting but that's about it.

It's probably because it's an internet meme.

The book is okay, Sakai does a really bad mediocre job of defending his thesis about white settler colonialism. There are so many books that do a better job.

CANON
Jun 7, 2007
White American workers will in fact be the vanguard of world revolution

skipmyseashells
Nov 14, 2020
Probation
Can't post for 8 hours!

unwantedplatypus posted:

I wonder how first world leftists are supposed to gain power while promising to decrease peoples’ living standards.

I wonder more how third world leftists are gonna accept the ‘no warfare but class warfare’ when even the idea of reducing first world living standards are dead in the water

Danann
Aug 4, 2013

skipmyseashells posted:

I wonder more how third world leftists are gonna accept the ‘no warfare but class warfare’ when even the idea of reducing first world living standards are dead in the water

Bridges are literally collapsing, the hospitals that haven't already been shut down are increasingly incapable of taking care of sick people, people are drowning in debt and rent, etc; there is no "First World Living Standard" save for the elite and their stooges in America.

CaptainACAB
Sep 14, 2021

by Jeffrey of Langley
99% of all people who read settlers read it to justify continuing to do nothing, too.

unwantedplatypus
Sep 6, 2012

skipmyseashells posted:

I wonder more how third world leftists are gonna accept the ‘no warfare but class warfare’ when even the idea of reducing first world living standards are dead in the water

This is so dumb unless you think reducing living standards means less consumption rather than reducing quality of life. You are not going to have a successful political movement by telling people they have to get shittier medical treatment, have less access to basic amenities, and more food insecurity. Moralizing about how unfair this is isn't going to change that fact.

You can reduce consumption without reducing living standards. You can then pair this with helping to improve the living standards of the third world.

emTme3
Nov 7, 2012

by Hand Knit

PawParole posted:

Id love to read it, but the shipping time from Langley to my house is outrageous.

I’ll probably read some other CIA psyop that’s ahistorical and race-essentialist, like any good Anglo “””socialist””” I want an excuse as to why It’s Good Not to Achieve Anything.

hot drat! that is a take.

here was my takeaway from reading settlers several years ago: revolutions are something you do with lots of peeps with lots of guns. in the imperialist cores, we have no peeps and no guns.

why do we have no peeps or guns? sakai's got two answers for this - the first being that we never had that many peeps or guns ever no matter how far back you go, and the second being that whatever productive labouring class there is in NA actually benefits from the imperialist structure of the world system. (also a bunch of gently caress whitey but idgaf about racial essentialist poo poo really).

which, they do, and there's plenty of other really solid materialist historical analysis that demonstrates this. hence the everyone being a temporarily embarrassed millionaire cultural thingy. also, literally every succesful revolution in history has happened in a periphery, including the capitalist ones. cores don't revolt! all the big pseudo-waves in the NA core were mirroring other peripheral revolutionary waves.

sorry if this minimizes your lived suffering in the hellhole that is the NA core but thems the breaks.

none of this in any way points to doing nothing. it points to there being lots and lots to do.

galagazombie
Oct 31, 2011

A silly little mouse!
Ironically despite seeming to be the place where it's least likely to happen and most likely to be defeated, I think it might be that the Imperial Core is the only place where revolution could actually defeat global capital. Whenever a revolution (even non socialist ones that still buck the world order) succeeds in the periphery it immediately gets "contained" and turned into , if not a pariah state, then at least excluded from all the cool kid clubs. Cuba's been under siege for the past 70 years, Iran is blocked from participating in the world community at every step, even the Soviet Union, who managed to take over a rather large (albeit second rate) world power still got ultimately encircled and strangled by the first rate powers. Even places like Vietnam and China have been forced to let capitalism make inroads into their countries to avoid being dogpiled by the West. I legit wonder if the only way for to overthrow global capital would be to "cut of the snake at the head" as it were, where if things deteriorate enough the proletariat of the core gets class conscious and revolts.
Of course if things deteriorate that much it may be that the core no longer has the power to encircle, contain, and strangle revolts in the periphery and the preceding paragraph is just a bunch of nonsense. So I guess what matters how fast conditions for the core proletariat deteriorate compared to how fast the cores power projection does.

skipmyseashells
Nov 14, 2020
Probation
Can't post for 8 hours!
there’s no reality where america or Europe starts or leads the revolution

galagazombie
Oct 31, 2011

A silly little mouse!

skipmyseashells posted:

there’s no reality where america or Europe starts or leads the revolution

In the current state of things definitely, but History has shown that no state of affairs is permanent. Whose to say 50 years from now things haven't degenerated to such a massive extent that the whole "Labor Aristocracy" Middle Class no longer exists?

Brain Candy
May 18, 2006

skipmyseashells posted:

there’s no reality where america or Europe starts or leads the revolution

revolution can occur when the treats stop, and they are stopping

there is no reality where the us continues it's hegemony indefinitely into the future, it's incapable of responding to crisis beyond throwing money and pr at things. the leaders are all hapsburg-tier dipshits that actually believe the bullshit their grandparents made up as rhetoric

this isn't to say that the massive positional advantage won't and hasn't let them continue, but they are literally too stupid and clueless as a whole to buy people off anymore, they've lost the ability to doing anthing that isn't short sighted

skipmyseashells
Nov 14, 2020
Probation
Can't post for 8 hours!

galagazombie posted:

In the current state of things definitely, but History has shown that no state of affairs is permanent. Whose to say 50 years from now things haven't degenerated to such a massive extent that the whole "Labor Aristocracy" Middle Class no longer exists?

cause that means either a revolution or new empire has won out. it’s so contradictory that I wouldn’t believe it in fiction

CANON
Jun 7, 2007

Brain Candy posted:

there is no reality where the us continues it's hegemony indefinitely into the future, it's incapable of responding to crisis beyond throwing money and pr at things. the leaders are all hapsburg-tier dipshits that actually believe the bullshit their grandparents made up as rhetoric

The final paragraph of the book echoes this, although it's more likely meant that revolution will be possible elsewhere once the US empire no longer exists.

quote:

Every nation and people has its own contribution to make to the world revolution. This is true for all of us, and obviously for Euro-Amerikans as well. But this is another discussion, one that can only really take place in the context of breaking up the U.S. Empire and ending the U.S. oppressor nation.

galagazombie
Oct 31, 2011

A silly little mouse!

skipmyseashells posted:

cause that means either a revolution or new empire has won out. it’s so contradictory that I wouldn’t believe it in fiction

I’m not sure I understand you saying “revolution has won out” because that’s what I’m saying? The first world proletariat would actually start being capable of revolution if they were no longer given even the crumbs they are now.

Crowsbeak
Oct 9, 2012

by Azathoth
Lipstick Apathy

Brain Candy posted:

revolution can occur when the treats stop, and they are stopping

there is no reality where the us continues it's hegemony indefinitely into the future, it's incapable of responding to crisis beyond throwing money and pr at things. the leaders are all hapsburg-tier dipshits that actually believe the bullshit their grandparents made up as rhetoric

this isn't to say that the massive positional advantage won't and hasn't let them continue, but they are literally too stupid and clueless as a whole to buy people off anymore, they've lost the ability to doing anthing that isn't short sighted
Fordism is best understood as capitalists reading Engels and building his labor aristocracy.

R. Guyovich
Dec 25, 1991

Crowsbeak posted:

He is. Telling who actually believes the dogshit he writes . Outside of it also being poorly researched.

i find it difficult to believe you've read see spot run, much less settlers

CaptainACAB
Sep 14, 2021

by Jeffrey of Langley

R. Guyovich posted:

i find it difficult to believe you've read see spot run, much less settlers

See Deez nuts run

Dreylad
Jun 19, 2001

Gato posted:

It's been a while since I read 1491 and I have no idea if it's considered up to date but iirc the smallpox and influenza brought by the Spanish to the Caribbean had already decimated continental North America (possibly up to 90%) by the time European settlers started arriving in meaningful numbers a century later. The settlers were only able to get a toehold in the first place because the Native American societies had been so drastically weakened by the plague.

of course nobody's arguing that the settlers then didn't enthusiastically genocide the remaining 10% of the population

afaik 1491 is pretty up to date unless the scholarship has radically changed over the past 10-15 years. that's about accurate. the death in the 1500s in the spanish colonies is insane, some of the worst plagues in recorded history wiping out the vast majority of indigenous americans to successive yearly waves of various plagues well before anyone understood germ theory. the spanish were dependent on indigenous labour at that point as well so while they were brutal overlords, they also weren't going to intentionally sabotage their own workforce. much of the history of early post-contact is figuring out how to establish a workforce in the new colonies because everyone is either a) running away because they know how to survive in the interior or b) dying at incredible rates to euro diseases, which includes the european labourers they brought over.

Dreddout
Oct 1, 2015

You must stay drunk on writing so reality cannot destroy you.

emTme3 posted:

hot drat! that is a take.

here was my takeaway from reading settlers several years ago: revolutions are something you do with lots of peeps with lots of guns. in the imperialist cores, we have no peeps and no guns.

America, a gun free, peaceful land.

i say swears online
Mar 4, 2005

Dreddout posted:

America, a gun free, peaceful land.

bunch of glocks won't do much good in an insurrection

Yadoppsi
May 10, 2009
I'm sorry the ied doesn't have the cultural cache sidearms do in America. I'm dubbing Houthi nasheeds as fast as I can.

Crowsbeak
Oct 9, 2012

by Azathoth
Lipstick Apathy

R. Guyovich posted:

i find it difficult to believe you've read see spot run, much less settlers

I mean I have difficulty believing you read so...

Crowsbeak
Oct 9, 2012

by Azathoth
Lipstick Apathy

emTme3 posted:

hot drat! that is a take.

here was my takeaway from reading settlers several years ago: revolutions are something you do with lots of peeps with lots of guns. in the imperialist cores, we have no peeps and no guns.

why do we have no peeps or guns? sakai's got two answers for this - the first being that we never had that many peeps or guns ever no matter how far back you go, and the second being that whatever productive labouring class there is in NA actually benefits from the imperialist structure of the world system. (also a bunch of gently caress whitey but idgaf about racial essentialist poo poo really).

which, they do, and there's plenty of other really solid materialist historical analysis that demonstrates this. hence the everyone being a temporarily embarrassed millionaire cultural thingy. also, literally every succesful revolution in history has happened in a periphery, including the capitalist ones. cores don't revolt! all the big pseudo-waves in the NA core were mirroring other peripheral revolutionary waves.

sorry if this minimizes your lived suffering in the hellhole that is the NA core but thems the breaks.

none of this in any way points to doing nothing. it points to there being lots and lots to do.

In what way was Imperial Russia a peripheral country, or France. Iran also was not really peripheral by the 70s.

Dreylad posted:

afaik 1491 is pretty up to date unless the scholarship has radically changed over the past 10-15 years. that's about accurate. the death in the 1500s in the spanish colonies is insane, some of the worst plagues in recorded history wiping out the vast majority of indigenous americans to successive yearly waves of various plagues well before anyone understood germ theory. the spanish were dependent on indigenous labour at that point as well so while they were brutal overlords, they also weren't going to intentionally sabotage their own workforce. much of the history of early post-contact is figuring out how to establish a workforce in the new colonies because everyone is either a) running away because they know how to survive in the interior or b) dying at incredible rates to euro diseases, which includes the european labourers they brought over.



This should also be read with the Barbarous years if you want to see how brutal the colonization of the southern us was.

Crowsbeak has issued a correction as of 01:28 on Feb 11, 2022

Private Cumshoe
Feb 15, 2019

AAAAAAAGAGHAAHGGAH
Amerigo manifest some destiny

- Hillary probably

R. Guyovich
Dec 25, 1991

Crowsbeak posted:

I mean I have difficulty believing you read so...

you're a parakeet

Crowsbeak
Oct 9, 2012

by Azathoth
Lipstick Apathy

R. Guyovich posted:

you're a parakeet

I mean better then being a clinical moron who thinks you somehow have a revolution by telling people you want to destroy their country. I do hope someone can help your feeble minded tendencies.

Speaking of non peripheral countries. Short Victorious war is coming it looks like maybe we won’t act like 1905 but 1917.

skipmyseashells
Nov 14, 2020
Probation
Can't post for 8 hours!
wanting to destroy America is bad now? first I hear the imperial core is gonna be the vanguard, and now this?!!

was this thread posted in D&D?

T-Paine
Dec 12, 2007

Sitting in the Costco food court unmasked, Bible in hand, reading my favorite Psalms to my five children: Abel, Bethany, Carlos, Carlos, and Carlos.

skipmyseashells posted:

wanting to destroy America is bad now? first I hear the imperial core is gonna be the vanguard, and now this?!!

was this thread posted in D&D?

I was going to close it because it got poo poo up in no time but I figured I'd leave it open so maybe some people see it and read the book

skipmyseashells
Nov 14, 2020
Probation
Can't post for 8 hours!
So wait... this is race-essentialism drivel and there’s no warfare but class warfare... but for some unexplained reason that we won’t discuss the global south and Africa took on way more damage than anyone from the global north


also white westerners are gonna save us all? did I get everything correct in the thread so far

skipmyseashells has issued a correction as of 01:52 on Feb 12, 2022

Morbus
May 18, 2004

Flowers For Algeria posted:

I mean, there doesn't seem to be anything wrong with the analysis.

Conflating the columbian exchange and resulting apocalyptic epidemics with the subsequent genocide of the remaining indigenous population is pretty dumb, doesn't really contribute to any point, and is an analysis that can only come from the same euro-centric well of ahistorical dumbshittery that the author is criticizing in the first place. There's a reason why the american continents are singular in the extent to which indigenous languages, cultures, and ethnicities were annihilated and replaced. Ignoring this gives too much credit to the imperialists, too little to the indigenous population, and not nearly enough to the cruelty of god.

But other than it mostly looks OK on the surface, if not a rehash of things the intended audience will read and say "well duh".

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

R. Guyovich
Dec 25, 1991

Crowsbeak posted:

I mean better then being a clinical moron who thinks you somehow have a revolution by telling people you want to destroy their country. I do hope someone can help your feeble minded tendencies.

Speaking of non peripheral countries. Short Victorious war is coming it looks like maybe we won’t act like 1905 but 1917.

you got convinced by i can only assume are some podcasters that true proletarian revolution is only possible by upholding the iconography of the united states of america, the fourth reich, the great satan. i'm pretty sure if you listened to enough audio about the nutrition of pond scum you'd be treating the nearest stagnant puddle as a buffet

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply