krishna bound

2y

i know this is a tired topic esp. with people such as jimmy dore et al types, but immigration is really a great topic for western leftists to capitalize on. every time someone mentions this they get called a nazbol or they get angela nagle'd. that said, no true scotsman fallacy aside, "mass immigration" (conceptually) having clear economic faultlines (hell even literal libertarians and neolib economists admit this openly) is such a clear way to culturally reach a lot of the working class and garner sympathy for causes they may not even know are leftist. i'm not saying to make a red-brown alliance or something, but this is not even a "white" issue. go on black twitter and look at the growing resentment toward hispanic migrants (or, hell, existing hispanic citizens vs incoming migrants lol). this doesn't have to be an innately racial topic just because a lot of low IQ tards on twitter can't help but spin it that way

snowboyrari

2y

capitalize on it how? unless you are empowering migrant communities to fight back against racist and xenophobic violence i dont know what you mean.

krishna bound

2y

migrants should understand the mechanism of why they are coming here
existing citizens should also understand that mechanism
people who are still woefully ignorant of understanding can be dealt with but thinking by default no one is capable of understanding that is silly

i'm not talking about educating would-be KKK members. not every migrant who reads hateful headlines is going to think every white person is after their families and not every white person in the midwest who reads hateful headlines and worries for their community stability is racist and unable to connect dots

this is very basic base/superstructure stuff, even in the USSR there was a built-in aspect of mediating ethnic tensions between groups as related to underlying national economic needs. like transplanting different ethnic groups in different enclaves/regions was met with controlled economic justification and understanding to ease what would have otherwise led to alien tensions

snowboyrari

2y

migrants do understand the mechanism by which they come here, this is understood through their intimate experience with the production process itself.

the Russian Empire, like the United States, was a prisonhouse of nations. the Bolsheviks understood that the nations that would constitute the constituent soviet republics would need to be overly represented in the state against an outsized Russian majority which was overdeveloped in comparison. but these were not ethnic fiefdoms, the USSR was a truly cosmopolitan multinational formation and encouraged cooperation between its various cultural minorities (to incredible success i might add, nothing like the Balkan wars occured in the USSR btw until Perestroika and the restoration of capitalism). a similar process of decolonization must occur within the phony borders of the USA.

what do you mean by "community stability"? why should white people in segregated neighborhoods have "stable communities"? what does any of this have to do with communism, which would necessarily mean the transfer of suburban white wealth to America's internal colonies?

krishna bound

2y

it's so obvious where your biases lie here, every time there's any conversation on things like immigration/etc you make it as obvious as possible. all i have to say is best of luck with your views and don't be surprised at the consequences

snowboyrari

2y

what consequences? what biases? what are you talking about? say what you mean dude, you seem to be skirting around what you wanna say.

krishna bound

2y

i'm not skirting around anything, i'm saying that there are incredibly basic base/superstructure ideas that are fundamental to material reality and every time something like this comes up you lean extremely hard solely into the superstructural elements solely and then pay lip service to material conditions

snowboyrari

2y

you are speaking in jargon. be specific and make a critique of what I'm saying. I said that american suburban wealth and technology should be transferred to the global proletariat and that the US should be thoroughly decolonized in a similar manner to the Russian Empire or the former white settler colonies of Africa. what is your actual issue with what I'm saying?

I understand the mechanisms of global migration perfectly fine. Address what I'm actually saying here.

krishna bound

2y

walk me through a step-by-step of how you think this process should occur and what a successful revolution that establishes this looks like

snowboyrari

2y

I just gave you examples. The USSR successfully broke up their empire and empowered cultural minorities within their national borders. African guerillas successfully expelled white settlers from African native lands in Kenya, Algeria, Zimbabwe, etc. Palestinian militants are currently engaged in the same process. I can't give you a "step-by-step" of anything because what is revolutionary or not can only be determined through the immediate contradictions of the moment. But obviously following an anti-colonial revolution -- the colonial borders of the "USA" will not exist, its non-contigous colonies will be returned to their respective indigenous populations, and its wealth and technology will be shared with the entire third world, much like how the Soviets transferred all of their high technology to the Chinese in one of the most selfless acts of proletarian internationalism in history.

The need for proletarian revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat is sort of the main lynchpin thing about being a communist, what exactly is confusing here?

krishna bound

2y

Do you not see the contradiction between the two examples you cited there especially in regards to which of the two was more successful

krishna bound

2y

My view is very simple and not hard to understand. Superstructure conflict is relevant and not able to be ignored, but facilitated through the base. As this conflict is based on material reality, ignoring that to adhere to utopian moralistic ideas results in coming full swing back to liberal ideology or to nonsensical race conflict
Understanding of conflict within the superstructure as a reality and meditation through mutual cause in a revolution will always succeed better than relying on facilitating superstructural conflict borne from base realities

krishna bound

2y

i know this is a tired topic esp. with people such as jimmy dore et al types, but immigration is really a great topic for western leftists to capitalize on. every time someone mentions this they get called a nazbol or they get angela nagle'd. that said, no true scotsman fallacy aside, "mass immigration" (conceptually) having clear economic faultlines (hell even literal libertarians and neolib economists admit this openly) is such a clear way to culturally reach a lot of the working class and garner sympathy for causes they may not even know are leftist. i'm not saying to make a red-brown alliance or something, but this is not even a "white" issue. go on black twitter and look at the growing resentment toward hispanic migrants (or, hell, existing hispanic citizens vs incoming migrants lol). this doesn't have to be an innately racial topic just because a lot of low IQ tards on twitter can't help but spin it that way

Choking

2y

white canadians and assimilated canadians need to be rounded up and shipped off to the Yukon to be dumped in the wild to die of “natural causes”

krishna bound

2y

My view is very simple and not hard to understand. Superstructure conflict is relevant and not able to be ignored, but facilitated through the base. As this conflict is based on material reality, ignoring that to adhere to utopian moralistic ideas results in coming full swing back to liberal ideology or to nonsensical race conflict
Understanding of conflict within the superstructure as a reality and meditation through mutual cause in a revolution will always succeed better than relying on facilitating superstructural conflict borne from base realities

Harlem

2y

What do you mean by superstructure conflict btw

snowboyrari

2y

The economic base of the United States is settler colonialism. Racial conflicts are not in people's heads or a form of "false consciousness", they are the result of a real system of racial apartheid and genocide which stems from the disposession of native land and the theft of Africans from Africa. These are all real things that actually happened and have real consequences -- the result of which was the creation of a black, native, and pan-latino proletariat which is used to prop up the wealth of a white settler aristocracy.

Choking

2y

disagree that “leftist” should use the immigration crisis to push further roots with the krakkers or assimilated krakkers, and should rather be focusing on the newer immigrants that are gonna be left behind like the najuwan support network in the toronto area

krishna bound

2y

Never argued settler colonialism wasnt real and also never said racial conflict wasn’t real. “Superstructure” does not mean “not real”. Settler colonialism is of course a base issue. It’s also more complex issue than simple prole vs bourgeois capitalism. You’re free to view this the way you have now but imo you are unlikely to succeed in any material manner and are more likely to stroke super structural issues than fix contradictions in the base

snowboyrari

2y

The "contradictions of the base" is the existing system of american racial apartheid. This is remedied through anti-colonial revolution which would put the colonized in control of the state and socialist land reform which would put them in control of the means of production. what exactly do you disagree with? and what do migrants have to do with all of this anyway?

krishna bound

2y

Marxist theory is not about “minorities” , about weird Christian sins of the father thinking, or about moralistic views of good and bad or mistreatment and attonement. Your views are insanely weird and informed by vulgar and idealistic fantasies. You want a race war rather than desire a revolution.

snowboyrari

2y

· edited

The "idealistic fantasy" of socialist land reform and decolonization. Gotcha. Gonna stop being nice to you now btw, very obvious you think "communists" should pander to "concerned" white racists and moron ADOS types who think Haitians are subhumans and youre just too chickenshit to actually say it out loud for fear of being banned. Gonna block you, never talk to me again.