Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

9

sudo wrote

I noticed the author conveniently forgot to mention that black people and other people of colour would also be forced to leave the United States, in order to truly return the land to the indigenous tribes it was stolen from. This type of thinking, where land belongs to the very first group of people to live on it, nevermind the people who live there now, is what got us into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

How about this: the damage from colonialism has already been done. The best course of action now is to work to overthrow the american capitalists, who are the real reason for colonialism, from power. While understandable, these knee-jerk reactions borne of frustration will get us nowhere.

6

kore wrote

This type of thinking, where land belongs to the very first group of people to live on it

I've been thinking about this so goddamned much, it's as if decolonial theory has amnesia before the 15th century. Settler colonialism is very narrowly defined (and I think rightly so), so it's not productive to call anything other than European imperialist colonialism "settler colonialism," but the basic concepts behind it deserve a far more general theory and a much broader historical examination.

I think part of the reason that European settler colonialism is the focus is because it's the source way more oppression to people living today than anything remotely similar, past or present. The Israeli-Palestine situation arguably stems, at least in part, from European settler-colonialist attitudes.

The best course of action now is to work to overthrow the american capitalists, who are the real reason for colonialism, from power.

Yeah to me it seems that working on things like immigrant rights would do more to get rid of the white majority.

1

ziq wrote (edited )

African Americans aren't settler colonialists and they are addressed in the article.

you should probably give Black people your money, give Native peoples your land, and go back to Europe.

2

sudo wrote

Right. Like I said, even if Black people weren't the ones who originally stole the land, they now live on (parts of) said stolen land. Does the author think they need to shove off to make way for the indigenous tribes, too? Is the author indigenous? If not, did the author even ask indigenous people what they want to do about this situation, or did they just assume that this is what they want? This article seems more like an angry rant than a well thought out plan.

2

ziq wrote (edited )

The best course of action now is to work to overthrow the american capitalists, who are the real reason for colonialism, from power.

Bullshit. Communism has proven just as colonialist as capitalism again and again. "Overthrowing" the capitalist class doesn't magically stop colonialism. The land will still be settled, indigenous peoples will still be expected to conform to Western cultural values aka communism or be subjugated for refusing to accept the system.

3

throwaway wrote

This is some fucking narrow thinking and writing, how you can support such a fascist stance and call yourself a libertarian leftist is beyond me. Fuck borders, fuck ownership of land. There are actual solutions to the problems we face, and they do not and can not involve crippled authoritarian shortsightedness.

2

kore wrote

I think the authors point is that getting white people to leave would move closer to the dissolution of borders and private property. I don't think that this is necessarily true at all, and the author doesn't really support that reasoning.

1

ziq wrote (edited )

What makes you think the author calls themself a 'libertarian leftist'?

There's nothing more repugnant than 'libertarian' whites telling indigenous people "fuck borders, fuck 'owning' land", you're an 'authoritarian fascist' for caring that we took your land from you."

So much fucking whiteness in this thread, shit.

1

kore wrote (edited )

you're an 'authoritarian fascist' for caring that we took your land from you."

Yeah and that sort of gotcha doesn't acknowledge the fact that it's not simply "we took your land." For example, Alexander the Great "took" land when he conquered people but in many situations he largely allowed local forms of government and local customs to stay in place. Not saying there can be good conquering, just saying that "taking" land is only a very tiny part of the problem.

1

ziq wrote (edited )

Western agricultural industrialist culture makes no allowances for non industrial cultures. The land isn't just taken, it's destroyed forever. As is native life. Everyone is forced to live as the invaders live.

2

Zzzxxxyyy wrote

I didn’t read the article, but what about those of us who are mixed white-indigenous and actually are citizens of Native American nations?

1

ziq wrote (edited )

You just described every indigenous person in the US.

2

asg101 wrote

I have been an advocate for the Puritan Repatriation Initiative for 30 years. Sad that it never took hold.

2

kore wrote

I'm having trouble understanding this... wouldn't getting white people to move back to Europe reinforce racial divisions?

1

ziq wrote (edited )

With everything the article mentions about settler supremacy and how every facet of society there is dominated by settlers and their institutional racism; I'm going to have to say the de-settlering of North America (and Australia, New Zealand, Israel, etc) would improve racial divisions because when there are no Europeans around, racial divisions are greatly diminished.

It's obviously realistically never going to happen tho.

And if all the 'ethical' settlers left, that would just allow the shittiest ones to more easily engage in another genocide so they can avoid becoming the minority.

4

kore wrote

To me it seems like it would improve racial divisions locally but exacerbate them globally. I have yet to see anyone seriously consider what happens after white people are gone. It seems similar to the line of thinking of some anarchists that "once we abolish hierarchy we'll have a utopia!", as if struggle could ever be completed

1

ziq wrote (edited )

I don't think the article is meant to be a serious plea for white USA people to return to Europe, but it does make an interesting case re: the people who are moving to Canada to get away from Trump not actually helping because they're just hopping from one stolen land to another... because the bald-faced realities of (the long pre-existing) European supremacy got a little too photorealistic for them when filtered through the openly racist Trumpian lens.

But in a world where europeans stayed in europe instead of genociding and then settling everywhere else, I don't see why we'd have worse racial divisions than we have now. The divisions are primarily caused by settlers needing to erase everything from a culture in order to lay claim to the spoils.

-2

Greyscalestarfield wrote

Author is an idiot.

If all the non native American people left tomorrow, the US would become and environmental disaster.

Who is going to look after the nuclear reactors and nuclear waste storage depots, all the chemical stores, oil infrastructure, dangerous munitions. Not to mention all the buildings and facilities that would fall into ruin.