When the West sanctioned Zimbabwe for appropriating white farm land what was the reason for it? Did they do it out of anti-communism? Was it to protect whites?
>>2297414Dumbfuck zigger bot.
>>2297398Anti revolution, I would hardly call farm seizure to be full communism, but they didn't like that it was being done.
>>2297414kys reactionary retard, land reform has almost always been the major demand backing socialist movements
>>2297398>Did they do it out of anti-communism? yes
>>22974391) No one said his approach was good.
2) You reduced it to being black which is the typical reverse racism strawman when it comes to Western colonialism.
3) Fuck off.
>>2297518It's really crazy how the same arguments are made no matter how often this retarded framing has been addressed.
1) The wrongdoing didn't happen in a singular event somewhere far in the past but is an ongoing systemic problem in which CONTEMPORARY settlers participate in UNLESS they are actively participating with the colonized in dismantling the racist, colonial system they benefit from. The vast majority don't. Out yourself as an idealist liberal by saying "Well, maybe they were against it even if they didn't do anything!". That's worthless.
2) Additionally, your suggestion omits that when you try to dismantle the colonial system peacefully that it is those very descendents who will fight you at every step, which is why it escalates to bloodshed. They have been indoctrinated into a racist, colonial mindset and believe they are entitled to the colonial spoils. That is the exact reason why many of them must be removed and it happens due to their own combativeness and not indiscriminate revenge.
3) Lastly, no one is talking about expulsing everyone who descents from settlers except a bloodthirsty minority that has never represented any decolonial movement.
the zimbabwean government has started its billion dollar compensation scheme to white farmers
Zimbabwe makes first compensation payments to white farmers over land grabs
>Zimbabwe's government has announced an initial pay-out of US$3m (£2.3m) to white farmers whose farms were seized under a controversial government programme more than two decades ago.
>It is the first payment to be made under the 2020 compensation agreement signed between the state and the local white farmers in which Zimbabwe committed to pay $3.5bn (£2.6bn) for seized farmland.
>The payment announced on Wednesday will cover the first 378 farms, out of a total of 740, for which compensation had been approved.
>It represents 1% of the total $311m allocated for the first batch of payments.
>The remainder will be paid through US-dollar denominated Treasury bonds, said Finance Minister Mthuli Ncube.
>President Emmerson Mnangagwa, who replaced Mugabe in a 2017 coup, has sought to engage Western governments to restore ties.
>Mnangagwa has previously said land reform cannot be reversed, but committed to paying compensation as a key way of mending ties with the West.
>The southern African country has been locked out of the global financial system for more than two decades, leaving the struggling economy with a huge foreign debt.https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cq5wwp5eelxothoughts? apparently they're doing it as part of a deal with creditors to restructure their debt:
>The payments are expected in the last quarter of 2024, finance minister Ncube said. Zimbabwe has been in talks with creditors, led by the African Development Bank, since 2022 to restructure its $21 billion in debt, with the white farmers’ compensation a sticking point.https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2024-10-17/zimbabwe-to-compensate-white-farmers-who-lost-land-in-seizures-20-years-ago>>2297398>When the West sanctioned Zimbabwe for appropriating white farm land what was the reason for it?I don't think you're gonna genuinely get a neat singular answer for that because "The West" isn't a neat singular entity. It's a loose (at best) assortment of imperialist forces that are themselves rife with internal contradictions, and where members aren't equal partners. The United States and its settler-colonial interests dominate within it, with the former world powers of France, Britain, Germany, etc. oftentimes struggling to do anything independently of those interests and chafing under that reality. Hence the ambitions of many in the EU to fully unite Europe as an imperial equal (rival) to the US, ambitions that have been strengthened by the Russo-Ukrainian War.
The major players in the campaign to grind Zimbabwe into dust were motivated by a variety of factors, the least of which being simple "anti-communism". The vestiges of the British Empire were more than willing to relinquish the rogue Rhodesian colony to "majority rule", but they wanted a neo-colonial Zimbabwe that they could still control, much in the same vein as what would later be done in South Africa. An aspiring imperialist Rhodesia rising as a rival power in the region wasn't conducive to colonial/neo-colonial aims in Africa (we see a similar trend with Israel today), but neither was a genuinely independent Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe needed to be brought to heel and forced into a neo-colonial position. These priorities are largely true for the other imperialist powers of Eurasia as well.
The settler-colonial states and empires on the other hand, chief among them the United States (but also including Israel, South Africa, Canada, Australia, etc.), had a very different perspective. The success of the people's war led by ZANU represented an existential threat for them that didn't necessarily exist for the British, French, etc. For the settler-states, the class and national movements that toppled Rhodesia could easily spread and inspire New Afrikan, Palestinian, and other national liberation movements that could likewise topple their governments. Thus, the economic destruction of Zimbabwe was a necessity in order to send a message around the world: "we will grind you into dust if you so much as sneeze towards liberation." Independence for the nations held captive by settler-states, even along capitalist lines (Zimbabwe was never on the socialist road) is completely unacceptable for them. Like Haiti before them, Zimbabwe couldn't be allowed to become a model for anyone else to follow.
Thus we have a practical basis for unity between these two forces in needing to bring Zimbabwe to its knees, and they did. But in practice this wasn't a uniform matter. Remember that the old imperialist powers of Eurasia don't need Zimbabwe destroyed, just reoriented back to neo-colonialism. Zimbabwe is hardly the first country to be reoriented in this way, and it doesn't require the total destruction of the economy and political system (Tanzania, for example). But the settler-states were out for blood, especially after the expulsion of settlers and redistribution of their land. It wasn't an international agreement that froze Zimbabwe's international lines of credit, it was the United States alone passing laws in its own government (the "Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001"). Today, it is the United States that unilaterally levies the harshest and most destructive sanctions against Zimbabwe. Though the EU has also levied sanctions over the years, they've never had the same impact and avenues were always left open for neo-colonial "aid" to filter through.
>>2298147White people are 58% of the population and have done jack shit. Pasty motherfuckers can't even grow lettuce without trafficking in a bunch of quasi-slaves from other countries to do it for them. But yeah sure, go ahead and keep believing that Hubert Pumpernickel who begrudgingly took on a labor aristocrat position at a Ford plant to get a college scholarship and leave the working class entirely is gonna pick up a rifle and shoot the cop protecting his Dad's car dealership. At least labor zionists are honest about what they really want.
Or do you think the 0.0012% of white people in the US who are genuinely destitute at any given moment (about 230,000 people) will lead the revolution? Cause that's a wayyyy smaller group than 50 million Black people, 35 million Latinos/Chicanos, and 10 million Native Americans.
>>2298186White people will invent "scientific" racism, use it as a superstructural support for the most racist and violent empire in human history that commodifies human beings like never before, and then tell the people they racialized and traded around like Pokemon cards that they need to stop with the "racial theory". Absolutely stunning chauvinism on display.
We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror.
>>2298164230,000 wypipo are 'genuinely destitute'.
But all of the 50m, 35m latinos, and 10m native Americans are destitute?!
>>2298186no one hates Africa more than an African
no one hates African women more than African men
>>2298207wypipos did a lot of wrong because they did a lot of things to begin with.
from there, it was normal that some really good stuff would come out of it, and some really bad.
I guess you can't do much wrong when you spend all your time hunting zebras and gathering nuts
>>2297398Mugabe and almost all other African decolonial leaders were braindead morons and were only good to drive out the coloniser.
Anyone who is not a crackka looking from afar, and genuinely knows about these leaders a little bit, will know that they are stupid and simplistic to the point of tragicomedy
>>2298164Upper middle class second gen african immigrant:
>GIVE ME YOUR MONEY WHITE MONKKKEY>WE SHOULD PUT WHITES IN WOKE CONCENTRATION CAMPS AND BREED YOUR WHITE WIFES>FREE AFRICA FROM CHINA>BLACKS SHOULD BE GIVEN JOBS IN PRIORITY, THERE NO WHITE MONKKKEY PROLESSubsaharian communists:
>Oh Putin, harden your heart and nuke France>African capitalists are as bad as western ones>Chinese investments improve our material conditions>African-Americans aren't africans >>2298238>>2298249>>2298253>>2298254>>2298255>>2298258>>2298265>>2298269>>2298282As usual, when confronted social chauvinists inevitably fall back on overtly racist caricatures and absurd strawmen to defend their position. Same vibes as Soviet tabloids armchair diagnosing Mao with various mental illnesses or ascribing Chinese anti-revisionism to racial characteristics in the 60s and 70s.
>>2298251Love the random insertion of stereotyped AAVE in all your posts. Very well-adjusted and reasonable of you.
No, nationally oppressed peoples aren't all destitute, my argument isn't hinged on that. The reality is that the workers of these groups do not have the same access, and aren't as bound, to the benefits of imperialism. Outside of tiny minorities of each group that have been selectively integrated into the imperialist settler bourgeoisie, these peoples live very different (more violent, unpredictable, at the mercy of the state) lives from their settler counterparts. Latinos/Chicanos are 2x more likely to be homeless than whites, Black people are 5x more likely, Indigenous peoples are 10x, and all these numbers go up even more if we include undocumented workers. They are all vastly more likely to be the targets of state violence and ending their own lives due to economic hopelessness. They are all vastly more likely to be renters and pay more of their income to landlords (a class that is overwhelmingly white). They are all the targets of overt and covert campaigns for relocation and extermination. Meanwhile, the US economy relies on the cheap and unpaid labor of these workers to keep domestic products internationally competitive in price, while whites generally occupy blue and white collar labor aristocrat positions with vastly higher pay. This isn't limited to the United States either, and is consistent across settler-states.
Class being the principal contradiction doesn't absolve you of the responsibility to analyze
how class struggle is expressed in practice. In the US and other settler-states, racial oppression and the blending of various nations into new racial categories according to the needs of capital is a key social component of the construction of the dominant nation. This social component has very material consequences, people live and die according to the dictates of racism, with white workers holding an overall parasitic relationship with the rest of the world. We like to pretend that the widespread cruelty of US/Canadian/Australian settlers in the 16th through 20th centuries was simply a product of its time, a pre-Marxist and internationalist world, but 85-98% of Israelis supporting the genocide of Palestinians today proves there to be a consistent alliance between the settler worker and bourgeoisie in order to maintain an artificially high quality of life. So it's deeply idealist at best and disgustingly self-serving at worst to tell nationally oppressed peoples to simply ignore race and pretend like settlers genuinely "have nothing to lose but their chains". They have everything to lose: their supermarkets, cheap electronics, gentrified towns, massive cars, fast fashion, high pay, etc. They stand to lose all of that and more in a revolutionary situation, and even a transition to Western European models of bourgeois democracy is unacceptable, hence the rise of fascism in the US positioning itself against those liberals in the Democratic party seeking some form of integrated European parliamentarism or social fascism.
>>2298266They aren't capable of answering the question because the depth of their political analysis is that of a dry puddle. Give them an apple and they'll tell you it tastes like a grape without even taking a bite.
>>2298273>>2298282Assuming I believe this for a moment, not being white doesn't somehow make you immune to upholding white supremacy. Every oppressed nation around the world has its coons and sellouts.
>>2298695>Le ideas rule le world2005 was 20 years ago.
>>2299955>Dividing class struggle based on race is fed shit.wrong. colonial system is racist system that divides society into bourgeois colonizer and proletarian colonized therefore colonized proletarian must smash the bourgeois colonizer
> The working class has no nation, no religion, no race. wrong. proletarians have their own states. proletarians have dialectical materialism which is factual materialist religion and scientific certainty in proletariat power and Communism. Proletarians are the supreme race
>>2299955>The working class has no nation, no religion, no race.To say the working class has no nation, no religion and no race is in fact a materially detached idealization. This isn't just about empathy or being a liberal, but your analysis will have to consider how these things play a role in behavior and alignment of working class people.
>Dividing class struggle based on race is fed shit.Anti-idpol Marxists really can't distinguish between assessing what you are dealing with from a meta perspective and believing they are real, independent and primary, as an actual Fed would do.
>This is not an idealistic hope that we assume will happen eventually without effort, rather it is something we will bring to reality using extreme violence.Which implies this isn't the case
now. Also that you think the primary approach is "extreme violence" outs you rather as a fascist. That's not an intelligent way of doing it at all.
>>2300027
>To say the working class has no nation, no religion and no race is in fact a materially detached idealization. It's literally a quote from Marx, I just added religion and race to it. Don't try to understand it in a literal sense like it describes the current state of the world. I mean it as a declaration of what a successful world working class revolution would seek to achieve.
You cannot resolve the conflict between black and white, between Hindu and Moslem, without fundamentally destroying these the very existence of these concepts at their foundational level.
Btw, why don't 10000 different Pagan traditions exist in Europe anymore? Did they peacefully unite? Or were they stamped out with violence?
How did the 500 German tribes that constantly warred with each other become a united nation?
Why didnt the citizens of an Empire as massive as Rome not constantly war between each other?
The answer to all these - their unity was enforced with violence. Communists will do the same, but with humanity as a whole, and across all racial, religious and national categories. And it will be possible unlike all other attempts before, because the very economic base of communist makes cooperation and social behavior the very foundation of all human activity.
>>2298789What point exactly are you trying to make with this article? Is it that the material benefits of imperialism for white workers in the US magically don't exist because the US specifically doesn't have
as formalized a welfare state? Their disproportionately higher wages (disproportionate to the value created by their labor) and cheap commodities (enabled by the paying nothing to the people who actually created the value overseas) just don't exist? Even if such a thing were true (it isn't) what about the other settler-states which do have universal healthcare?
That these workers don't live in a utopia doesn't change their overall relationship to the rest of the world, in the same way that a celebrity or business owner "having it hard too" doesn't change their overall relationship to production.All of these states contain a strata of
temporarily embarrassed settlers who fall through the cracks, but even then their primary struggle is the possibility of having to work an inglorious industrial or service position (that still has disproportionately high wages) until they get back on their feet. This is simply not the same struggle as the vast majority of workers worldwide, who struggle for basic daily survival in sweatshops, mines, and forges they don't even know if they'll be allowed to leave when their shift is done. The workers of the world face death and dismemberment every day and fear that death will come for them, the settler-worker in the US faces rude boss taking
some of their benefits and fear becoming a worker like in the rest of the world. The settler is still a worker in the strictest sense, but their relationship to capital is warped by social relations and material conditions on the ground.
I also shouldn't have to point out the major issue in self-reporting "living paycheck to paycheck", namely that the bougiest motherfuckers you've ever met will look you in the eyes and claim that.
Fucking Mr. Beast claims he lives paycheck to paycheck! Surveys can provide very useful data but in cases like this they prove fuck all. In particular a self-reported survey doesn't allow you to flatten the class struggle in the US or anywhere into a little idealist storybook depiction of class where internal contradictions don't exist.
>>2299955You say this as though it's communists who invented the concept of race and organized labor in the US based on a racialized social hierarchy. I am not dividing
anybody. I am identifying conditions on the ground and moving based on that, rather than idealistically twisting Marx's words to justify ignoring them.
The question is not whether the working class
should be divided because
they already are. US society has been organized in a way that materially benefits many workers and builds their lifestyle off the backs of other workers. The question is what forms that division takes (not just race, but gender and nationality) and what basis for unity exists among workers. The history of communist organizing in the US conclusively shows that the only material basis for racial and national unity between settlers and the oppressed nations is when settlers subordinate their national interests to the struggle for racial equality
and national self-determination (not one or the other, both). The mechanical and economistic belief that workers will simply unite for the sole reason of being workers has repeatedly failed and produced some of the worst setbacks in various revolutionary struggles.
>it is something we will bring to reality using extreme violence."Extreme violence" is little more than empty words when you are actively disinterested in even the slightest investigation of American superstructure, let alone its economic base.
Unique IPs: 39