I think America deserves some credit for the minute good it’s done on the world stage, but can any political unit ever even come close to a comparative amount of suffering and death caused? I feel like I don’t even need to go through the atrocities but I mean the USA has directly caused genocides on more continents than they have not… Has any tribe, nation, kingdom, soviet, whatever the fuck term you want to use EVER caused as much real physical harm as the great Satan, America?
Britain? Portugal? Rome? The Khanate? I don’t know if any of them match the amount of real distress and suffering caused, in a utilitarian sense, as the United States has.
No this post has nothing to do with the fact it’s the Fourth of July.
america was in a unique position to do all that shit because it lucked out geographically, and lucked out after ww2. i dont like american exceptionalism or anti-american exceptionalism. america is only powerful because of material conditions beyond its control.
>>2858904>>2858919Americas greatest buff was only because of the most direct genocide it committed, that being against the lands native inhabitants. Natural buff or not, my point stands that they have committed the most evil.
In terms of raw numbers, probably. Mongol Empire probably killed more people in human percentage numbers when compared to the population at the time, but it's hard to call it a political unit.
I find it hard to believe the us caused more native deaths than either Spain or Portugal, but I'll be honest I don't really give a shit about finding out.
>>2858900USA was extremely progressive for its time during 18th and 19th century.
no, amerikkka is very special and so are (you)
>>2858986my piss also does this sometimes
The English empire maybe. But the sheer fact that in a state of sistematic economic surplus people die from preventable deaths, either from hunger, disease, or lacking the general conditions a physically and mentally healthy human being should and actually CAN have… This sheer fact, I mean, is enough to consider any political unit responsible for it WORSE than any previous, pre-surplus economy, even if it was a cannibalistic killmongering hellhole or whatever
The Mongols for sure. They created nothing, left no culture, just straight up destruction for the sake of it.
britian and spain undeniably worse. the latter drained mexico city
>>2885022you're in luck, america is letting the saudis have civilian nuclear
if you move beyond the framework of individual nations and cultures and just think of humanity as a single holistic system, all of the empires that have existed throughout human history can really be thought of as one continuous global empire that becomes more centralized and powerful and destructive over time. the american empire is just the current form and therefore the worst form yet but it probably will not be the final form and whatever form the empire takes after this will be even worse, it will be bigger and more all-encompassing and more sophisticated and more insidiously evil than anything that came before it.
>>2885044Sarmakandian hands wrote this post
>>2885105the first dengist experiment
>>2885044authentic revolutionaries like all nomadGODS
>>2858900Hunter-gatherers: Wars kill dozens, maybe hundreds.
Feudalism: Wars kill thousands.
Capitalism: Wars kill millions.
Does socialism have the balls to kill billions? Will we ever be productive enough to slaughter trillions? Perhaps among the stars.
>>2858900USA was a progressive force in history until cold war started and they became fanatical anti-communists.
>>2858904>lucked out geographicallythis is winning the lottery by mugging someone else for their ticket
>>2885354>america was progressivewas this during the native american genocide, the half century of brutal slavery, the monroe doctrine in south america, or when they didn't bomb the nazi oil refineries and tank factories they owned and invaded nazi germany to save nazis from the red army?
I keep hearing american exceptionalist BS from libtards and they never fucking say when they think the US was good actually.
fuck you.
>>2885370>he thinks being a progressive force in history is about their moral character, not what those actions createdlol, lmao
>>2885370yes lib marx considered manifest destiny historically progressive. put down Settlers and pick up capitalvol1
>>2885044thats just untrue though
>>2885371>not what these actions createda hyper-individualist neobonepartist police state that created and still creates similar states around the world?
>>2885374a string of words with only the first three being accurate, the USA progressed quite literally every aspect of humanity, similar to how the soviets similarly progressed humanity, building cities, elevating large amounts of the planet into urbanization
>>2885372marx recanted this assessment of colonialism, and it may surprise you to learn marx is not the last word on marxism. dialectic and historical materialism is anti dogmatic. citing theory which has been superceded just outs you as poser.
>>2885377>Marx recanted this assessment of colonialism, No he didn't
> it may surprise you to learn marx is not the last word on marxism. Bernstein revisionist moment
>>2885370Yes colonialism was a progressive force in 15-18th centuries.
>>2885383revisionism is misrepresenting historical facts and the principles of the movement, the consensus changing across time is not revisionism.
marx did indeed recant his statements on colonialism being a progressive force specifically wrt british colonialism. we don't however need marx for these critiques as the communist critiques of imperialism and colonialism were greatly expanded upon by lenin, mao, and ho chi minh.
>>2885401*british colonialism in india
>>2885400where exactly was it a progressive force? the raj where it reinforced caste hierarchies? the congo under king leopold with all the hand chopping? french indochina? palestine?
fuck outta here.
>>2885405Colonialism was a progressive only when it replaced feudal or more primitive modes of production. Moralizing about chopping hands off has nothing to do with its objective role as a historically progressive force.
>>2885406historical revisionism. if you go through primary sources to find progressive arguments for colonialism they're all using liberal enlightenment race science to celebrate the depopulation of the natives.
marx wrote the manifesto in 1840 he had an excuse for being suckered: it was the zeitgeist of the time. what's your excuse you racist dickhead?
>>2885408my point is that in practice the colonists and settlers were completely indistinguishable to the feudal rulers: capitalism started at the port, the plantation used the whip.
>>2885418>my point is that in practice the colonists and settlers were completely indistinguishable to the feudal rulersThats probably true in most cases which is why I specified 'only when it replaced feudal or more primitive modes of production.' It would be false to claim that all of colonialism was progressive as the progressive aspects of it were only a byproduct.
>>2885423glad we agree. I would advise not saying such inflammatory shit if you don't have an example in the chamber.
>>2885401>marx did indeed recant his statements on colonialism being a progressive force specifically wrt british colonialismdont move the goalpost, marx never recanted anything about manifest destiny being historically progressive. no citation exists for your misinterpretation of marx
>>2885457>marx never recanted anything about manifest destiny being historically progressive. no citation exists for your misinterpretation of marxNo citation of marx calling manifest destiny progressive exists either
>>2886106>No citation of marx calling manifest destiny progressive exists eitherThis is Engels but aren't they joined at the hip?
https://www.connexions.org/CxArchive/MIA/marx/works/1849/02/15.htm
> Democratic pan-Slavism still puts forward these demands:
>"At that time we felt confident of our cause… justice and humanity were wholly on our side, and nothing but illegality and barbarity on the side of our enemies. The ideas to which we devoted ourselves were no empty figments of a dream, they were the ideas of the sole true and necessary policy, the policy of revolution."
>"Justice", "humanity", "freedom", "equality", "fraternity", "independence" - so far we have found nothing in the pan-Slavist manifesto but these more or less ethical categories, which sound very fine, it is true, but prove absolutely nothing in historical and political questions. "Justice", "humanity", "freedom", etc., may demand this or that a thousand times over; but if the thing is impossible it does not take place and in spite of everything remains an "empty figment of a dream". The pan-Slavists' illusions ought to have understood that all pious wishes and beautiful dreams are of no avail against the iron reality, and that their policy at any time was no more the "policy of revolution" than was that of the French Republic. Nevertheless, today, in January 1849, they still come to us with the same old phrases, in the content of which Western Europe has been disillusioned by the bloodiest counter-revolution!
<Just a word about "universal fraternal union of peoples" and the drawing of "boundaries established by the sovereign will of the peoples themselves on the basis of their national characteristics". The United States and Mexico are two republics, in both of which the people is sovereign.
<How did it happen that over Texas a war broke out between these two republics, which, according to the moral theory, ought to have been "fraternally united" and "federated", and that, owing to "geographical, commercial and strategical necessities", the "sovereign will" of the American people, supported by the bravery of the American volunteers, shifted the boundaries drawn by nature some hundreds of miles further south? And will Bakunin accuse the Americans of a "war of conquest", which, although it deals with a severe blow to his theory based on "justice and humanity", was nevertheless waged wholly and solely in the interest of civilization? Or is it perhaps unfortunate that splendid California has been taken away from the lazy Mexicans, who could not do anything with it? That the energetic Yankees by rapid exploitation of the California gold mines will increase the means of circulation, in a few years will concentrate a dense population and extensive trade at the most suitable places on the coast of the Pacific Ocean, create large cities, open up communications by steamship, construct a railway from New York to San Francisco, for the first time really open the Pacific Ocean to civilization, and for the third time in history give the world trade a new direction? The "independence" of a few Spanish Californians and Texans may suffer because of it, in someplaces "justice" and other moral principles may be violated; but what does that matter to such facts of world-historic significance?
>We would point out, incidentally, that this theory of universal fraternal union of peoples, which calls indiscriminately for fraternal union regardless of the historical situation and the stage of social development of the individual peoples, was combated by the editors of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung already long before the revolution, and in fact in opposition to their best friends, the English and French democrats. Proof of this is to be found in the English, French and Belgian democratic newspapers of that period. >>2886107God damn it engels
>>2886107Engels is not Marx but fair enough. Though he's mostly talking about american-mexican/spanish wars here, not manifest destiny in its entirety.
They were both more stagist in their early days, but I think it is wrong to assume from this that either Marx or Engels in totality had such a rigid or determinist view of historical progress and that either ultimately had such simple thought on the matter as "colonialism and manifest destiny = progressive force = necessary for communism" or something like that
Read how Marx thought about early colonialism in Capital
<The discovery of gold and silver in America, the extirpation, enslavement and entombment in mines of the aboriginal population, the beginning of the conquest and looting of the East Indies, the turning of Africa into a warren for the commercial hunting of black-skins, signalised the rosy dawn of the era of capitalist production. These idyllic proceedings are the chief momenta of primitive accumulation. On their heels treads the commercial war of the European nations, with the globe for a theatre. It begins with the revolt of the Netherlands from Spain, assumes giant dimensions in England’s Anti-Jacobin War, and is still going on in the opium wars against China, &c.
<The different momenta of primitive accumulation distribute themselves now, more or less in chronological order, particularly over Spain, Portugal, Holland, France, and England. In England at the end of the 17th century, they arrive at a systematical combination, embracing the colonies, the national debt, the modern mode of taxation, and the protectionist system. These methods depend in part on brute force, e.g., the colonial system. But, they all employ the power of the State, the concentrated and organised force of society, to hasten, hot-house fashion, the process of transformation of the feudal mode of production into the capitalist mode, and to shorten the transition. Force is the midwife of every old society pregnant with a new one. It is itself an economic power.
<Of the Christian colonial system, W. Howitt, a man who makes a speciality of Christianity, says:
<“The barbarities and desperate outrages of the so-called Christian race, throughout every region of the world, and upon every people they have been able to subdue, are not to be paralleled by those of any other race, however fierce, however untaught, and however reckless of mercy and of shame, in any age of the earth.” [4]
<The history of the colonial administration of Holland — and Holland was the head capitalistic nation of the 17th century —
<“is one of the most extraordinary relations of treachery, bribery, massacre, and meanness” [5]
>Nothing is more characteristic than their system of stealing men, to get slaves for Java. The men stealers were trained for this purpose. The thief, the interpreter, and the seller, were the chief agents in this trade, native princes the chief sellers. The young people stolen, were thrown into the secret dungeons of Celebes, until they were ready for sending to the slave-ships. An official report says:
>“This one town of Macassar, e.g., is full of secret prisons, one more horrible than the other, crammed with unfortunates, victims of greed and tyranny fettered in chains, forcibly torn from their families.”
>To secure Malacca, the Dutch corrupted the Portuguese governor. He let them into the town in 1641. They hurried at once to his house and assassinated him, to “abstain” from the payment of £21,875, the price of his treason. Wherever they set foot, devastation and depopulation followed. Banjuwangi, a province of Java, in 1750 numbered over 80,000 inhabitants, in 1811 only 18,000. Sweet commerce! >>2886172
so you are telling me he was
>leftist politically incorrect
>>2886124> Engels in totality had such a rigid or determinist view of historical progress and that either ultimately had such simple thought on the matter as "colonialism and manifest destiny = progressive force = necessary for communism" or something like that
>And will Bakunin accuse the Americans of a "war of conquest", which, although it deals with a severe blow to his theory based on "justice and humanity", was nevertheless waged wholly and solely in the interest of civilization? Or is it perhaps unfortunate that splendid California has been taken away from the lazy Mexicans, who could not do anything with it? That the energetic Yankees by rapid exploitation of the California gold mines will increase the means of circulation, in a few years will concentrate a dense population and extensive trade at the most suitable places on the coast of the Pacific Ocean, create large cities, open up communications by steamship, construct a railway from New York to San Francisco, for the first time really open the Pacific Ocean to civilization, and for the third time in history give the world trade a new direction? The "independence" of a few Spanish Californians and Texans may suffer because of it, in someplaces "justice" and other moral principles may be violated; but what does that matter to such facts of world-historic significance?>waged wholly and solely in the interest of civilization?>for the first time really open the Pacific Ocean to civilization, and for the third time in history give the world trade a new direction?>>2886124>Read how Marx thought about early colonialism in CapitalNowhere in there does he say it's a bad thing lol. In fact he seems to be saying the opposite:
< they all employ the power of the State, the concentrated and organised force of society, to hasten, hot-house fashion, the process of transformation of the feudal mode of production into the capitalist mode, and to shorten the transition. Force is the midwife of every old society pregnant with a new one. It is itself an economic power. >>2886351
>Nowhere in there does he say it's a bad thing lol.Are you stupid?
<These idyllic proceedings are the chief momenta of primitive accumulation. On their heels treads the commercial war of the European nations, with the globe for a theatre.So you think Marx considered slavery and colonial conquests to actually be idyllic or what?
<The history of the colonial administration of Holland — and Holland was the head capitalistic nation of the 17th century —
<“is one of the most extraordinary relations of treachery, bribery, massacre, and meanness” [5]
<Wherever they set foot, devastation and depopulation followed. Banjuwangi, a province of Java, in 1750 numbered over 80,000 inhabitants, in 1811 only 18,000. Sweet commerce!Do you think Marx here really thinks the depopulation of Banjuwangi was a good thing when he says "sweet commerce!"? Is he bringing up these quotes about the savagery of the colonial system for no reason or what are you trying to say?
>>2886351He was clearly ragebaiting Bakunin by acting edgy
>>2885375>the USA progressed quite literally every aspect of humanityWhen?
>>2887283The serious academic consensus in western academia (with its inherent anti-soviet biases) is that without lend lease the USSR would still have won, but the conflict would have taken longer and claimed more lives.
>>2886441>So you think Marx considered slavery and colonial conquests to actually be idyllic or what?So you think he is advocating for primotive accumulation? Are you dumb?
>>2858900No, the United States was not a particularly evil country. There's this weird tendency to ascribe to American Exceptionalism no matter what, and if America wasn't the greatest country that ever existed, then it must have been the worst country that ever existed. In the history books, America won't be a particularly remarkable empire. The most remarkable thing about it will probably be the way in which it destroyed itself almost randomly rather than suffering any particular loss (or empire-destroying Pyrrhic victory). That, and the way it structured its empire around finance bullshittery, assuming that's not just the new mode of empire.
It hasn't done anything like the Mongol Empire, which murdered so many people it left an impression on population numbers hundreds of years later.
>>2887404Stalin, Zhukov, and Khrushchev all privately acknowledged that without the US government’s Lend-Lease program, the Soviets would’ve lost the war.
>The serious academic consensus in western academiaMeaningless and an appeal to authority. Of course the Western historiography says the US dindu nuffin. Think of the implications… the flagship anti-communist state bailing out the flagship socialist state, and thus laying the groundwork for the Cold War? Unpalatable!
Whats up with all this black legend on here? There were like 30 million people in America in 1500, Spain + Portugal can't have killed more (many deaths related to virus which aren't their fault) than France or Britain in the colonial period?
>>2887601The USSR already broke the back of Nazi Germany by 1942-1943 and the lend lease started really coming in 1943 when the momentum was already on the Soviet's side.
>>2858977everyone know at this point that the majority of deaths by spain and potugal were due to diseases. Even if they wanted to kill them all they could not have done it, since the disease would kill them first
>>2887608>The USSR already broke the back of Nazi Germany by 1942-1943 The ussr only started pushing germany back by late 1942. Which coincides when usa land lease to russia started increasing rapidly, and when the usa + britain invaded africa
>>2887494you are such a fool
https://www.prsgroup.com/the-invisible-siege-reassessing-the-mortality-cost-of-economic-sanctions/Only by sanctions USA and his dogs are one of the most brutal and homicidal empires in history, probably side by side with the english empire or even worse. If we take into account IMF, CIA & co., and all it's interventions, that have led to the majority of countries in the world to be in a state of permanent underdevelopement, misery, criminality, drug addiction… what more can be said? what other empire other than the british one has come to such level of sustained depravity on a global scale?
We're living in an era of economic surplus, people are dying from hunger, and the worst empires are the ones when they couldnt even feed everyone on a sustainable rate lmao
>>2887608So are you saying Stalin and Zhukov were wrong?
Germany occupied the USSR’s grain producing regions in the Ukraine and North Caucasus. Without the food aid from Lend-Lease, the Soviets would’ve starved to death. That’s why by the summer of 1942, Molotov was practically begging the Allies, especially Roosevelt, to increase the aid (which is what happened).
>>2887655>>2887608y'all nibbas either start dropping sources or it's all just an ego battle.
>I say this<No, I say thatshut up and give source you stupid fuckers
>>2887655>So are you saying Stalin and Zhukov were wrongIf you know anything about diplomacy, see where Stalin said that. He was flattering the Western allies to keep giving aid and especially push them to go into Africa and start a Western front(Stalin and the Soviets were concerned that the West was trying to bleed the Soviets as much as possible while the West remained strong and clean the aftermath) The German army was attempting to go deep with horse carried equipment after winter. The war was supposed to be over before winter as the rotten house was supposed to collapse within.
>>2887676Too lazy. Just use Google you useless piece of shit. I’m not making any sophisticated claims.
>MMM DO YOU HAVE A SOURCE THAT GERMANY OCCUPIED UKRAINE IN 1942??Fuck you.
>>2887680Stalin, along with Khruschev and Zhukov, made the same statements in private so your whole blurb about public posturing is irrelevant.
(I really need to spend more time correcting errors in my comments, before posting them)
The timeline is pretty much:
>usa land lease to the ussr started increasing rapidly from march 1942. Post march 1942, the ussr was designated as a prioritized recipient for landlease, and us factories had mostly transitioned to war time production, as well.
>The ussr starts pushing back germany at late november 1942
There was 8 months of large usa landlease support before the ussr started pushing germany back. Usa aid was important
>>2887759dare to use the brain now and then
>>2887707>Stalin, along with Khruschev and Zhukov, made the same statements in private<Khrushchev attempting to make detente and Stalin trying to squeeze everything out of the western powers.Lend Lease didn't make the difference between winning the war, it made the difference with how many loses
>>2888238Do you know what the word "private" means?
They PRIVATELY admitted to their OWN PARTY COMRADES they would’ve lost. Why do you keep inserting appeasing the Allies into this scenario? Are you stupid?
>Khrushchev attempting to make detenteNo, dumbass, Khrushchev authored his memoirs in secret after he was overthrown, and he wrote it before detente became official Soviet policy. The only reason we know the memoirs exist is because his son smuggled copies to the US and Western Europe in the 1970s; it was a major political embarrassment for the Soviets at the time.
>>2858900>I think America deserves some credit for the minute good it’s done on the world stagelike…. what?
>>2888618defeating imperial japan? Defeating fascist italy? Helping defeat fascist germany?
Unique IPs: 50