Colonizer refers to anyone involved in the entire process of expropriation of the resources of another nation, this is a national distinction, not a racial one. Colonized, or indigenous in the settler form, refers to those who’s national property in land, resources, and labor is expropriated by a colonizing nation. The American nation owns, is hegemonic over, or exercises sovereignty over, the lands of Turtle Island. The nations that rely on those resources are being pushed off of them while the resources are expropriated for the entire Settler economy, the “free gifts of nature”. So colonizer vs colonized or settler vs indigenous relates to the definite relations between national (social) groups. Colonizers have exploitative positions in consumption of expropriated resources from the colonized groups in land and labor. As in when you have super exploited national groups within a country, it means that the colonial proletariat is exchanging less labor for the same returns in the distribution of resources in the economy. The state, superstructure turned back into material, allocates expropriated resources/property/consumption for members of the colonial nation, as if it were a bourgeoisie as a whole. So why isn’t the class differences within the colonial nation the primary contradiction (or the primary class contradiction, i.e. peasant vs prole) in a settler society? Because even if the settler proletariat defeated the settler bourgeoisie, it would still maintain national differences in the means of production and ownership of yet to be utilized resources. The settlers would have to voluntarily give up their position of expropriation over the other nations, that would have to be maintained by the decolonial state apparatus, the end of American supremacy.

Do the classes interpermeate or are they distinct?

Yes, distinct in the way of definite social relations to production, but like the bottom of the bougies and the top of the labor, the consumption by individuals varies beyond national bounds depending on the relationship to property within each nation. Colonialism once it has subjugated competing nations converts the structure of those nations into a model that provides the most expropriated resources with the least effort, in the case of the US the Americans can either totally expropriate territory from the indigenous, taking from bougie and prole alike, or in a neo-Colonial form where the indigenous bourgeoisie allows super exploitation of their proletariat and resources by a higher power in exchange for a share of the proceeds and reinforced rule by the colonizers. This form remains dominant as indigenous territory is used for meat, lumber, oil, and mineral production (especially Uranium), while indigenous workers rarely get those jobs from the American bourgeoisie as it is reserved for the American workers. Essentially any resources claimed by the colonial bourgeoisie are also claimed by colonial proletariat, this is the fuel of reactionary nationalism within the colonial nations.

It’s a retronym, Marxist theorists in this space never unified the theories and applications of ML utilized by Fanon, Rodney, Lushaba, Wynter, etc., under a specific title. However, the revolutions in Cuba, Vietnam, and China have been Decolonial in nature and should be studied in the way they took special attention to the society of the colonized masses when constructing Socialism that would go on to challenge and defeat Colonial rule.

The basis is the refusal to start history at the time of colonization, or from the reference point of the colonizers. The context of the settler states needs to start before the settlers arrived, how they arrived and came to dominate, and understand the protracted resistance against the settlers. When understanding the structure of a particular colonization, which is really how national resources are processed and consumed, we can see the relationship between the colonizer class and the colonized.

When I say Decolonization is a reorientation of ML I mean that ML was developed to explain the need for the proletariats of Imperial nations to understand the development of Imperialism in relation to class struggle. The American MLs know they need revolutionary defeatism but they do not understand what they need to defeat and where. The struggle for gender is one of deconstructing Colonialism, the struggle for race is one of deconstructing Colonialism, the struggle for the environment is one of deconstructing Colonialism. The struggle for class is one of deconstructing Colonialism. Decolonial Marxism is Scientific Socialism that builds a society that supplants the Colonial order.

Indenture contracts most often guaranteed the servant land upon finishing their obligations. It was an upwardly mobile system that allowed settlers to enter debt for entrance into the colonial planter class. Indenture was basically dead for over 50 years by the time black sharecroppers became the dominant form of agricultural worker for black people.

Indentured servants were still part of the colonizer class, and were obligated to defend the colonies in militias alongside their masters. Indenture fell out of fashion after a series of servant revolts through which the servants won significant rights in the colonies. These revolts increased the planter class’ reliance on African slaves. By the time of the Revolution indenture was basically irrelevant.

Decolonial Marxism is perfectly compatible with MLism, in fact it is a reorientation of MLism, into the perspective of the colonized. Colonization is the subjugation of one nation by another. It is the purpose of Marxists in the colonizer nation to practice defeatism in solidarity with their nation’s colonized peoples. The Marxists of the colonized nations need to defeat the chains of Imperialism by fighting against their colonizers.

America being a settler state, a state by and for settlers where settlers exercise political supremacy (as seen in the Navajo water case just ruled by the SC), lives alongside its primary colonial subjects, the extant indigenous nations (most are still around) and the black nation. The secondary subjects being the migrant workers from colonized nations around the world (predominantly Latinos and Asians).

The Settlers as a nation are a colonizer class above the indigenous and black people. The contradiction between settlers of the bourgeoisie and property-less is secondary to the nation-state’s looting of indigenous land and super-exploiting black workers. The Pick-Sloan dams are a prime example of the white laborers working on genocidal projects that benefited white people overall. The condemnation of black and asian neighborhoods made way for downtown highways for white beneficiaries of the GI bill.

America has massive weaknesses in the production of Imperialism, namely in the necessity of the US to continue colonization of indigenous territory to maintain dollar imperialism. The DAPL and KXL protests blocked and delayed massive oil projects that the US and Canada need to control the price of oil. Biden has signed off on massive drilling projects in Alaska on indigenous land where the residents don’t have running water or electricity. This project is to replace the reliance on Saudi Arabia in maintaining a low price of oil. In response to unfavorable global conditions, the settler states dip into their own resources to replenish their empire. I think MLs in America should focus on attacking the US in its arteries, the production chain of imperialism. The dismantling of White Supremacy means removing White rule over the vast territories of North America and depriving the settlers of a state for themselves. The Dictatorship of the Colonized Nations is the necessary form of state that will replace the US, Canada, and Mexico.

So my state, Washington, is expected to grow by 2 million people by the 2030s and our airport (SeaTac) is expected to grow too crowded to have as many one way destinations as it has right now.

A major Republican just put out an op ed saying that we need to build another airport, but nobody wants to live next to it. So to solve this, we need to plan a new 250k+ city and give it an airport. The level of NIMBYism we are entertaining is a planned economy to keep the landed folks rich.

It’s problematic that settlers in a settler colony don’t know what the environment looked like before their ancestors colonized the land. I’m not saying nature in the abstract but the specific environments of the Americas that were destroyed due to homesteading and colonizing. They want a return to “green” but that “green” is imported flora and fauna.

They can brainstorm all day but when it comes down to praxis, if they are reproducing settler Colonialism of the environment, they are a problem. If Solarpunks in the colonies don’t have an intimate understanding of their local native species, they are just colonizers, not much better than people who keep their lawn green.

Edit: relevant image I just ran into

That one Chobani commercial is still a cornerstone in the Solarpunk “movement”, at least on social media (where I expect it lives and dies). There is a “de-advertised” version where someone took the time to remove all of the references to the dairy magnate. There is no criticism of the environment depicted in the art being full of colonizing species, only derision in it being produced by Chobani. This is worrying because the settlers in the settler states, even the “environmentally conscious”, can’t even imagine a form of living alongside nature, only a continent sized homestead. Environmental collapse is more than just carbon emissions and asphalt, the environments of the Americas have been collapsing ever since the colonizers came and exterminated tens of millions of bison, tens of millions of beavers, wolves, dammed rivers that wipe out salmon populations. It’s problematic that people here don’t know what nature actually looks like, especially those who play around with “revolutionary aesthetics”.

I like the idea of being sustainable, growing your own food, and living naturally. I used to dream about starting a commune or homestead, but now I’m starting to think the idealization of it is petty bourgeois and part of the settler mindset.

It absolutely is the settler mindset. Homesteading is an economically stagnant practice at best. Homesteading served a few historical functions. First, it was an outlet for the downwardly mobile classes of Europe (at first, just England) to escape the monopolization and enclosures of land. Now, all these Europeans coming over for their homesteads had to come out, take land that was developed by other humans, destroy it, terraform, and fill it with European taxa (honey bees, apples, grass, mice, and salad weeds like dandelions), settle it, and defend it from recapture. Homesteading has been an occupation and colonization tactic of people and nature from the start, and Jefferson’s ideas turned it into a literal war tactic on Indian Country. In macro, homesteading was a way to have loyal settlers occupy territory for the high bourgeoisie to later expropriate. This takes the form of the land being seized on debt defaults, land sold to extractive (oil, mining) interests, land sold to real estate interests (suburbanization). Often times to pay the debts back the planters need to exploit the earth at greater and greater intensities, eating away at the soil environment until the land itself dies as in the case of the Dust Bowl (the victims of which, got free land seized in California and Washington from interned Japanese farmers).

Homesteading itself isn’t a real economic practice, it serves a specific function in colonization (of people and environment) and can’t exist independent from the larger market society. There is no way for it to be revolutionary, as it is an atomized form of the feudal village farmer, and only succeeded with the importation of outside labor (servants slaves and migrants). It’s a yearning for the life of a yeoman (who’s existence was a sign of Capitalism developing), and the greenwashing surrounding it calls back to not nature, but the total colonization of nature by man, in America it means turning a piece of Turtle Island into a model of Europe (looking at you, Solarpunk and Cottage Core).

Overall I think homesteading is poor use of land. We need collaborative and socialized food production so we can limit the amount of land necessary to meet the needs of our people. Homesteading as an escape from Capitalism is utopian and it failed over and over for the same reasons.

He’s a Communist. He’s people first, so he is a good Communist. He ran a poverty alleviation program as a provincial secretary which got him the national position, which he has been overseeing poverty alleviation at the national level. The program he ran took wealth and Capital from his coastal province Fujian and built up the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region. The poverty alleviation in Xinjiang that occured in the last decade is a continuation of Xi’s work. He was really the guy Xinjiang needed in a time of crisis with deep poverty where the citizens there have a larger barrier to migrant labor opportunities due to language barriers (many older Uighurs don’t know Mandarin or Chinese script and only use Uighur script).

Xi’s ideology in terms of which theories he upholds is honestly less relevant (even so, he upholds ML), because he is the lead organizer of an AES state where attending to the needs of the people is most important. For him and China’s context this means improving peoples’ lives without bringing too much chaos, but always identifying problems by their primary contradictions so that they are eventually solved.

I wear and have a lot of pink things. I have a few pairs of flower earrings. I like cute things. If I drink I prefer fruity cocktails.

We are overpaid to produce useless shit that is overvalued under monopoly capitalism because software as a service is hyper efficient rent seeking. Because we make rich people so much money there is industrial level propaganda to make our work out to be some revolutionary science that will solve all of humanities problems.

Welcome cousin

Blinken, Sullivan, and Nuland are 100% card carrying neocons. The Neocons who crafted the Iraq invasion are in the Democrat camp now.

Both the Realists and Neocons are anti-China. The Realists are the ones that took down the USSR and think the Neocons are blowing it.

Ahh yes we are Liberals for not wanting to work with white supremacists and homophobes.

Nobody has yet to explain how we can oppose Imperialism through peaceful protests.

Rainer spends 50% of his time tailing “paycheck to paycheck” petty bougies and the other 50% making adventure time fanfiction.

You keep mentioning morals as if that has shit to do with our oppression. Scientific Socialism finds solutions without bending to settler morality.

Settlers are in fact, a bourgeoisie toward the colonized peoples.

If you aren’t American, be a bystander then. When the Israelis become the majority after killing enough Palestinians should they get to keep their stolen land?

You have zero understanding of the American conditions. The Black and Migrants joining with the political structures of the indigenous nations alongside radicalized working class de-settlers will defeat the white supremacist system.

also why should a small minority of people control the majority of the land thats like the whole thing that we are against here.

It’s their land, it was stolen. More people doesn’t mean more land. You realize you’re just looking to let the Americans keep their Lebensraum right? We will dismantle their Lebensraum.

You know that it isn’t occupied because it is reserved for extractive industries right, the state gives extraction rights to private corporations. And 17% of total land is for agriculture which most of it goes over seas for food dependency imperialism or is wasted rotting in dumpsters in settler communities. Y’all don’t even own that shit it is locked up by your kulaks who are direct descendants of the settlers who killed for the land. We will help you expropriate their land and we are taking most of it. 🤷🏾

White people can absolutely be radicalized and we expect many to be. We just have higher expectations of settler communists than they currently set for themselves.

Many indigenous American households don’t have running water or electricity. The extractive industries on their lands do. This is the contradiction we are talking about.

We really don’t care. Anything short of land back is genocide so we are going to fight against the reaction. The Americans are not ready to feel the frontiers again and the frontiers are ready to fight back. The US military collapses if the Black, Latino, and indigenous soldiers mutiny. I’ve pointed out that Americans occupy less than 25% of the lower 48. Winnable odds, much more winnable than any existing attempts of radicalizing the white workers. This country runs on us.

If population means share of land then we might as well give a fifth of the world to China.

And the Americans still benefit from settler colonialism. I pointed out Alaskan drilling and the hydro-electric battery being built on Yakama land against the tribe’s wishes. Homesteading ended in the 70s and the American landlord class is made of those settlers who got free land. Americans as a people do not need or intend to live on a vast majority of the lands they own, we are taking them back.

You are in effect making the argument that their interest is best served by holding on to all of the land since that enables their system to continue.

If this was the case then what the hell would we all be doing on anti-Imperialism forums? The Americans do benefit from colonialism and imperialism. The contradictions with their Bourgeoisie are being hidden through the consumption granted by the empire. Even if the systems of oppression benefit settlers, they don’t have any freedom to meet human needs. If they are content with finishing our genocide rather than working towards internationalism then let them be consumed by history.

Decolonized Buffalo is an educational working group and probably the most radical. There are extant groups of Panthers and AIM. We are really in the educational phase of needing to radicalize our families and communities. Getting CPUSA and PSL to recognize the primary contradiction. The water seems to be heating up though. There are in the ML sense spontaneous protests against the colonial conditions, but there isn’t an organization that really guides these moments yet.