Today I met a white American who had lib opinions on Gaza. I finally got to say "Read Settlers liberal" in real life.
Today I met a white American who had lib opinions on Gaza. I finally got to say "Read Settlers liberal" in real life.
Fucking made my month. I can die happy.
Yesterday, I talked (online) with someone who I told that I'm a communist, and using these exact words, they refer to me as a "liberal" later on when I said I don't support Biden:
"I didn't know there were liberals who don't support Biden."
...even though I literally told this person (who was definitely a chud) that I'm a communist.
To chuds, everything to the left of Marjorie Taylor Greene is basically liberal, SJW, woke, communist.
You got the vaxx? Fucking anarchist Stalin lover.
For sure, but it's not even just chuds ime, it's the majority of the US population that thinks the "further left" something or someone is, the more "liberal" it is. Even many liberals think this.
Similar to Angel's story, a while back I told someone (an acquaintance I met irl) that I considered myself a communist and their response to me was:
"I'm pretty liberal myself, but communism is too liberal even for me."
There were several other people present and none of them thought this was a strange thing to say.
Telling chuds you hate libs too can really break their brains lol
that's when you call them a liberal, because you're correct and they're not
I talked with someone offline who used the term "liberal" to mean something like "for a better society, progress, for a better world"
Basically just an ignorant rationalization of american liberal vs conservative political understanding.
I got banned on Political Memes@lemmy.world for linking settlers. Reason: "racist"
Anti white racism. Literally the worst kind of racism that's ever existed. Think of all those poor mayos that had to hear the word cracker spoken to them.
Edit: @mathemachristian@lemm.ee I just noticed that you're not from this instance. Sorry that's sarcasm.
I accidentally revealed my power level at a pub once when a white friend's brother visiting town brought up "it's kinda lame there's no cool slurs for white people" And without skipping a beat, I listed "No purpose flour, honkey, cracker, cumskin, Yakub's mistake, spiceless satan, melanoma bait, pale comparison"
What the fuck? That’s tortured logic even for stormfront.world
Like, they’re at least facially progressive in the Reddit / white suburban mom sense.
I don't understand it either but the mod I messaged ignored me 🤷
I'd like to bestow upon you the highest ranking award I can
The mystery emote lol
Settlers is the book that made me truly hate white people. It's good, folks.
What's that book that's like Settlers that's more lib-friendly and academic?
Edit: Thanks for all the responses.
Wretched of the Earth by Fanon?
I'd like to know as well
unnecessary sarcasm
The Counter-Revolution of 1776 by Gerald Horne. It's all the content of Settlers, but with a presentation that's much harder for libs to dismiss out of hand.
The Conquest of America: The Question of the Other by Tzvetan Todorov (?)
Zak Cope: Divided World Divided Class.
i don't think settlers is particularly illuminating about the palestinian context or settler-colonialism in the general sense
The general answer is that Sakai was talking about the bourgeois mentality of white "leftists" and our inability to feel solidarity with the exploited non white people. The pedantic answer is that Sakai explicitly ties US settlerism to zionism.
Actually you're the liberal for not carrying a copy of Settlers with you at all times to quote from.
Wow, this is a really nice book. I've not read it, but the Wikipedia summary has convinced me to, in the nearest future.
welcome to the team, comrade
Permanently Deleted
Sure J Sakai is a pen name. But he publishes all his books for free, he seems to have cred from his activist days, and he's not pushing anything self serving. If it makes you feel any better, I read Settlers with a critical eye, and checked the footnotes for facts that seemed sus to me, and things in fact checked out.
I can't say enough, any critique of the book comes down to "it's so negative" or "it divides the left", which aren't critiques at all. Anyone can argue against the facts he's stating, yet no one does.
any critique of the book comes down to “it’s so negative” or “it divides the left”, which aren’t critiques at all
Defeatism is a valid critique, as is its cousin, an extremely negative analysis that presents no path forward.
More specifically, there's plenty to critique about the idea that poor (by U.S. standards) white people are unable to be radicalized by virtue of having a higher standard of living than people in developing nations, and by virtue of the privileges afforded to white people in the U.S. There's a passage in Settlers that uses the percentage of U.S. households that have basic appliances like refrigerators to make the labor aristocrat argument. I'm supposed to believe someone working a dead-end, low-wage job can't be radicalized because they have a fridge and a TV?
There's also a contradiction between the point that race was socially constructed to get settlers to buy in to colonization projects and the conclusion that centuries later this constructed identity of whiteness is some immovable barrier. Leftists talk about deconstructing all sorts of deeply-entrenched ideas: economic systems, gender, family, education, justice, etc. But we're supposed to look at whiteness, throw up our hands, and say "I guess communism is just impossible here"?
