Third-Worldism literature

I've read Sakai, and even though the guy is awful I think your assertion is a bit of a strawman. The "brown people good" shit seems less like metaphysics and more like he's channeling Mao and temporary alliances with the national bourgeoisie against settler-colonialism.

Just asking, are you white? Not going to say you're evil if you are of course, but I'm interested in whether or not people of colour actually agree with the TWist thesis.

White Heterosexual Male - allbeit far from PB, from a former settler colonial state (Now a part of the American Rainbow Empire).

Plenty of "people of color" uphold third worldism. They are all almost exclusively located in the third world though, so they aren't "real people" as far as "poc" opportunists and narcissists in the FW are concerned.

TBH I think both the LLCO and RAIM are very cult-like. I'm in a few FB groups with ex members of both and I've gotten the impression both orgs are sketchy as hell. Personally, I have a difficult time telling them apart since ideologically they seem to be identical on everything except transgender politics and the issue of oppressed peoples within the First World. I don't like how social justicey RAIM is but at the same time I could never side with TERFs.

Why is there so much bad blood between LLCO and RAIM when, as I said previously, the two orgs share most positions excluding a handful?

Whats the more, the description of the United States, Canada, Australia, etc, as fundamentally settler colonialism or as somehow ideologically "white supremacist" simply isn't the case. it is out of clue with reality.

"White Supremacy" was never an ideology to begin with. That is to say, the basis of settler-colonialism and colonialism as a whole was not based ideologically on the advancement of the interests of whites. It was based on the economic exploitation of what became the colonial world in order to build up the economies of he Imperialist states, and to fuel industrialization (which took place almost entirely on the backs of exploited workers in Africa, India, and the colonial world as a whole)

White Supremacy was from the get-go a kind of tool which justified the necessary atrocities to enforce colonialism. When colonialism became unfeasible, and the transition toward neo-colonialism took place on a global level, white supremacy became inadequate and unnecessary. Just as the bourgeois imperial states of the west and their populations embraced liberal feminism and queer culture, they have embraced the idea of a rainbow population. The former settler colonial bourgeois/imperialist states of the west no longer promote white supremacy, both because it is unnecessary and counter-productive. In fact, it has largely absorbed the former colonial cultures into itself. Today, American/European supremacy are sold to the third world not via old style christian, white chauvinism, but rather with black and brown faces, hip hop, ebonics, Japanese anime, etc etc.

Out with the old, in with the new. Economically, there is no feasible difference between the living standards of "poc" and whites in the US. Black/Brown people in the US benefit equally from the global imperialist system is grinding down the people of their homelands into mincemeat. Black and brown people in the US support US/European imperialist at least as much as whites, and while a higher portion of their populations are proletarian (est 40% proletarian for latinos and blacks in the US vs 20-30% proletarian for whites, and about 10% for Asians) the majority support US Empire, and give their lives to die for capitalism imperialism.

The Sakaist outlook - eg, that black people, brown people, trannies unite against the evil white man is so out of touch with reality, and so unbelievably outdated. The majority of the time, it leads to either overt support for liberal imperialism, or turd positionist racialism.

(cont)

Sakaists will correctly denounce the idea of "false consciousness" when it comes to the white PB, but then when it comes to black/browm Americans and their outright chauvinism toward Africans, Asians, Latin Americams, or their will to die for uncle sam, they'll then revert to what is essentially an argument of "false consciousness". "The poor brown people just don't know what is good for them".

The whole "black people and brown people and trannies vs cis white men" or the nat lib movements in the FW are largely a white, PB college students fantasy. These forces simply do not exist in the real world outside of the internet, or college campuses. The Democratic party are the vanguard of these liberal reactionaries - not communists.

If you're serious about organizing for revolution in the FW, then yes, of course, organize black/brown lumpen, but in terms of raw numbers, the largest portion of the proletariat is white - even if proles are a minority of the "white nation" as a whole. By shitting out this bizarre privileged "fuck white people, fuck heterosexuals, fuck non trannies" you're aiding both reactionaries, and the state. Shit is about to hit the fan, and the entire FW left are stuck in the liberal racialist/queer pol lunacy. It is going to be a slaughter unless American leftists can get their heads out of their asses.

I like that you used concrete examples, however I think the approach Sakai is using is more one of social relations. For example, black and Latinos living with in the empire and benefiting from imperialsim doesn't mean they are any less colonized. There are plenty of people in the Third World who hold reactionary views, support crypto-fascists against leftists, etc. yet we would never deny their exploitation at the hands or capital or the fact that they deserve national liberation. When I visited Turkey a few years ago I saw plenty of support for Erdogan (especially in the countryside) despite the guy being a total lackey for western (and Saudi) interests. When my brother visited India he told me there was no shortage of support for Modi, given that he is building industry and infrastructure in the country. But does this mean Turks and Indians *deserve* to be brutalized by imperialism, or fundamentally change their social relationship to the Global North? Not really unless you think ideology is part of class; i.e. it's not enough to be exploited, you also have to have a mind which breaks from the capitalist ideology).

I also don't get how the LLCO's anti-trans views fits in with their conception of global politics. Several cultures in the Third World have transgender individuals (hijras in India/Pakistan for example).

Do you have evidence of RAIM supporting the Democrats? Third Worldism seems more along an accelerationist, vote-for-Trump-to-dismantle-the-system line.

"Transgender" is an entirely American thing which originates from the 1960's. Several TW societies have legit third/multi/non binary gender groups, and many of these groups consider Trans activists as a hostile force. Transsexualism, and queer politics as a whole is imposed on people in the third world. Their histories are reinvented. Trans and queer groups throughout the global south receive massive funding from the Pentagon & CIA. They are practically bankrolled entirely by US Empire. Communists & Anti Imperialists in Africa are hostile toward queer politics for that reason. Queer culture is 21st century colonialism - as malicious as white supremacy ever was.

Regarding Latinos/Blacks in the US being a supposedly colonized people - These are populations which overwhelmingly benefit from global imperialism, and from Euro/American supremacy. They overwhelmingly support US Empire. Communists are not vulgar anti oppressionists. We do not support national liberation for the sake of national liberation. National Liberation should be supported in regards to outright colonies, and insofar as it aids the communist project. If you want to fight for a Latino/"New Afrikan" homeland in North America, fine, but not only do the overwhelming majority of "african"-Americans/Latinos not support this, but the forces you're working with on the matter are overtly pro imperialist - eg, in their promises for better living conditions, higher wages, or so called "reparations" when the living standards of these populations are already dependent on global imperialism. What you're fighting for necessarily demands the continuation of imperialism. It is essentially just a more "egalitarian" distribution of imperial loot, under the continuation of the global imperialist/capitalist order.

What you're fighting for then isn't communism. The whole strategy of balkanizing third world populations into mini states for every ethnicity, tribe, caste, etc, as the RAIMoids propose is a good way to ensure the defeat of global communism. These people use the term "global people's war" but they have no idea what it actually means. Global People's War is necessary opposed to RAIM's idea of massive scale self determination "nat lib". GPW in action means creating revolutionary states as large as physically possible - if we can unify all of South Asia, or all of Africa, or Latin America, then it should be done. If this means repressing nat lib forces, so be it. The US has a history of employing reactionary "nat lib" forces against communists when it serves them. See the Uyghur or Tibetans in China, the Hmong in Laos/Cambodia, or Indigenous groups in central America.

Do you have a source for any of this? It sounds incredibly conspiratorial.

I'm not a Third Worldist. No clue why you're accusing me of being RAIM lol. RAIM and the LLCO are both cults which I would strongly stay away from, I just see the RAIM view as being more dialectical.

The Bourgeois media practically brags about its bankrolling of queer groups in the third world & eastern europe. If you find a queer/tranny group in Africa, you can pretty much guarantee it is receiving US funding. They mask this as "Support for gay rights". In actuality, it is about recruiting a 5th column to support US Imperial interests,

An example: nytimes.com/2015/12/21/world/africa/us-support-of-gay-rights-in-africa-may-have-done-more-harm-than-good.html

Why do you keep using the word "tranny?" I'm not one to language police, but I find it bizarre how a comrade who knows better would employ such terminology.

Also, if the position of the LLCO is anti-trans, where do third genders in the third world fit into their revolution? Granted, trans and third gender rights will have to be brought to the table at some point.

I was a part of both groups. RAIM is batshit insane little cult which preys on mentally ill white dudes, and spits on dysfunctional, scared human beings. I left just as things were starting to go really crazy. RAIM is 100% an internet group.

LLCO went through a culty phase from 2012-2016. When PF was kicked out, the cultism went with him. LLCO in the FW is well and truly fucked (this why I left), but Unlike RAIM, LLCO has a significant real world presence in the third world. Entire villages have been won over to the org in rural ghana, where the party practices an early kind of dual power. There are a couple churches which are a part of the org, and the org runs a farming project to feed its serve the people programs.

LLCO tried to mend the bridges between the two several times, but the RAIMers are ultra sectarian weenies who are convinced that pretty much every other communist group in the world is secretly white supremacist. They refuse to even acknowledge the progress that is being made in Africa, and bury themselves in tumblr arguments.

Third/non binary gender is not synonymous with trans. Trans is a first world/liberal lifestyle/subculture. It has practically nothing to do with gender.

I don't speak for LL, but I've seen no indication that they don't support liberation for non binary/third gender people in the global south, and everywhere. I certainly do.

Even if trans is a "first worldist subculture" so what? I would expect better conduct from a self-proclaimed revolutionary in terms of how to approach the issue, rather than denouncing all trans people as bourgeois or whatever.

I'm not trans but I work in an organization with many trans members, and they are arguably some of the most radical people out there. And it's a false dichotomy to claim participation in queer subcultures is opposed to the realization of third world suffering (kind of like the "boycotting Israel means you don't care about the crimes of Myanmar" crap that neocons throw around).

Then why not concern for other reactionary subcultures? Most FW communists I've met are gamers. There are probably more gamers in the FW communism movement than trannies Does that mean we should be out trying to organize gamers? Should we ban use of the term "neckbeard", "cheeto dust", etc?

There is a strong case to organize the local renaissance faire, or civil war reenactors than transsexuals. Their lifestyles are a hell of a lot less reactionary than queer culture.

The fact that Trannies have come to represent such a huge portion of the left in the Imperialist states is not proof of rev potential in the queer community - it is proof of the failure of the revolutionary movement, and of course a deliberate attempt by the bourgeois state since the end of occupy (a huge scare to the bourgeoisie of the FW) to dilute rot the core of the revolutionary movement. if a reactionary ever wants to make socialism look unreasonable, all they need do is point to the trannies, and any sensible human being - whether "POC" or white, is quickly going to be turned off from socialism.

Again why do you keep using the word "tranny?" Is isolating the trans community that important to you?

This is a giant non-sequitur. Caring about trans issues doesn't make you blind to issues of third world exploitation. I don't see where you're getting this idea that trans individuals are all reactionary (in fact, you sound AWFULLY like Sakai "white man bad, brown man good" here).

Yet you don't believe revolution is possible at all in the 1st World, so why would you care? It's like me saying West Virginia will never vote Democrat, and then getting mad at the Dem candidate for being unelectable. See what I mean?

(Cont)
Hell, there is more of a case to be made for organizing incels than the trannies. You'd be pulling in about the same amount of violent male chauvinists either way.

I care more about organizing plumbers and electricians than I do trannies - larger group of people, more useful to the rev movement. As far as I can tell, most plumbers and electricians aren't going to join a movement which is infested with queer culture.

(cont)
Well I identified as a tranny (mtf) for about 3 years. Had gender dysphoria for most of my teen years. And like 98% of young men who experience gender dysphoria, my dysphoria went away in my early 20's, soon after I stopped associating with tranny groups and tranny politics.

As a former tranny, I can attest that trans politics, trans groups, etc, are wholly reactionary.

You don't answer me. I asked you why do you use reactionary words like "tranny" if you're a leftist?

Transsexuals are not an oppressed group. As a former tranny, I know just how reactionary, and mindfucked the whole tranny subculture is. If you have any concern for people with legit gender dysphoria, you'll despise trannyism and the people who are bankrolling it (Trannyism is all about $$$)

Transexuals and transexual identity politics are not the reason working class citizens are not getting organized, or whatever. Any effort of attempting class consciousness will be thwarted by the ruling class and we shouldn't concede to their demands by not supporting a group that gets oppressed by capital…….
This is just a right wing talking point like "sjws infest college campus and kill free speech" which some anti-idpol people even on the left have taken as a fact when it's just propaganda that furthers Koch interest……….

Actually is - they overpay for meds and surgery.

In order to understand Third (Turd) Worldism, all you need is this infographic.

Attached: third-worldist-chart3333.png (561x1400, 380.47K)

Not to mention, most trans people are living in poverty, have high rates of suicide, etc.

Using slurs and making trans people feel more alienated isn't going to help anyone, dipshit. And why are you so angry about this issue? You're going so far as to call trans people "imperialist" as if trans itself is a conspiracy. For fuck's sake.

Sakai is Anti-Jap Gang!!!!

You wold think plumbers would be natural allies of trannies. That's a hell of alot of toilets to install.

I made the same experience, but with Aspergers. All the same individualist idpol shit.

le idpol spook

Trans people are like .3% of the population. Who gives a shit? They aren't revolutionary anyway. Now they get sex-change free operations from Starbucks.

Same with gays/lesbians. 3% of the population. Hell the average income for gay men is almost 200k/year. Tell me that's a revolutionary class with a straight (lol) face.

As to the reddit people. They're just liberals. This isn't even about making communism more appealing to white people. Whites are a lot more open to the LGBTP stuff than the Global South. The close-minded people in that case are the brown people. So, again, who cares?

unironically this

web.pdx.edu/~gilleyb/2_The case for colonialism_at2Oct2017.pdf

How is excluding trans people good for leftism?

I'm not for excluding anybody. I'm just wondering why slurping or not them is a litmus test for the plebbitors.

i don't thik he's a nip

It's such a small fraction of the population (and one with such a high suicide rate) that it literally does not matter if they're attracted to leftism or not. I'm not saying we should be hostile to them, but there's absolutely zero material benefit from going out of our way to appeal to them.