Someone explain "decolonization" to me

Fun fact actually, Navajos themselves are considered migrants to the southwest, like whites, by a lot of natives. The Hopis I've known all generally tolerate them but they have some pretty racy jokes in private. The fact that they have the largest reservation in the country and are one of the most widely recognized while most people don't even know what a Hopi is kind of just adds insult to injury.

...

Well, the difference is that the dominant people of the Russian Empire, the Russians, were indigenous to part of the USSR (Russia, obviously). So when the Russian Empire "decolonized" Russian settlers throughout the empire could just go back to Russia and stay in the USSR. On the other hand, whites (and blacks and asians and arguably most hispanics, depending on how you look at it) aren't indigenous to anywhere in the US, there's no "American SSR" in this future society to be a homeland for 98% of the population. So I think the people who want full decolonization will be sorely disappointed.

That doesn't surprise me too much, the old name for the Puebloans, Anasazi, was a Navajo word that meant "ancient enemy."

I come from a Texas-German background. Fun fact: the lone unbroken Indian treaty in this state was the Meusebach–Comanche Treaty between the tribe and the German settlers.

Meaning: I would keep the German town names the same but all this Dixie crap is going out the window.

Somewhat related, but this should be required watching for marxists regarding making absolute statements about how X thing done in the past was wrong.
youtube.com/watch?v=vM2Arjuw43I

...

It should be common sense, but far too often I hear the sentiment of applying morality to past historical stages even here

...

Kind of what I'm saying here, but it's hard to ignore that some of the left has a "Noble Savage" problem.

All racial spooks need to be destroyed, going around and talking about how one specific racial identity is more problematic than any other is retarded. We should be arguing in favour of universalism, and the erasing of false distinctions like race which are literally cooked up by porky to divide the workers.

Sakai'ist tier nonsense that Liberals and a few Autistic M-L-M's / Maotists / Third World-Purists believe

We don't. Literally reactionary.

But we should give sovereignty back to the Amerindian nations and it might be possible to give some land back, too. If it's idle, corporate, or government land, I don't really think there's anything wrong with ceding it to adjacent national ground. But just trying to get as many white/black/whathaveyou people off as much ground as possible is stupid.

What we should do is respect their sovereignty over land they already have and respect treaties. The US government very clearly failed to do that during DAPL, which was effectively an invasion. They're nations, what they decide to do with their land is up to them.

This.

This. So much this. However this will probably happen anyways once America is destroyed. Europeans won't need the concept of whiteness unless they can get the EU off the ground which is unlikely.

Attached: c419833a0dc394b57ada41719ee8dc6a333a74d7d8818984aa27ca908e476f6b.jpg (619x720, 232.23K)

Yeah but see the thing is according to the US goverment they "Sorta" ARENT but ALSO "Sorta" ARENT

If the US gov wants to build a Pipeline or slap down a strip mine then its "Essentially a Devolved Autonomous Territory of the US such as Puerto Rico and the Federal government has the Ultimate Right to make decisions in Regards to it"

But if the people in these "Nations" are asking for Policing more funding actual Medical and even just Sanitation services etc overnight they become "Effective Sovereign Nations from the US and the Federal Goverment has no Obligation or even Right to intervene"

Its scarily similar to the Relationship between Israel and the Gaza Concentration camp

fix

I've seen that "noble savage" problem elsewhere (not much here). The application of contemporary morality to history is frequent here when dealing with an event like the American Revolution, though.

The American revolution is upheld by most Americans (including radlibs and quite a few anarchists) as an actual revolution when it fact it was really just a aristocratic rebellion that was wildly successful due to its leaders co-opting popular sentiment and settler colonialist ambitions America has never been good. It will be remembered as nothing but a den of oppression, filth and exploitation if it is remembered at all in the coming years.

I find this reasoning somewhat specious. White "solidarity" would be an impediment to any sort of proletarian consciousness, as it causes one to identify with a racial category rather than with other workers generally, yet the same problem exists when one treats other racial categories in the same way: members of those categories then begin to identify with the land-owners and capitalists in the racial group they regard themselves as belonging to.

I Responded to you with this in the American Revolution thread but i will Repost

it gave SOME white men the Right to Vote which was/is still progressive in Comparison to the completely unelective Feudalism present over most of the world at the time

Eh. Yes but say in places where it’s obvious that the concept of ‘whiteness’ is more attatched to a wealthy minority that makes up the most of the bourgeoisie of that area
*cough* South Africa *cough*
Destroying whiteness definitely take priority.

My main point being that whiteness in America serves a similar function as the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere did for Japanese imperialism. Black capitalists or Indian reservation capitalists are also capitalists but are also oppressed by imperialism, so revolutionaries should have a more pragmatic relationship to them. They can be enemies, or they could be allies, depending on the situation.

This is if I'm reading Mao right.

Marx and Lenin were radlibs? It was a bourgeois revolution, but it was as "actual" as the French Revolution.

I would think that Mao was speaking of colonial subjects of an empire created due to the needs of finance capital rather than citizens of a country who may suffer racial discrimination. Under a colonial regime, anyone within the country colonized would certainly share a common interest in overthrowing that regime. While a black or Indian capitalist in the US may want a change in government, they wouldn't overall want its overthrow.

We don't, decolonization is a butthurt revenge fantasy made by reactionary natives. "We're gonna fight white nationalism with native nationaism", which is sort of the equivalent of saying "we'll fight racism against blacks by being racist against whites." It's more IDpol garbage.

Isn't this just a Zig Forumsyp argument on priorities and who should go first?

In what way? In SA(and most of Africa to some lesser extent) the concept of whiteness has direct systemic roots to the colonial capitalist class, Apartheid has only been officially over for less than a couple decades, it’s economic and ideological conditions still persist. Although Jews were forced to take jobs dealing with money lending in Europe, this much different than the reality of South African explicit racial codification of laws involving property and jobs that existed.

It's a term analogous to restorative justice, but targeted specifically at people groups who have been systemically victimized by bourgeois and colonial society. No one who is relevant or serious actually wants to send 60% of the USAmerican population on boats to England and Ireland.

From my understanding, Decolonization, especially in places like the USA and Canada, implies giving reservations complete control over themselves (i.e. actually making them countries) while reverting to former treaties that were previously broken that established where reservations are borders. Of course, this typically doesn't mean "LMAO GO FUCK YOURSELF GET OFF OUR LAND!" but would probably mean your taxes now go to that reservation instead of to the US or Canadian Federal government(s)

Christ, I can't believe there are unironic apologetics for "Zig Forums for darkies" here. The absolute state of Zig Forums these days/

The same way we decolonize everywhere else: Exterminate all descendants of the cyanobacteria and return the Earth to its rightful anaerobic owners.

youre a fucking dumbass

youtu.be/AQ6cp2T76lY

daily reminder "destroying the concept of whiteness" is a dog whistle for killing white people and anuddah shoah

Anybody worth a damn has left Zig Forums since ages ago. This board is crap.

mayocide is good

Attached: pop.PNG (539x304, 48.25K)

user you're a faggot

The post-war US should be definitely be split up in order to prevent the resurrection of arguably the most evil country ever to exist. Not sure if natives should get ALL of it though, seeing as their communities are often run by porkies as well. Kind of a hard question really.

Holy shit, you're back! How's everything going, Greenland-friend?
Sage for off-topic

Natives get all the land that isn’t part of Major cities, because the only people shrilling for this are Whites who live in LA and NYC. Which would be the only places not affected by this.

daily reminder being offended by that sentence means you're such a mutt you don't even know what country your family came to clapistan from

Attached: woja453.jpg (488x463, 20.54K)

You don't decolonize it since the damage is already done, a better idea would be to get people in power and try to destroy the union in order to create a series of separate countries.

My idea is similar to the south leaving the union but with many different groups splitting the country in different pieces. What if each state were it's own nation.

This does not imply 51 different white ethnostates but instead a series of different states with their own culture and laws.

The answer is simple. Give black people the southeast, give whites the northeast, and gives natives everything between the east and west. Asians could probably claim a few areas on the west coast.

It’s ethnic reactionary blood and soil nonsense.

Race and ethnicity is supposed to become obsolete once communism is achieved

it's never gonna fucking happen I don't know what you people are injecting

sounds good to me, they deserve it tbh

Here's a helpful infographic.

Attached: 1539022882.png (2468x791, 504.46K)

That sort of decolonization is a pipe dream spouted by idiots that are more interested in getting revenge on whitey than actual decolonization or building socialism.

I've read some stuff about the theory of decolonization, which seems in part about despooking yourself of bourgeois ideology regarding society. It doesn't seem like a completely worthless theory, but Settlers-tier bullshit pervades most discussions about it.

Its an nothing word because the same people who demand decolonization wont give there land and money, even if they would are they really are going to give there money to native Americans they dont believe in socialism thats the white dream of what native americans are.
I should know im a native american

It is literally just "when the government FUCKS OFF".
That's decolonization.
Its not some "whitey go home" revenge fantasy that alt-right and scared white bois will tell you. People should be responsible for and be able to take care of their own land without porky building a road or pipe through it at every whim.
Material conditions of Native Americans were different. We weren't part of the wider working class for a big chunk of US history. We weren't even allowed to be citizens at one point. So we rallied around our tribes. As we move out of the reservations and into urban centers, I've noticed our kids become more class conscious.
I've always been for the termination of tribes. but not for stupid racist right wing reasons.Our tribes just allow our porkys to have free reign over us.

Do you have any idea how badly this shit will play with white proles? 0/10 praxis, you're either a false-flagging alt-righter or a genuine idiot

This is a shit tier argument. Black and native identities were identities imposed upon these groups, white is a group imposed upon themselves.
Not even a "ship em back" decolinist, but this us clearly a bad faith argument.

Fixed your maps OP

google "bioregion"

Attached: Dumbfuckistan.jpg (736x650 11.61 KB, 87.09K)

should have said "identity", not group

This is a huge meme, no one identifies with their "bioregion" except nazis in the Pacific Northwest

All of which amounts to "fuck whitey" in the ears of working class whites. No matter how much theory and context you dress it up in, they're going to see you denying them - and them alone - the right to racial self-advocacy and perceive you as their enemy.
Now maybe you don't care about winning these people over, maybe you want a revolution of blacks and browns only (idpol much?) or maybe you're just not interested in leaving your armchair, but for those of us who care about spreading class consciousness we can't afford to wilfully alienate huge swathes of the proletariat. Rejection of racial identity has to be unilateral, otherwise you're only deepening the existing divides.

Stupidy.

A socialist government could promote cultual festivals and even teach the language and history in school all without the need to arbitrarily divide by genes who has a say where on which bit of spooked land in a functioning socialist/communist democracy . There is nothing colonial about a marxist society. Anyway the emergence of a new high socialist culture is going to happen and probably from a mix of various other cultures and to a degree "" anti-colonial"" talk in the Western world is full of idpol and rejects objectivly good dialectics. If your culture is beating women and keeping them as housewives then it needs to change and has ZERO place no matter how long you've been doing it. Ofcourse it needs to change under the guidance of a Progressive Socialist society which will still respect the rights,culture and history of the people while removing/altering/changing reactionary and legitimate slave/feudral social culture. This goes for all Cultures. Soviet culture was far better then american capitalism, elsa vs spiderman culture. Bleeding heart liberals would let beatings go on untouched or female genital mutilation happen then address the issues around eg. Islamic culture and tradition. Because god forbid some elements of slave society and feudralism made it into the 21st century and you address this issue (without imperialism, genocide etc).

READ STALIN
marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1913/03.htm

pretty sure that the Cascadia people are anti-nazi, what are you smoking?

Probably worse stuff than the Cascadians are smoking.

stop these fucking pedos they put pedo shit in their game
8ch.net/hgg/res/263233.html
stop these fucking pedos they put pedo shit in their game
8ch.net/hgg/res/263233.html
stop these fucking pedos they put pedo shit in their game
8ch.net/hgg/res/263233.html
stop these fucking pedos they put pedo shit in their game
8ch.net/hgg/res/263233.html

communism

Are there really still Nazis in this day and age user? No. Just wannabes with 0% influence on society.

Why? Most native tribal boundaries were won via warfare and/or trade with neighboring tribes. "Colonizing" Europeans aren't any different - they won the land via violence and, occasinally, trade.

basically, if you are white, kill yourself

that's ancap though

ANARCHOcapitalism prevents this. without government, porky has no legal right to appropriate your land. you are porky over your own land, and your neighbor is porky over his land. nobody is allowed to pork each other without both party's mutual agreement
i don't think you meant to argue for ancap