The Willow person is confused, they are mistaking the effect for the cause and vice versa because they have an idealistic, anti-materialist view on the relationship between capitalism, colonialism and white supremacy, but i don’t think they said anything that actually counts as reactionary. This post may be under the wrong community.
I agree. This would have been better suited for /c/leftistinfighting or possibly /c/shitultrassay, because this isn’t somebody defending capitalism. It’s more like a mildly heated argument between anticapitalists over whether the chicken or the egg came first. Far from a good example of reactionary misbehavior.
I don’t see their confusion, the colonizers felt they had the God given right to take over lands and peoples for themselves. That mentality is what would lead to capitalism not vice versa. That’s why capitalism and many other competitions today still favor white people because many of the rules were set up to reward their vision of greatness. The only nuance I might add would be a more narrow depiction of who they considered white compared to how we refer to whiteness today. A more holistic view of the battle we have on our hands to dismantle the power structures that oppress people today would include the colonialist supremecist roots they grew from.
The primary contradiction in the Amerikan settler colony is colonialism, which is indeed white supremacy. If capitalism disappeared today there would still be white supremacy, hence why building socialism through decolonizing is the best option.
I don’t actually think the original comment was saying you can only get rid of white supremacy via capitalism, I think they were saying bringing socialism won’t automatically end white supremacy.
Can you even decolonise at all without socialism?
Definitely IMO. But it’s certainly not feasible in the context of successful settler-states like the US/Canada/Australia, which have already committed genocide to such an extent where the rightful indigenous peoples cannot feasibly reclaim full or even partial power without being part of a larger whole.
This conversation is just symptomatic of how the Twitter format prevents any form of meaningful exchange, but I don’t see anything worth of mockery there, just a blatant lack of nuance and toxic debate bro culture.
Also OP’s title is completely missing Willow’s point. This user is anti-capitalist but they think that white supremacy is too big of an obstacle to achieving the revolution. To them capitalism is definitely not the tool to destroy white supremacy.
And finally the Communist Studio is displaying a lack of dialectical analysis too. Yes it’s true that ideology is Historically built to justify material actions, so white supremacy was built because of capitalism in the first place. But, one shouldn’t say that if you dismantle one then the other just goes away, that’s causality based vulgar materialism. Now that they both exist, their relationship became dialectical. Both need to be fought against simultaneously because if one is not being dealt with it will be used to trigger a reaction to reinforce the other.
White supremacy was created to justify western european imperialism that started in mercantilism, not capitalism per se. However for the rest of the points I agree.
Yes this is true, the two are often blended because of their historical lineage but if we want to be precise it’s important to remember this
Lack of materialism leads to holes in logic. Water remains wet
Liberals always have a team of “Well-versed academics” of some flavour or another to reinforce their status quo opinions. Like clockwork, everytime they always mention some wise mystical council of learned men and women who know the things and therefore we should turn our brains off and defer to them, as the important thing-knowers unlike us plebians who cannot understand anything.
They don’t look reactionary. I certainly don’t agree with them but that doesn’t mean they are reactionary.
I’m upvoting and commenting on this post because I think it’s an important discussion to be had, I currently agree with willow and not the misrepresentation of their view displayed in the title.
