“If the end result of a working-class revolution in the United States is the continued domination of non-white people by white ‘revolutionary leaders’ and a Left-wing [white supremacist] government, then we will make another revolution...”
There are multiple things being conflated and misunderstood on this topic:
1) Race and ethnicity are not the same thing, although they are both socially constructed.
2) There is a distinction to be made between nationhood and nation-state when discussing the term “nationalism.”
To the first point:
This is the “lowercase b vs. uppercase B” conversation. In the United States, “black” is used to describe physical characteristics (race), and “Black” is used to describe shared histories + cultures within North America (ethnicity). These are distinct things.
While “Black American,” for example, describes a people, “black American” could describe many different peoples of the African diaspora. With the former, you’re speaking to a particular national identity (ethnicity), and with the latter you’re describing physical features (race).
Many in our org believe we need a new name that 1) isn’t defined by our historical oppressors, and 2) is unique to us in a world where the word and concept of “black” is global (this is why there is still much confusion over this topic and why some of us identify as New Afrikan).
More on the differences between “race” and “ethnicity” below.
As the Ervin quote shared above sort of implies, there are Black folks who believe in a national Black identity while rejecting the nation-state model. While one could argue that nationalism and statism typically go hand in hand, this is not always the case.
Two examples from outside of the United States to look at on this point in particular:
• Maya peoples in Chiapas, Mexico.
• Kurdish peoples in Northeastern Syria (commonly referred to as Rojava).
White rejection or erasure of Black identity/culture on the “Left” that relies on a conflation of Black identity and nationhood with ethno-statism is actually just ideological cover for forced assimilation under white supremacy, which is inherently coercive and authoritarian.
While our organization rejects the nation-state model, we will never reject our own cultural identity or autonomy.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Politicians claiming to be “Left” should be ditching the political theater, uniting to meet poor and working-class people where they’re at, and developing bottom-up, municipalist strategies with communities (in communities) in the lead-up to an international, #DualPower movement.
Entryism is not working. The inherent structure of the Democratic Party does not allow for anyone elected to be held accountable. New political vehicles and forums must be created, but they must be grounded in community and direct (or “liquid”) democracy.
Instead of just coloring inside the lines of the terms “representative democracy” has set for the present, “Left” politicians should instead be looking around and working in coalitions to plant grassroots seeds for the direct democracy of the future.
Gestures like these illustrate clearly that, despite whatever Bernie & similar forces may have done to “shift the Overton window,” “progressive” politicians lack the radical imagination & boldness necessary to help poor & working-class people confront fascism & build a new world.
Instead of leveraging the *millions* of dollars & access that he’s cultivated for economic counter-institution-building that can sustain new political power while *also* sustaining communities in meeting material needs (#DualPower), he & others accept Neoliberal limits & placate!
Bernie Sanders & other “progressive” politicians accept Neoliberal limits on strategy & placate instead of trying to think outside of the traditional “electoral politics” box & embracing a municipalist strategy, even with fascism right on our doorstep! Truly bizarre beyond words.
“All who strive to oppress & exploit the working class, & gain power for themselves, whether [on] the right or the left, will always be threatened by Anarchism.... because Anarchists hold that all authority & coercion must be struggled against.”
“Anarchists & Anarchism have historically been misrepresented... The popular impression of an Anarchist as an uncontrollably emotional, violent person [...] only interested in destruction for its own sake, & [...] opposed to all forms of organization, still persists to this day.“
“Further, the mistaken belief that Anarchy is chaos & confusion, a reign of rape, murder & [mindless/total] disorder & insanity is widely believed by the general public.”
Anarchists are (and have historically been) sticklers when it comes to contesting coercive power and/or imposed authority, and so there has almost always been consensus amongst Liberals, Conservatives, authoritarian “Leftists,” and fascists in trying to stifle Anarchist activity.
What authoritarian forces want is for power vacuums to emerge and to be exploited in a contest for centralized domination.
And no matter how few in numbers these forces may be compared to the general population, they are extremely determined to use discontent to their advantage.