Its annoying to me that people use the word 'decimate' when they mean 'annihilate'.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Yeah, I recognize the role white Europeans and early Americans had in decimating the indigenous population.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
everyone in the west benefits from the legacy of slavery and colonialism, that’s the entire point of the whole discourse. you think all the plantation money sowed the ground for 15 square miles of bristol and that’s it? lmao. you might be surprised to learn that most of bristol is still a post-industrial city inhabited by a white working-class who didn’t own slaves or plantations (like liverpool, which was just as big in the atlantic slave trade); the big estates money went to nearby bath. think a little harder about your comments.Dilbert_X wrote:
Um well wasn't most of Britains wealth which has flowed down to your education and nice lifestyle built on colonialism and slavery?uziq wrote:
i couldn't care less what your daddy did, maybe you should grow out of talking about daddy's work. you're not at prep school anymore. i was only pointing out the prevalence of racist bullshit in australian life because it was ran like an apartheid regime up until the 1970s.
Aren't you living in the one British town literally built on slavery?
I mean whats your point in all of this?
my apartment is in an ex-tobacco packing warehouse, on the waterfront where they’d unload goods from the colonies. yes, i know fully well the local history of where i live, thanks.
you don’t see me gloating about indigenous peoples being ‘annihilated’ though, do you, or making silly snide jokes? you don’t see me grumbling about ‘the threats to white civilisation’, or posting dog-whistle links to street crime and suggesting that it can’t possibly, no never, be a problem with a white underclass either? (why don’t you post news links about all the mass shootings committed by white people and make throat-clearing noises of concern about how they’re on the rise?). i don’t want to deny afro-caribbeans their right to equality, and i certainly don’t see them as a ‘threat’ to me.
just what exactly are you getting at, and who exactly do you think you are, sat in australia as a 50-year-old talking about annihilated aboriginals ‘for the lulz’? grow the FUCK up, seriously. it’s amazing how much time you’ve spent in your life weaving your own personal family tragedy into some mythos nd endless parade of self-pity, and then you can’t find a single sous down the back of the sofa for anyone else. you are a mental and emotional midget. you seriously come across like a child in these debates.
Last edited by uziq (2020-08-28 00:19:54)
When did I say there was anything 'lulz' about anyone being annihilated? Certainly not the local aboriginals.
Didn't I express sympathy for anyone graduating into the COVID crisis, which you then turned into being about yourself?
Pretty sure I haven't milked anything thats happened to my family, and not for sympathy, various acts of parliament prohibit me from going into much detail for one thing.
Thanks for the pschoanalysis though, its really valuable coming from an expert in the field.
Didn't I express sympathy for anyone graduating into the COVID crisis, which you then turned into being about yourself?
Pretty sure I haven't milked anything thats happened to my family, and not for sympathy, various acts of parliament prohibit me from going into much detail for one thing.
Thanks for the pschoanalysis though, its really valuable coming from an expert in the field.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
I wouldn't typify all of neoliberalism as new colonialism, but American foreign policy sure is fucked up. Some strong voices who keep insisting on using its global reach to dominate others rather than cooperate ( & these views have a history far predating the neoliberals). While non involvement doesn't seem like an option, the current involvement around the world is disgusting. Literally destroyed parts of the ME and central america for no gain at all.
Dilbert it has been explained a million times that race has no meaningful relation to crime and violence, at this point you're ignoring valid arguments only to cling to correlations with no meaning. I have also many times said that there are some problems with immigrating communities certainly in the first few generations but none of that could even remotely justify your outright disgust for people born in any continent but Europe.
The irony you refuse to see is that these riots are because of people like you. It's been clear that your racism runs through daily life and I'm sure it translates in treatment of colleagues and voting behaviour. Now I would say you are of the extremely prejudiced type, an anomaly even, but it is undoubtedly so that you putting down and refusing to work with others primarily based on your dislike for their ethnic or racial origin is a great catalyst for conflict in your own society.
Dilbert it has been explained a million times that race has no meaningful relation to crime and violence, at this point you're ignoring valid arguments only to cling to correlations with no meaning. I have also many times said that there are some problems with immigrating communities certainly in the first few generations but none of that could even remotely justify your outright disgust for people born in any continent but Europe.
The irony you refuse to see is that these riots are because of people like you. It's been clear that your racism runs through daily life and I'm sure it translates in treatment of colleagues and voting behaviour. Now I would say you are of the extremely prejudiced type, an anomaly even, but it is undoubtedly so that you putting down and refusing to work with others primarily based on your dislike for their ethnic or racial origin is a great catalyst for conflict in your own society.
Last edited by Larssen (2020-08-28 00:40:46)
neo-colonialism and post-colonialism are very much things and do not require a specifically neoliberal ideology in the home country. france wasn’t neoliberal for most of the 20th century, it barely is now, and yet its relations to places like mali or lebanon (or even indochina) can be explored through neo/post colonial thinking.
it just so happens that most of america’s most hawkish foreign policy took place under neoliberal or neoconservative governments. he is totally right to point to the recent failed coup in bolivia as another example of attempted regime change. what an embarrassment that has been — and yet nobody really talks about it. the legacy of white western nations still fucking with other’s self-determination is still very real, though, and the assumption that the world economic order be in our image/favour, too.
it just so happens that most of america’s most hawkish foreign policy took place under neoliberal or neoconservative governments. he is totally right to point to the recent failed coup in bolivia as another example of attempted regime change. what an embarrassment that has been — and yet nobody really talks about it. the legacy of white western nations still fucking with other’s self-determination is still very real, though, and the assumption that the world economic order be in our image/favour, too.
Which is what I was getting at yes.uziq wrote:
neo-colonialism and post-colonialism are very much things and do not require a specifically neoliberal ideology in the home country. france wasn’t neoliberal for most of the 20th century, it barely is now, and yet its relations to places like mali or lebanon (or even indochina) can be explored through neo/post colonial thinking.
Globalisation has also meant that domestic politics almost anywhere affects international parties to a greater degree. While I wouldn't advocate states engaging in election meddling, I'm not surprised it's happening ever more oftenit just so happens that most of america’s most hawkish foreign policy took place under neoliberal or neoconservative governments. he is totally right to point to the recent failed coup in bolivia as another example of attempted regime change. what an embarrassment that has been — and yet nobody really talks about it. the legacy of white western nations still fucking with other’s self-determination is still very real, though, and the assumption that the world economic order be in our image/favour, too.
Nope, never refused to work with anyone. You're thinking of my Vietnamese colleagues who refuse to have an Indian in the building.Larssen wrote:
The irony you refuse to see is that these riots are because of people like you. It's been clear that your racism runs through daily life and I'm sure it translates in treatment of colleagues and voting behaviour. Now I would say you are of the extremely prejudiced type, an anomaly even, but it is undoubtedly so that you putting down and refusing to work with others primarily based on your dislike for their ethnic or racial origin is a great catalyst for conflict in your own society.
Riots are 'because of people like me'
So far we have:
One man dead with methamphetamine and a fatal level of fentanyl in his system, who was complaining he couldn't breathe when no-one was touching him and well before he was restrained.
One man dead after he physically attacked and fired a taser at police officers for no clear reason.
One man injured after he had been warned repeatedly and tased and while going for a knife.
But yes it's 'people like me' who are the problem.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2020-08-28 00:54:28)
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
that makes globalism seem very easy to criticise. ‘hey, join our market! we strongly induce you to trade with us! wait; you want to elect your own governments too?!?’
In a system ruled by national interest and until recently fervent racial/ethnic thinking, yeah globalism has many potentially adverse effects. The rise of the new right is no accident.uziq wrote:
that makes globalism seem very easy to criticise. ‘hey, join our market! we strongly induce you to trade with us! wait; you want to elect your own governments too?!?’
of course, but the salient point is that western imperial/colonial pre-eminence has been pursued and continued through the 'ideology-free' mechanism of the market. dilbert is one of those 'we ended slavery 150 years ago, why are the blacks everywhere so far behind?' types. the banana republics of central and south america are a good example of the ways in which 'free' peoples are still kept in subservience.
Last edited by uziq (2020-08-28 01:39:32)
You'd think they would have worked out how to make a profit out of bananas by now.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
i firmly suggest you read a fucking book on the topic.
I already know enough about bananas.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
keep your celibate habits to yourself.
It certainly has had a prolonged effect but there's something to be said for people's own agency as well, which is something that simply isn't acknowledged in this analytical lens. The perspective on neocolonialism developed at some point in the 70s and 80s and has remained unchanged since. While our histories are certainly interwoven and much can be attributed to historical wrongs, not all problems in developing countries today stem solely from colonial history and neocolonial ties, though there's obviously extreme examples to be found. Relentless tribal warfare, repressive cruel governance, nepotism, extreme corruption - I think it is only fair to also point at the far worse identity politics and violent inclinations that have gripped quite a few poorer African countries. Or how 'liberators' of a previous generation like Mugabe or even Ghadaffi ultimately became insane dictators annihilating their own people.uziq wrote:
of course, but the salient point is that western imperial/colonial pre-eminence has been pursued and continued through the 'ideology-free' mechanism of the market. dilbert is one of those 'we ended slavery 150 years ago, why are the blacks everywhere so far behind?' types. the banana republics of central and south america are a good example of the ways in which 'free' peoples are still kept in subservience.
Of course I am aware how some western companies like de Beers and Shell have had a hand in localised conflicts or how they manipulate and exploit foreign peoples. We should have been and need to be far more assertive and punitive against such practices. Nonetheless there seems to be a subset of people here in the west who somehow perpetuate some form of colonial thinking despite their opposition against neocolonialism - by implying always that it is somehow the west that is really responsible for the events elsewhere. Influence we may have but when one liberian massacres another there's quite some local dynamics at play. Fomenting wars or rebellions elsewhere is only really possible if toxic domestic conditions already exist.
Last edited by Larssen (2020-08-28 02:35:02)
ever read about chiquita banana? Start there.Dilbert_X wrote:
I already know enough about bananas.
i don't think anyone was suggesting that it's exclusively the 'fault' of colonial powers, but that it has had a very real impact on their development. it can be both, you know. the overlap between foreign corporations and corrupt dictators/bureaucrats is not exactly clear-cut. if a nation leeches its national resource wealth to foreign companies or, worse, the bank accounts of despots, that has a massive impact on vital investment and investment.
as for how liberators become oppressors, the sad inevitability of figures like mugabe and lurches to authoritarianism are right there in neo-colonialist theory. some of the seminal writings on the subject outline the process of how newly 'liberated' nations can collapse inwards into cronyism and strong-man cabals, even whilst ostensibly developing a middle-class (or more often a class of foreign-educated natives toting western alliances and pro-market theories). again, it's not clear-cut, and for you to punt it to 'their fault' suggests a rather all-too-convenient washing of hands. read frantz fanon.
as for 'identity politics', yes, sure, although that's a bizarre misapplication of the term to an african context. they're not arguing over intersectionality in the congo. some (though far from all) of those 'identities' are, of course, colonial-era constructions. that's all been analyzed to death, too, as i'm sure you know.
as for how liberators become oppressors, the sad inevitability of figures like mugabe and lurches to authoritarianism are right there in neo-colonialist theory. some of the seminal writings on the subject outline the process of how newly 'liberated' nations can collapse inwards into cronyism and strong-man cabals, even whilst ostensibly developing a middle-class (or more often a class of foreign-educated natives toting western alliances and pro-market theories). again, it's not clear-cut, and for you to punt it to 'their fault' suggests a rather all-too-convenient washing of hands. read frantz fanon.
as for 'identity politics', yes, sure, although that's a bizarre misapplication of the term to an african context. they're not arguing over intersectionality in the congo. some (though far from all) of those 'identities' are, of course, colonial-era constructions. that's all been analyzed to death, too, as i'm sure you know.
Last edited by uziq (2020-08-28 02:42:03)
But the focus is and remains the western involvement and purported manipulation of other countries. It is not an analysis of domestic processes and dynamics (only insofar that external connection can be made). Fine if it doesn't pretend to be so, but there are plenty who confine their (political) commentary and opinions to this one angle. Probably Chomsky leading that charge. Which, imo, is wrong and getting rather tired.
i think you'll find that lots of neocolonialist literature focuses on 'domestic processes and dynamics'. are you sure you don't just have that impression because you studied it from an international relations perspective? is this another 'episteme must mean this' scenario? lots of african and latin american writers have studied their own domestic politics and internal processes from post/neocolonial perspectives. it would be a very thin theory indeed if everything was always laid to blame on far-distant (spatially and temporally) mother countries.
and lol, 2 months ago you were accusing chomsky of being a nobody in the progressive movement, with zero influence, and now you're arraigning him for 'leading a wrong charge' in thinking? but, sure, his liberal critiques, like john pilger and michael moore, focus a lot on the role of his own country rather than on deep analysis of the countries in question. but these people are public figures and polemicists; they write angry essays and make films; they're not the totality of the neocolonial school of thought. it's a little odd that you'll credit chomsky as the main antagonist, here, and not, er, any of the main thinkers who constitute postcolonial and neocolonial thinking (chomsky does not feature on this list at all, though he might engage with its body of literature).
here's a good example of a study of the congo that is much more than just 'omg the west is bad'.
https://newleftreview.org/issues/II92/a … eaky-giant
and lol, 2 months ago you were accusing chomsky of being a nobody in the progressive movement, with zero influence, and now you're arraigning him for 'leading a wrong charge' in thinking? but, sure, his liberal critiques, like john pilger and michael moore, focus a lot on the role of his own country rather than on deep analysis of the countries in question. but these people are public figures and polemicists; they write angry essays and make films; they're not the totality of the neocolonial school of thought. it's a little odd that you'll credit chomsky as the main antagonist, here, and not, er, any of the main thinkers who constitute postcolonial and neocolonial thinking (chomsky does not feature on this list at all, though he might engage with its body of literature).
here's a good example of a study of the congo that is much more than just 'omg the west is bad'.
https://newleftreview.org/issues/II92/a … eaky-giant
I wrote my bachelors thesis on postcolonialism in northern africa. I'm aware, but evidently I'm not referring only to actual academic studies of domestic issues but rather political commentary and opinion, which does or can derive from those studies in a chomskyite way. The article you linked is in contrast rather measured. Though I wonder if we're talking about the same thing because neocolonialism and postcolonialism explicitly focus on the effects of contemporary contact with former colonial powers culturally, politically and economically and on how the history of colonialism shaped institutions/territories & social groups. The external-internal connection is in the name.
A more domestic look would be for example to analyse the interactions between various social groups, their framing of one another, how perhaps local cultural norms and practices are absorbed in governance and leadership styles etc. In fact I'm in agreement with the writer you linked that you're going to need both approaches at least to comprehensively analyse postcolonial societies.
A more domestic look would be for example to analyse the interactions between various social groups, their framing of one another, how perhaps local cultural norms and practices are absorbed in governance and leadership styles etc. In fact I'm in agreement with the writer you linked that you're going to need both approaches at least to comprehensively analyse postcolonial societies.
Last edited by Larssen (2020-08-28 05:28:06)
well, as i said in my first post, the division between external and internal affairs is far from clearly demarcated. social groupings and divisions of power can reflect colonial ruling-class identities and ideologies, for e.g. there’s a huge amount to unpack in each case study but one thing that certainly does not happen is ex-colonial subjects being robbed of all agency/responsibility whilst the big bad westerner picks up the tab.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr … sts-police
For decades, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has routinely warned its agents that the white supremacist and far-right militant groups it investigates often have links to law enforcement. Yet the justice department has no national strategy designed to protect the communities policed by these dangerously compromised law enforcers. As our nation grapples with how to reimagine public safety in the wake of the protests following the police killing of George Floyd, it is time to confront and resolve the persistent problem of explicit racism in law enforcement.
I know about these routine warnings because I received them as a young FBI agent preparing to accept an undercover assignment against neo-Nazi groups in Los Angeles, California, in 1992. But you don’t have to take my word for it. A redacted version of a 2006 FBI intelligence assessment, White Supremacist Infiltration of Law Enforcement, alerted agents to “both strategic infiltration by organized groups and self-initiated infiltration by law enforcement personnel sympathetic to white supremacist causes”.
A leaked 2015 counter-terrorism policy guide made the case more directly, warning agents that FBI “domestic terrorism investigations focused on militia extremists, white supremacist extremists, and sovereign citizen extremists often have identified active links to law enforcement officers”
There are going to be people who want to protect the status quo, obviously people in law enforcement have political opinions.
On the other hand there are going to be factions on the BLM side taking the opportunity to milk the situation to gain advantage.
America is practically at the point that its going to be impossible to arrest a black man for anything without him resisting and provoking a riot.
I can see Police departments refusing to enter ghetto areas for any reason or resigning en masse.
What happens next? The CHAZ barely lasted a few weeks before the shootings and rapes started.
On the other hand there are going to be factions on the BLM side taking the opportunity to milk the situation to gain advantage.
America is practically at the point that its going to be impossible to arrest a black man for anything without him resisting and provoking a riot.
I can see Police departments refusing to enter ghetto areas for any reason or resigning en masse.
What happens next? The CHAZ barely lasted a few weeks before the shootings and rapes started.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
FFS dilbert, here's how "impossible" it is to arrest a black man:
See? Easy.
It's just they had the wrong man, attacked him while he was complying, and pulled the person filming bodily out of her car to lecture her about how he was "playin' games" (and obviously to block her line of sight).
Do you see him acting up here? Confusing these well-intentioned white folk with his alien black folk body language (like you were hanging on in posts past).
I don't know why I'm supposed to feel frightened at the thought of corrupt police officers resigning. If it's going to be impossible to arrest cops en masse in some sweeping IA sting or something, this would be the next best thing. The force needs better men and better training.
See? Easy.
It's just they had the wrong man, attacked him while he was complying, and pulled the person filming bodily out of her car to lecture her about how he was "playin' games" (and obviously to block her line of sight).
Do you see him acting up here? Confusing these well-intentioned white folk with his alien black folk body language (like you were hanging on in posts past).
I don't know why I'm supposed to feel frightened at the thought of corrupt police officers resigning. If it's going to be impossible to arrest cops en masse in some sweeping IA sting or something, this would be the next best thing. The force needs better men and better training.