An 'internationalist' CANNOT be 'anti colonial' - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#15310750
This simply fails on basic logical grounds that should be obvious to anyone if I just point it out.

The essential anti colonial position is that people have a right to self determination rather than to be subject to foreign rule. That is...people who perceive themselves to share a common legacy and a common destiny have a primae facie right to organize and determine their own destiny.

There is a word for that attitude: nationalism. Historically, nationalism arose in Europe in competition with christianity...that the legitimacy of a government comes from the will of the people and consent of the governed rather than decided by God or the church. A religion which seeks to actively convert the entire world would be intrinsically 'internationalist' and 'globalist'...obviously if you want to conquer the whole world and make them Christian you cannot have much respect for the right of a people to have self determination.

That brand of Christianity is basically extinct today...so the most common 'new' version of internationalism is basically what people label as communism. Communists do seek to unite all the 'workers' of the world under a shared ideology...and they pretend that ethnic identity is some sort of trick that thr bourgeois play on people to 'divide' the workers and prevent a one world government where all the workers will be happy (in practice workers in communist countries are actually miserable, but this is besides the point).

When people who call themselves communist pretend to be anti colonial...there is always an obvious double standard. What they really mean is that they cannot tolerate white people having their own country...there is nothing universal about their values.

For example, they would never say: "Indians should have allowed the anglos to enter their country and seek a better life. India would be better off with more diversity and the anglos could help bring innovation and perform the jobs Indians didn't want to do. Only Indian supremacists would want to kick the anglos out of their country'. This is, of course, exactly the rhetoric these people use when they insist white countries become more brown...but using the exact same argument with the races switched is unthinkable. Thus it is not a universal standard.

People who self identify as communist will also always give away the reason they pretend to be anti colonial when they are actually just anti white. They are terrified of how powerful white people were in recent history. This is why they talk about history all the time and try to remind everyone about how mean the anglos once were to other races...even if it is totally irrelevant today and the uk has no colonies at all. Communists simply recognize the enormous potential white people have for acquiring power and anyone who wants world domination would be wise to first get rid of their most dangerous potential enemy: white people.

It is a totally cynical and calculated tactic...and it is exactly the same thing some extra terrestrial life form would do if they wanted to conquer earth.

It is worth mentioning, however, that once should be careful what they call 'communist. Mosern day China, for example, has significant government control over the economy. But the government also focuses on the Han national identity. That means modern day China is nationalist. They are socialistand nationalist. There is a term for that: national socialism. And unlike communism proper, a national socialist CAN be anti colonial because they recognize national identity as legitimate, and they can respect the right of self determination for a people. Likewise, what caused the ussr to collapse was not Ronald Reagan, it was nationalism. Specifically it started with estonian nationalism and spread quickly when thr ussr found itself unable to invoke enough fear in the Estonian nationalists to submit.
#15310754
What a remarkable post. When it comes to chess, Poker, Go, maths, physics or software development, I never feel like the most intelligent person on the planet. Years after first coming across the idea I still haven't got my head around the Tagless Final methodology. I still feel I'm beginner on the journey of using functional effect systems. But when it comes to politics I struggle to find any other properly intelligent life on the planet.

What I find so remarkable about your post is not its essentially correctness, but that your understanding is not a common place. Of course if you are a consistent human universalist you can't support national states. My view is as a culture we entered a moral crisis with the fall of Rome, a moral crisis that has only got worse in recent centuries and decades. When Christianity became the Roman state religion, for most people it was for all intents and purposes the world government. but at least until near the end of the western Roman Empire it was the only Christian government. For Christians Rome was only the legitimate world government.

So the western empire broke up, for a while people looked to Constantinople as the final arbiter of state legitimacy, but over time Christians rationlaised that they had multiple christian states in a human universalist religion by saying that God had ordained the Kings to rule over various areas of land. In Britain we are currenlty rule by Charles Christ the Third. Charles has been anointed by God to rule over Britain, The Channel Islands, the Ilse of Man and few other places. At least hear he is the anointed one, the Messiah, the Christ. Obviously I personally never bought this drivel, but that's what monarchists apparently believe.

So over time Christianity evolved into Liberalism. God has been replaced by men like Benito Mussolini and Nikita Khrushchev. Nikita Khrushchev ordained that Crimea was part of Ukraine, so that can not be undone. Mussolini ordained that Libya was a unitary state so that's how it must stay. Woe to any man who claims to recognise an alternate reality.
#15310756
Race is a concept that only people who believe in superficial crap believe. It is bound to be a piece of shit theory.

The human race has been intermixing and running around jumping into every environment since the species began. It is not about the white race is the one that will always be superior or this or that bullshit.

Instead human cultures are always in flux. Changing and because of that they adapt the economy, the religion, and the superstructure of society to serve the needs of what some Myth the society sets up as the base of why a nation-state exists.

FiveofSwords is seriously a pathological person with zero morality. He should look into why he clings to a lack of morality. Morality is supposed to be the core of Christian belief.

He is some xenophobic idiot in my opinion. No matter how much he wants to write bullshit that has zero substance.

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/20/us/r ... index.html

I am sorry, but the truth is that the trashy theories that are desperate to be intellectual when all they are is trash theory are never going to get out of the intellectual hole they are in.

It is about white nationalism and fears of losing power to supposedly people they see as a threat.

But there is no real white genocide. So now it is about how can we change this to theories about superiority inherent.

All their trash is trash. It is not going to be magically transformed from trash theories.

It is the same justifications for greed and violence as has been used for centuries. Nothing changes that.

Keep washing your blood filled hands. It will not change reality Sword. You are one of those trash white pseudo intellectual nationalists who think this is their historic moment to grab power.

Go take on those liberal elitist globalists? They have lots of power. Go to war with them. You are going to lose simply because nationalism never gets enough traction in capitalism.

Clinging to bad economics while being exclusionary will make you lose against a capitalist globalist. That you do not see how is why you are a fool in general. :lol:





But the reality is that none of the xenophobic trashy white nationalist intellectuals like @FiveofSwords they just can't deal with much science.

Hell, the man could not produce a video proving there is white genocide happening in his area of the USA.

Yet he clings to that myth. Why?

Got to believe in lies. Has to. Cannot breathe without living with lies in his head.
#15310766
paeng wrote:Their argument is that nationalism is tied with the bourgeois, i.e., the state works for the bourgeois. The two sets of bourgeois sic the working class of their respective countries on each other.


Yes that is obvious Paeng. The issue is if the working class in their nation is inclusive of all working class people or not? If it is not because they use the same stupid racist device that the corporate globalists use? Then how are they going to liberate the nation from the bourgeois?

Excessive nationalism dehumanizes groups of people. Once you do that? They become objects and you can kill them off or deny them human rights.

@FiveofSwords can not even back his claim that a white genocide is going on in the USA right now of his specific state or neighborhood.

It is not happening now. But the thought that the threat to his 'race' is imminent, justifies a lot of mierda theory.

He either believes all human beings are one race--the human race.

Or he does not believe it.

Many of these foolish white nationalists want color coded countries. The UK for the white skinned British people only. The Chinese for the Han Chinese only, and etc etc.

Fear of the OTHER.

They really do not understand that international capitalism has transformed borders FOREVER. The entire economy of the world can not go back to only consuming, and creating strictly local dependent modes of living. It has been farmed out all over the world. To stop that train means giving up on nation-states completely and just going back almost to feudal times.

The ones who tried anarchistic societies successfully in the 1920s and 1930s in Spain George Orwell visited long ago.

But you are surrounded by a modern society that does not agree with that structure. They will pull it down.

No, we are stuck with interacting with each other's societies until further notice.

White nationalists need to stop living in fear and confront the globalist elites who do have enormous power.

But instead they kill innocent people who either do not agree with their xenophobic nonsense, or who they feel do not support the idea that the OTHER is a threat to white life.

They are small and pitiful. And they will remain that way because they fail to understand international capitalism. Or why racism is a device to be used when it is useful, and when it is not useful? It is dissolved.

It is too much for them.

They want something neat and clean and packaged. Humanity is messy and it fucks with their limited thoughts. :lol:
#15310769
Marxism is about the extermination of the bourgoise. In the same way Cultural Marxism is about the extermination of the White Infidel Gentiles. This doesn't mean that when a Marxist pops into his local owner occupied hardware store, he's consciously thinking, "one day I'm going to kill you." In the nineteen thirties the Bolsheviks exterminated six million Kulaks, six million peasant farmers, not just in the Ukraine but thorughout the Soviet Union. When the Bolsheviks made their revolution they had the support of millions of people, most of the people that supported the Bolsheviks didn't intend to murder (sorry I mean sentence to death, from a Marxist point of view this was justice not murder) 6 million Kulaks, in fact at the time of the revolution most of them would have been horrified by such a prospect.

Similarly the vast majority of Cultural Marxist are not consciously intending to exterminate the White Infidel Gentiles, but that's the direction we are heading.
#15310779
Rich wrote:Marxism is about the extermination of the bourgoise. In the same way Cultural Marxism is about the extermination of the White Infidel Gentiles. This doesn't mean that when a Marxist pops into his local owner occupied hardware store, he's consciously thinking, "one day I'm going to kill you." In the nineteen thirties the Bolsheviks exterminated six million Kulaks, six million peasant farmers, not just in the Ukraine but thorughout the Soviet Union. When the Bolsheviks made their revolution they had the support of millions of people, most of the people that supported the Bolsheviks didn't intend to murder (sorry I mean sentence to death, from a Marxist point of view this was justice not murder) 6 million Kulaks, in fact at the time of the revolution most of them would have been horrified by such a prospect.

Similarly the vast majority of Cultural Marxist are not consciously intending to exterminate the White Infidel Gentiles, but that's the direction we are heading.


I feel like this is true of so many ideologies that it would be inaccurate to pin this as a unique feature of Marxists/Communists. FOr this reason, I think this is just a super round about way for @FiveofSwords to try and justify his own racism.

What tends to happen with many ideologies is that the ultra devout branch which are usually those with the power and thought leadership of the ideology openly supports and encourages this kind of extermination. The next ring of believers of the ideology, who are not so dedicated will usually step back and allow it to happen. This is not unique to Marxism. That is, the next ring out is usually happy to offload/proxy their brains away. Often, proxy it to psychopaths.

A simple right wing example of that, is how many MAGA supporters probably would never go out and start attacking politicians, but they are ok when at least a few of them do (then they find all sorts of ways to excuse it based on what their thought leaders say, we see it here on pofo too).
#15310780
Rich wrote:
Marxism is about the extermination of the bourgoise. In the same way Cultural Marxism is about the extermination of the White Infidel Gentiles. This doesn't mean that when a Marxist pops into his local owner occupied hardware store, he's consciously thinking, "one day I'm going to kill you." In the nineteen thirties the Bolsheviks exterminated six million Kulaks, six million peasant farmers, not just in the Ukraine but thorughout the Soviet Union. When the Bolsheviks made their revolution they had the support of millions of people, most of the people that supported the Bolsheviks didn't intend to murder (sorry I mean sentence to death, from a Marxist point of view this was justice not murder) 6 million Kulaks, in fact at the time of the revolution most of them would have been horrified by such a prospect.

Similarly the vast majority of Cultural Marxist are not consciously intending to exterminate the White Infidel Gentiles, but that's the direction we are heading.



Thanks for the laugh.

The way you turn a complicated world into a child's cartoon is remarkable.

This thread is about dueling perspectives. Most perspectives have something to offer, but all have limitations.

I have been trying to think of a way to reconcile the two dominant viewpoints, the economic one, and the one that describes exploitation as colonialism.

But I am beginning to think there isn't a way to do that outside an academic setting. Give me but world enough, and time...

Here's my 2 cents on yours: there has never been a communist country. It would require a whole new way of doing things, and we are a long way from pulling that off.

There is a book that was popular in the 1960s, called The Seven Laws of Money. One of the chapters is titled 'There are Worlds without Money'. People tend to get hinky over money, but it's just a way of ordering society. There have been places that didn't use it. Works best in a tribal setting.

The point is, things change, and they can change in ways you do not expect.

Stalin was a psychotic dictator. That's about as far from communism as you can get. After he died, the Politburo took over. That was a big improvement, not that any of us would want to have been part of it. Now Russia has a dictator again.

One closing thought, we need fewer and fewer people to produce goods and services. The sweat shops that made clothing are being replaced by factories that have 2 employees (most of the time). A janitor and a software guy.

We can have millions sleeping outside, homeless. Like now, but a thousand times as many, because they are not needed. Or we can have a country with a vibrant science, and arts community that beggars the greats of yesteryear.

Right now, we are becoming a poor country with a very few billionaires that hold a wildly disproportionate amount of wealth. Or we can build a future people want to live in.

One thing I can guarantee, you will never get there trying to bring the 1800s back to life.
#15310782
Rancid wrote:I feel like this is true of so many ideologies that it would be inaccurate to pin this as a unique feature of Marxists/Communists.

Oh absolutely, absolutely. You can't blame the modern left for inventing identity politics. You can't blame the modern left for inventing homicidal identity politics. In fact homicidal and potentially genocidal identity politics has almost certainly been around since before we even became fully human.

Actually I would go even further than my previous post and say that I suspect that never mind the supporters, most of the Bolshevik leadership in 1917 would have been horrified if they could see what their party was going to do in the future. I could be wrong but I suspect that the majority of the Nazi leadership in 1933 would have been horrified if they could have looked into the future and seen Auschwitz and Treblinka.

We are the subject-objects of history. We all help to make history, but we are all the products of history. The products of a particular time and a particular place, even if we like to imagine that we "think for ourselves". This is why I don't blame either the Russians or the Ukrainians for entering into nationalist madness. However I do see it as the responsibility of us outsiders to help them escape that madness , rather than collude in it.
Last edited by Rich on 06 Apr 2024 18:27, edited 3 times in total.
#15310785
Rich wrote:Marxism is about the extermination of the bourgoise. In the same way Cultural Marxism is about the extermination of the White Infidel Gentiles. This doesn't mean that when a Marxist pops into his local owner occupied hardware store, he's consciously thinking, "one day I'm going to kill you." In the nineteen thirties the Bolsheviks exterminated six million Kulaks, six million peasant farmers, not just in the Ukraine but thorughout the Soviet Union. When the Bolsheviks made their revolution they had the support of millions of people, most of the people that supported the Bolsheviks didn't intend to murder (sorry I mean sentence to death, from a Marxist point of view this was justice not murder) 6 million Kulaks, in fact at the time of the revolution most of them would have been horrified by such a prospect.

Similarly the vast majority of Cultural Marxist are not consciously intending to exterminate the White Infidel Gentiles, but that's the direction we are heading.


Rich do you know a time in the world where white skinned Europeans were the MAJORITY of the human race?

If you look at sheer numbers? Europeans and white skinned Europeans have never been a vast majority. EVER.

Look at numbers.



If you want to have more balance between groups?

Educate women. Support women and men in committed relationships who are raising children.

And start to accept immigrants who have skills your nation needs so you do not have to invest heavily in raising and educating adults when you do not have enough adults within the working age range to make a difference in your society.

In the end these numbers are inevitable. Nothing the white nationalist cause can do about changing the facts.

The Genocide screaming and stupidity has to do with losing power. The liberal elites they see as a powerful multicultural group that does not do the neat package deal.

So they want to take them down.

The white nationalist cause needs to attack capitalism hard with every white dummie who thinks they lost a job due to brown person, and instead round them all into a tight formation and go after the globalist elitist with TRILLIONS and POWER galore.

Once they get smacked down and beaten to death with their stupidity. They might be open to realizing it is not about white genocide.

The only solution is about changing bad policy for everyone.

And that means not alienating the vast majority of humanity. Who will never be Europeans and white only.

Let me repeat. The vast majority of the human race are not European only. And never will be.

You need the majority to stop the problem with the globalists.

But you can't do it because you are petty white nationalists who believe in lies instead of facts.

Sorry.

You will lose. But before you lose? Fight the right people. The globalists who use the racism as a device when they need to divide and conquer, and when they need the racism to stop to sell and prosper or unite and exploit.

Lol.

Why is this so hard for the foolish types like @FiveofSwords to get?

He needs another kleenex. Pobrecito.



@Rancid the numbers are not changing.

You got shrinking due to what they mention.

Human beings are not mostly European though and that is a fact. And it will be true for the foreseeable future.

I am just glad there are humans out there living human lives.

I want my species to survive, do well and thrive. No matter what ethnicity they come from.

That is the intelligent thing to do.

The rest is falling into traps of racism devices. :lol:
#15310786
Sounds like a division aroubd identity of race and class as most fundamental or whether it is a social matter of indifference or perhaps to be undermined. For those focused on class, racial conflict and propaganda is meant to divide the working class and we see the failures of unity as a class specifically in unions that denied membership to women and racial minorities compared to syndicalists that sought a broader coalition within the working class.

Race is socially significant as an identity because it shapes ones participation in society and the division of labor still. Self determination like individual autonomy has its limits but of course limits are to be imposed on imperialist powers who plunder say African nations for raw resource extraction. It’s not specifically about race as much as its about the historical trajectory in which states plundered others justifying themselves in white supremacy.


It doesn’t benefit the working class to deny members of the working class solidarity in their struggles against capital and trying to survive. Otherwise it creates a exploitable underclass that can scab wages and undermine solidarity and fractures the working class along its weak points.
#15310787
Rich wrote:Oh absolutely, absolutely. You can't blame the modern left for inventing identity politics. You can't blame the modern left for inventing homicidal identity politics. In fact homicidal and potentially genocidal identity politics has almost certainly been around since before we even became fully human.

Actually I would go even further than my previous post and say that I suspect that never mind the supporters, most of the Bolshevik leadership in 1917 would have been horrified if they could see what their party was going to do in the future. I could be wrong but I suspect that the majority of the Nazi leadership in 1933 would have been horrified if they could have looked into the future and seen seen Auschwitz and Treblinka.

We are the subject-objects of history. We all help to make history, but we are all the products of history. The products of a particular time and in a particular place, even of we like to imagine that we "think for ourselves". This is why I don't blame either the Russians or the Ukrainians for entering into nationalist madness. However I do see it as the responsibility of us outsiders to help them escape that madness , rather than collude in it.


Excessive nationlism is problematic.

You start thinking we are the best. Better than all the rest. Better than anyone, anyone I ever met.

Simply the best.

This constant need for an ideal perfect new man or woman is highly problematic.

No such thing as perfection Rich.

The ones who want that are asking to be sliding into psycho territory.
#15310789
Rancid wrote:I feel like this is true of so many ideologies that it would be inaccurate to pin this as a unique feature of Marxists/Communists. FOr this reason, I think this is just a super round about way for @FiveofSwords to try and justify his own racism.

What tends to happen with many ideologies is that the ultra devout branch which are usually those with the power and thought leadership of the ideology openly supports and encourages this kind of extermination. The next ring of believers of the ideology, who are not so dedicated will usually step back and allow it to happen. This is not unique to Marxism. That is, the next ring out is usually happy to offload/proxy their brains away. Often, proxy it to psychopaths.

A simple right wing example of that, is how many MAGA supporters probably would never go out and start attacking politicians, but they are ok when at least a few of them do (then they find all sorts of ways to excuse it based on what their thought leaders say, we see it here on pofo too).


Woe...that is a convenient attitude for anti white people to have. If anyone cares about white people then they are racist, and anything a racist says cannot be true it must just be a way to justify their racism. So latter ho2 much you harm whites, it is unthinkable for any white person to resist it.

I can understand why people would try to spread this idea cynically because they just hate white people...what I cannot understand is how anyone actually manages to believe it. Certainly Aristotle was racist...does that mean basic logical prinicples that he pointed out like tertium non datur were just justifying his racism?

Then at least be consistent. Even if we grant that everything I believe is false because I am racist, then you cannot conclude that it is not true...that would be falling into the racist trap of aristotelian logic.
#15310798
Anti-colonialism united the Third World that was under Soviet influence and the Soviets won hearts and minds in the Third World by backing anti-colonial struggles. But it was originally based on an American idea that there is no substitute for self-government. This was captured in October 1942 in an ‘Open letter to the people of England’ published in Life magazine:

‘[O]ne thing we are sure we are not fighting for is to hold the British Empire together. We don’t like to put the matter so bluntly, but we don’t want you to have any illusions. If your strategists are planning a war to hold the British Empire together they will sooner or later find themselves strategizing all alone […] In the light of what you are doing in India, how do you expect us to talk about ‘principles’ and look our soldiers in the eye?’

FDR supported the anti-colonial position in the 1940s when he spoke against British imperialism in India. The Atlantic Charter is identified as encapsulating Roosevelt’s anticolonialism, which promised the dissolution of European colonial empires in the post-war era. Truman also refused the Dutch request to transport Dutch troops to the Dutch East Indies to suppress Indonesia's independence. The issue of independence for European colonies complicated US-Soviet diplomacy and it was no longer a purely domestic issue between the European colonial powers and their colonies.

Image

American Anti-Colonialism and the Dissolution of the British Empire
William Roger Louis

International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-)
Vol. 61, No. 3 (Summer, 1985), pp. 395-420 (26 pages)
Published By: Oxford University Press

https://doi.org/10.2307/2618660
Last edited by ThirdTerm on 06 Apr 2024 16:10, edited 1 time in total.
#15310803
FiveofSwords wrote:Woe...that is a convenient attitude for anti white people to have...

While I agree with some of what you're saying I hardly think that @Rancid's post deserved this response. I'm sorry but i do think you're potentially guilty of mirroring the very behaviour, that you're criticising. Some leftists do react to the slightest diversion from their dogma with accusations that you are a White Supremacist Nazi just itching to bring back chattel slavery for "Black people"But similarly I don't think you should just assume that every person who expresses a slightly leftist view is of that mind set.
#15310804
FiveofSwords wrote:Woe...that is a convenient attitude for anti white people to have. If anyone cares about white people then they are racist, and anything a racist says cannot be true it must just be a way to justify their racism. So latter ho2 much you harm whites, it is unthinkable for any white person to resist it.

I can understand why people would try to spread this idea cynically because they just hate white people...what I cannot understand is how anyone actually manages to believe it. Certainly Aristotle was racist...does that mean basic logical prinicples that he pointed out like tertium non datur were just justifying his racism?

Then at least be consistent. Even if we grant that everything I believe is false because I am racist, then you cannot conclude that it is not true...that would be falling into the racist trap of Aristotelian logic.


What do you do about the white people who do not care about other white people? Who believe some multicultural drivel and who influence others who are weak minded and betray the white race for dollars and cheap labor?

Do you need another kleenex?

@Rancid does not care about white people you say?

I want to know--@Rancid you need to make clear which white people you care about? And which white people you will throw under the bus in order to get more money?

because, FiveofSwords thinks caring about his white race is caring about White People.

Does he care about Biden the white Roman Catholic Irish background American from Delaware? Who was vice prez with Barack Obama?

He is a white guy....and Biden says or said super racist shit all the time....but it is all water under the bridge for the Democrats. He is part of the group running the show.

But you do not care about White People Rancid. Shame on you!

:lol:
#15310805
Rich wrote:While I agree with some of what you're saying I hardly think that @Rancid's post deserved this response. I'm sorry but i do think you're potentially guilty of mirroring the very behaviour, that you're criticising. Some leftists do react to the slightest diversion from their dogma with accusations that you are a White Supremacist Nazi just itching to bring back chattel slavery for "Black people"But similarly I don't think you should just assume that every person who expresses a slightly leftist view is of that mind set.


Rich, you really need to realize that a lot of the white nationalist sentiment in the USA is not as nuanced as you would like it to be.

I chalk it up to not knowing that culture as well as you might presume to know. It is not a British mentality at all.

It is based on made up identities of colorism. ;)
#15310807
Rich wrote:While I agree with some of what you're saying I hardly think that @Rancid's post deserved this response. I'm sorry but i do think you're potentially guilty of mirroring the very behaviour, that you're criticising. Some leftists do react to the slightest diversion from their dogma with accusations that you are a White Supremacist Nazi just itching to bring back chattel slavery for "Black people"But similarly I don't think you should just assume that every person who expresses a slightly leftist view is of that mind set.


I don't care one bit about the fake 'right' and 'left' identities. He suggested that my post...which ought to just be plainly true...was just some ruse to 'justify my racism'. That is all I need to know about him.
#15310808
ThirdTerm wrote:Anti-colonialism united the Third World that was under Soviet influence and the Soviets won hearts and minds in the Third World by backing anti-colonial struggles. But it was originally based on an American idea that there is no substitute for self-government. This was captured in October 1942 in an ‘Open letter to the people of England’ published in Life magazine:

‘[O]ne thing we are sure we are not fighting for is to hold the British Empire together. We don’t like to put the matter so bluntly, but we don’t want you to have any illusions. If your strategists are planning a war to hold the British Empire together they will sooner or later find themselves strategizing all alone […] In the light of what you are doing in India, how do you expect us to talk about ‘principles’ and look our soldiers in the eye?’

FDR supported the anti-colonial position in the 1940s when he spoke against British imperialism in India. The Atlantic Charter is identified as encapsulating Roosevelt’s anticolonialism, which promised the dissolution of European colonial empires in the post-war era. Truman also refused the Dutch request to transport Dutch troops to the Dutch East Indies to suppress Indonesia's independence. The issue of independence for European colonies complicated US-Soviet diplomacy and it was no longer a purely domestic issue between the European colonial powers and their colonies.

Image

American Anti-Colonialism and the Dissolution of the British Empire
William Roger Louis

International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-)
Vol. 61, No. 3 (Summer, 1985), pp. 395-420 (26 pages)
Published By: Oxford University Press

https://doi.org/10.2307/2618660


You may be forgetting that the biggest anti colonial force in the 40s was actually adolf hitler. People all over the world who were sick of foreign (and especially British) rule found hope in the rise of national socialist Germany. That is why Japan allied with Germany. That is why he had close ties with the grand mufti. That is why he had many supporters in India, Ukraine, and the Baltics.

FDR was just a politician. As this letter suggests, he wanted to avoid appearing openly hypocritical...a talent that politicians have become too foolish to maintain of late. But that does not mean that he himself had anti colonial sentiments. Certainly he felt Germany was his enemy...and it is not because he felt Germany would invade the usa with their zero aircraft carriers.
#15310810
Tainari88 wrote:Race is a concept that only people who believe in superficial crap believe. It is bound to be a piece of shit theory.

The human race has been intermixing and running around jumping into every environment since the species began. It is not about the white race is the one that will always be superior or this or that bullshit.

Instead human cultures are always in flux. Changing and because of that they adapt the economy, the religion, and the superstructure of society to serve the needs of what some Myth the society sets up as the base of why a nation-state exists.

FiveofSwords is seriously a pathological person with zero morality. He should look into why he clings to a lack of morality. Morality is supposed to be the core of Christian belief.

He is some xenophobic idiot in my opinion. No matter how much he wants to write bullshit that has zero substance.

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/20/us/r ... index.html

I am sorry, but the truth is that the trashy theories that are desperate to be intellectual when all they are is trash theory are never going to get out of the intellectual hole they are in.

It is about white nationalism and fears of losing power to supposedly people they see as a threat.

But there is no real white genocide. So now it is about how can we change this to theories about superiority inherent.

All their trash is trash. It is not going to be magically transformed from trash theories.

It is the same justifications for greed and violence as has been used for centuries. Nothing changes that.

Keep washing your blood filled hands. It will not change reality Sword. You are one of those trash white pseudo intellectual nationalists who think this is their historic moment to grab power.

Go take on those liberal elitist globalists? They have lots of power. Go to war with them. You are going to lose simply because nationalism never gets enough traction in capitalism.

Clinging to bad economics while being exclusionary will make you lose against a capitalist globalist. That you do not see how is why you are a fool in general. :lol:





But the reality is that none of the xenophobic trashy white nationalist intellectuals like @FiveofSwords they just can't deal with much science.

Hell, the man could not produce a video proving there is white genocide happening in his area of the USA.

Yet he clings to that myth. Why?

Got to believe in lies. Has to. Cannot breathe without living with lies in his head.


When are you going to learn that I am never going to bother reading your anti-white and pro colonial squaking? You type so God damn much also...and it is all really stupid gosh galloping and wrong assumptions. Clearly you said nothing to address my point and I knew you wouldnt.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 15

International Court of Justice orders Israel t[…]

Taiwan-China crysis.

:lol: at warmongering shitlibs.

Talk on the warrants starts at 11 minutes: https:/[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

Why Israel is Stuck Three concepts of Western […]