They used racial ideology to construct a global division of labour, a massively inequitable global division of wages, and a global hierarchy of rights. Racial ideology was promoted so aggressively that it developed its own momentum of hatred and violence.
Racism, like imperialism itself, is not a side-show to capitalism but a structurally necessary feature of it. It is not a standalone problem that can be addressed with a few liberal reforms here and there. It has always been central to capitalism and it remains that way today.
Overcoming capitalism - in other words, transitioning to a democratic socialist economy - is ultimately necessary to end structural racism and imperialist violence.
The struggle against racism must be anti-capitalist, and the struggle against capitalism must be anti-racist.
These arguments have been established by a long tradition of scholarship -- WEB du Bois, CLR James, Cedric Robinson, Angela Davis, Walter Rodney, Claudia Jones, Utsa Patnaik, Ali Kadri, Immanuel Wallerstein, Samir Amin and more -- and they remain as relevant today as ever.
thank u professor jason
The assertion that arguments by figures like W.E.B. Du Bois, C.L.R. James, and Angela Davis remain relevant today is accurate, as their ideas continue to be actively studied, applied, and built upon in contemporary scholarship and social movements.
Their work is still central to academic fields such as Black Studies, sociology, and political science and informs current discussions on racism, capitalism, and global inequality.
So what do you suggest that we should do?
Take back the commons.
Abolish capitalism before it wipes us out. Share resources. Treat people and the environment fairly.
But how are we going to convince the majority, that we should abolish capitalism? What will we replace it with? Do we need a plan of some sort? Is there a party we can vote for with such a vision and a plan?
I think if put to 'the majority', an informed majority, they wouldn't need convincing. Capitalism only leads to mass poverty and disparity and, ultimately, the destruction of the surface of our planet. We'll literally destroy our species whilst also killing billions of other life forms. No-brainier
I agree, but there are no political parties that support this idea?
In this country? I think Sultana and Corbyns new party might head in that general direction? The Greens too. Not as far as what I would personally want or stipulated. They're our only hope of preventing fascism here, atm
A community, country, world based on socialist ideals of sharing resources, promoting nature and caring for people is also a no-brainer
Any direction away from capitalism and it's imperial nature and the destruction it literally feeds on has to be the path we all take. Otherwise it's oblivion
delicense an oil major
I am afraid, that I do not understand that. I am Dutch, maybe I lack context.
No, being Dutch is not why you don't understand. No one does. Am I just crazy? Being Dutch, I expect you understand what an oil company is, even if RoyalDutchShell did move to the UK. Can you not imagine a way that the issuer of a sovereign currency could destroy an oil company?
I think we need the oil, for the time being, while we make an inventory of necessary knowledge, design a sustainable society, and migrate to that society. But oil companies could be nationalized?
Nationalizing would just invest the nation in them; then it'd be even more difficult to make them go away, according to the IPCC schedule. There are how many, say 10 oil companies? Just destroy one per year, then we might survive.
Struggle against racism is inherently anti-capitalist but you can struggle against capitalism without opposing racism
no you can't
You can't imagine racist feudalism?
oh, so you are talking about anti-capitalism as presented by pre-capitalism, I thought you were talking about it in a post-capitalist/communist way
I hae no idea how you got there. I was talking about everything that isn't capitalism. That's it.
op's post is about overcoming capitalism in a progressive manner, so I didn't think anyone would presume he was talking about going backwards in the wheel of history as something to achieve
"wheel of history" seems a very weird concept. He used "must" twice for things that are very different and I thought merited clarification. The first is an absolute precondition, the second merely a moral imperative.
Study 20th century history and come back with a better suggestion.
Citocracy. You cant knock it if we have never tried it. bsky.app/profile/robi...
Please don’t. And don’t give me the “real socialism” crap.
Too scary for you Håkan?
Yes, socialism was / is a plague and has never brought welfare to the people. Let alone freedom.
It isn't socialism or at least calling it that is not fulsome. Maybe read the doc and call out its failings but don't just spout dogma and irrelevant hearsay. Exactly what is it about a fully engaged citizenry running their own nation without leaders with full contribution that you don't like?
Racism is the foundation of this country💔, from its inception.💔🤬💔