The following speech was given by Russell Means in July 1980, before several thousand people who had assembled from all over the world for the Black Hills International Survival Gathering, in the...
I'm referring here to the so-called theories of Marxism and anarchism and "leftism" in general. I don't believe these theories can be separated from the rest of the of the European intellectual tradition. It's really just the same old song.
China is the only remaining ML superpower, are they also part of the 'European intellectual tradition'?
'Some of us will survive in the hills' is just anarchist wishful thinking, if thats the best place to survive they will be taken over by organized states. You can't fight organization with desorganization.
I look to China and I see the same thing. I look to Vietnam and I see Marxists imposing an industrial order and rooting out the indigenous tribal mountain people.
I see China exploding nuclear bombs, developing uranium reactors, and preparing a space program in order to colonize and exploit the planets the same as the Europeans colonized and exploited this hemisphere. It's the same old song, but maybe with a faster tempo this time.
I swear I mean this in good faith (and I'd hope other interactions we've had would vouch for that): Why was industrialization and urbanization good? Or maybe, what is the measure for goodness that you're applying in this analysis?
China has thousands of years of culture and tradition, ML now coexists with them, after a period of strife, just as it would with Lakota or other first people's beliefs
That does not rebut the idea that Chinese ML is part of the European intellectual tradition. The use of "coexists" also definitely gives it an air of ideological imperialism/colonialism, that ML is the only correct path for development of a society. Seems awful "we must civilize the savages" to me.
This views Marxism as a step by step guide "This is how to do revolution bitch" rather than a rich dialectical framework that is dependent on the interpretations of its practitioners and applications to the unique material conditions that they exist in
ML is the political organization and economic of the state but the thousands of years of Chinese cultures also remain. The use of Coexists means that, they both exist at the same time.
I was responding to "Also Marxism is Alien but Anarchism isn’t?", not doing analysis. To your point, though, "useful" is a matter of cultural context (as are "truth" and "morality"), and I think that's a significant point of the article. There is tension between Marxist analysis and indigenous analysis precisely because the former is couched in the language and memes of Eurocapitalism.
China is the only remaining ML superpower, are they also part of the 'European intellectual tradition'?
'Some of us will survive in the hills' is just anarchist wishful thinking, if thats the best place to survive they will be taken over by organized states. You can't fight organization with desorganization.
deleted by creator
I swear I mean this in good faith (and I'd hope other interactions we've had would vouch for that): Why was industrialization and urbanization good? Or maybe, what is the measure for goodness that you're applying in this analysis?
deleted by creator
Not sure why you're getting downvoted for literally just quoting the article
most people don't read the article lmao
So disorganization couldn't stand against organization after all.
The very idea of "superpowers" is an artifact of the European intellectual tradition, so yes.
Yeah that does nothing to rebutt the material fact they are one.
I wasn't trying to rebut anything, I was confirming that they are part of the European intellectual tradition.
Lmao mfw when China is part of the European intellectual tradition.
TIL that Mao never read Marx and synthesized the ideas he advanced. :thinkin-lenin:
China has thousands of years of culture and tradition, ML now coexists with them, after a period of strife, just as it would with Lakota or other first people's beliefs
That does not rebut the idea that Chinese ML is part of the European intellectual tradition. The use of "coexists" also definitely gives it an air of ideological imperialism/colonialism, that ML is the only correct path for development of a society. Seems awful "we must civilize the savages" to me.
This views Marxism as a step by step guide "This is how to do revolution bitch" rather than a rich dialectical framework that is dependent on the interpretations of its practitioners and applications to the unique material conditions that they exist in
ML is the political organization and economic of the state but the thousands of years of Chinese cultures also remain. The use of Coexists means that, they both exist at the same time.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I was responding to "Also Marxism is Alien but Anarchism isn’t?", not doing analysis. To your point, though, "useful" is a matter of cultural context (as are "truth" and "morality"), and I think that's a significant point of the article. There is tension between Marxist analysis and indigenous analysis precisely because the former is couched in the language and memes of Eurocapitalism.
deleted by creator