Thread by @borntomub, Settlers mega-thread: a thread for dumb ppl who won’t read the book [...]

Settlers mega-thread: a thread for dumb ppl who won’t read the book and I’m too tired to debate (or ppl who just wanna learn); combatting misconceptions and validating the theoretical integrity of Sakai’s work

Part I: Summary

Settlers Chapter 1 summary:
The origins of racialization, class-race dynamics, and nation in the settler-colonial dynamic
(un-highlighted words are mine, highlighted are quotes)

Similarly, Mao writes: https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-9/mswv9_80.htm

(Summary continued)

Part II: Misconceptions

I. Shoddy Research
II. Revisionism
III. Anti Marxism

One of the most common criticisms found against Sakai’s book is the claim that Sakai’s research is poor and he specifically fabricates a Lenin quote to twist and build his thesis on labor aristocracy.

For the “fabricated” Lenin quote, see: Imperialism and the Split in Socialism:

A similar quote is also cited and explained in the Monthly Review article “Lenin and the Aristocracy of Labor” https://monthlyreview.org/2012/12/01/lenin-and-the-aristocracy-of-labor/

Here is a link to a line-by-line counter to the most popular criticism piece of Settlers (Kevin Rashid’s NABPP Essay) https://twitter.com/fitzsij/status/1276497168610852864?s=20

https://twitter.com/fitzsij/status/1276497168610852864?s=20

(Continued) https://twitter.com/fitzsij/status/1310312943893057536?s=20

https://twitter.com/fitzsij/status/1310312943893057536?s=20

Rebuttal to claims of Sakai being anti-labor: https://twitter.com/borntomub/status/1343320607769972742?s=20

https://twitter.com/borntomub/status/1343320607769972742?s=20

Learn more about Sakai’s labor radicalism as well as him countering claims against his work in this 2003 interview:

Two other common criticisms of Sakai are closely linked, this being the claim that “Labor Aristocracy is a revisionist line” and “Settlers is anti-Marxist.” These two points bring me to Part III

Part III: Validating Sakai’s Thesis

Here is a citation list of works that validate and reach the same conclusion of Settlers independent of Sakai’s work

-Lenin, CW 39, 531-5
-Marx, Capital 1, Ch. 33
-Marx, On the Irish Question
-Humphrey McQueen, A New Britannia, Ch. 9-13

(Citations continued)

-Edward Roux, Time Longer Than Rope, Ch. 14-15
-Noel Ignatiev, How the Irish Became White
-Noel Ignatiev, Black Worker White Worker

(Citations continued)
-Don Hamerquist, White Supremacy and the Afro American National Question
-Gershon Shafir, Land Labor and the Origins of the Israel Palestine Conflict, Ch. 3-4, 7-8

The assertion that Sakai’s thesis on labor aristocracy is revisionist is particularly ridiculous because this is simply not true. Rashid for example outright claims that there is no such thing as labor aristocracy, which reveals a gross misunderstanding of the concept.

Sakai’s analysis of labor aristocracy builds entirely off of Lenin’s development of the concept in Imperialism as well as his other lesser-known works. The term “Aristocracy of Labor” was coined by Engels himself.

https://rhizzone.net/forum/topic/14186/?page=2 Post #56

Read more about the Engel’s-Sakai connection and rebuttal to revisionism misconception here: https://kersplebedeb.com/posts/c_lwwch-2/

J. Sakai Comments On “Looking At The White Working Class Historically

Since David Gilbert has rightfully started off a re-evaluation of the entire question of the white working class, i would like to throw a few points into the discussion. First off, i think the value...

https://kersplebedeb.com/posts/c_lwwch-2/

For Lenin's views on Settlerism, see: Collected Works, Vol. 39, 531-34
https://archive.org/details/dli.bengal.10689.16204/page/n531/mode/2up
Lenin expands on this notion of labor aristocracy, even going as far as recognizing settler labor aristocracy created by imperialism in the first world.

Lenin remarks privately on the people of New Zealand "A country of inveterate, backwoods, thick-headed, egotistical philistines, who have brought their “civilisation” with them from England and keep it to themselves like a dog in a manger."

Lenin also asserts how the wealth of NZ's white masses came from the "stolen land of the Maoris, who were exterminated by fire and sword."

On Australia, he wrote of his shock that the workers party was in control of the Upper house in govt along with its widespread worker-friendly policies, stating that this is hardly reflective of anything genuinely proletarian.

Marx actually develops an early analysis of settlerism akin to Sakai’s in Capital, Vol. 1, Ch. 33 as well as in On the Irish Question
Below is a summary of Ch. 33: https://www.reddit.com/r/communism/comments/3f19jb/comrades_who_have_read_capital_what_are_some_of/ctkfg5e?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

Capital Vol 1, Ch. 33 Summary continued

Settler labor aristocracy in South Africa (Roux)

Settler labor aristocracy in Australia (McQueen)

Settler labor aristocracy in Australia (continued)

since this thread kind of blew up more than I expected, this information is meant to be supplementary to the book and also serves as a sort of introduction

Read the book here:
https://readsettlers.org/

Latest Threads Unrolled: