|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Internationalism does not mean there is no enemy:
by Railx
Despite decades of work by Maoists in north amerika, descendants of the oppressed, born and raised in the conditions they attempt to explain, mechanically apply economic analysis from semi-feudal and semi-colonial countries to conditions in the united $nakes. On Labor Day 2006, the League of Filipino Students (SFSU) put out a statement for the day's migrant rights demonstrations. "The vicious imperialist interest of the comprador big-bourgeoisie is the primary force of exploitation for immigrants and workers in the U.S. and other countries..."
This statement is an example of the confusion being spread by those who do not distinguish between imperialism and oppressed nations. The compradors are the ones who sell out their own people to the imperialists in a neo-colonial situation. So to speak of compradors in what LFS recognizes as the "number one imperialist country" makes absolutely no sense. One might argue there exists a comprador bourgeoisie among the internal semi-colonies of the united $nakes, but this is clearly not what LFS is referring to. Rather they seem to interpret internationalism to be the theory that conditions are the same all over the world.
International Solidarity is the righteous call to support the struggles of the oppressed nations for self-determination. It has often been the task of the oppressed nations' diaspora to build such solidarity among potential allies within the nations that are responsible for the very oppression they are struggling against. In such relations of the oppressed nations to allies among the oppressor nations there is no necessity for reciprocity. It is the duty of any just minded citizen of an imperialist country to do all they can to stop the oppression and exploitation that their people are imposing on others. The oppressed owe them nothing in return.
We would be better off if we make reparations a requisite part of international solidarity. This would clarify the relationship between oppressor and oppressed nations. It is true that the whole world benefits from an end to militarism. But as long as we live under capitalist economic relations, militarism is inevitable anyway. So the idea that we can ignore the flow of wealth from the Third World to the imperialist countries and effectively combat militarism is incorrect. Overcoming chauvinist attitudes in the imperialist countries requires combat by material means--reparations--not just talk. Once imperialist country populations have the same means of production as the oppressed nations people, it will be much easier to harmonize.
The League of Filipino Students goes on to pit amerikkkans against the Third World for stealing jobs, further inflating the oppressor's sense of entitlement and encouraging the very fascist anti-migrant and anti-oppressed sentiments the rallies are trying to combat. If you've grown up in the united $tates you know how amerikkkans react to the idea of other nations stealing their jobs. The paragraph concludes that all "workers" are exploited and all need better wages, benefits and conditions. There is no call for reparations for the Filipino people who have been a source of wealth through the exploitation of labor and natural resources for amerikans for over 100 years. No call for the reparations of the stolen land of Aztlán. No call for reparations for the stolen lives in Iraq. But a very clear call for higher wages for amerikan so-called workers.
The statement often reads more like a wish-list than an assessment of reality. LFS offers no evidence that there is "ever-growing dissent against US intervention and aggression in countries such as the Phillippines" amongst amerikkkans. In fact, those who are now turning against the occupation of Iraq for their own narrow interests do so in a way that endorses continued u.$. involvement in places like the Phillippines where amerikkkan troops aren't dying every day. Amerikans are exposed to more political campaigning that criticizes certain aspects of the invasion of Iraq (such as "we should have sent more troops") than any real opposition to u$ imperialism.
The Labor Day rally in San Francisco numbered thousands of people, but paled in comparison to May Day of this year. While May Day was a day of migrants, Labor Day was a lot of labor unions and white nationalist "socialist" groups. Perhaps the verdict is in for the current wave of the migrant movement in the united $tates, and it is destined for economism and special deals in league with the amerikan labor unions. But organizations of youth that have sprung up in response to the migrant struggle offer hope for the future with a focus on land, self-determination and correcting a history of genocide by the very people many at the rally believed to be exploited themselves. Meanwhile, the continued influx of the proletariat into u$ borders can only push the contradiction between the exploited and the exploiters to the forefront again.
Communists are internationalists in that we support the struggles of all oppressed people against imperialism in the common interest of humynity. It does not mean that we support the interests of all nations. We take a clear class position in favor of the proletariat and the peasantry because it is only those who have nothing to lose but their chains who have ever done what it takes to build a world without exploitation or oppression.
[MIM publishes this article as yet another example of how misleaders of the international communist movement are completely confusing the oppressed and exploited in the pursuit of their conciliation with u.$. imperialism and politician-like truthiness.]