Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q46,19/critique

This is not a fair characterization of the American revolution. [1]
I just watched a bad video about the Red Scare... well, no, it was just mediocre.
most people believe the definition of America itself inherently excludes the existence of Communists. I'm not a Bolshevik, Marx didn't believe in violent revolution, Marx believed in Menshevism, then you're an American.
in this light all the stuff about 'the settler regime' actually makes some kind of sense if you define 'the settlers' not as some kind of ethnic group made of Europeans but specifically as the early bourgeoisie who established things like gold mines or the fur trade.

hypothetical world Stalin's government shooting Trotskyists in the street
would it be fair to call Stalin and Mao both a progressive force because they defended their country against empire?

"never was a democratic revolution in America and that therefore it has no democracy worth defending"
seems upset at the suggestion there is "no American democracy to defend"
Trotskyist makes point against permanent revolution. each time I read an explanation of why Trotsky had an accurate model of the Russian revolution one of the points was always that it was possible to skip over Menshevism and bourgeois class rule in the Third World because the Third World would be starting a worldwide revolution, and as a revolution it had no need to cut itself off by establishing capitalism.
trotsky said you can't support mao when he advances a bourgeois republic if and when the bourgeois republic would kill Communists. if the CPC or KMT suppresses the proletariat Trotskyists stop defending 'their important step forward for Chinese democracy', and defend whatever few proletarians the government suppressed.
reconstruction failed - like Stalin failed

"no entrenched power—monarchies or slaveholders or capitalists—is beyond the reach of revolution" - only one of those was actually dislodged. totally missing Reconstruction era history, which is critical.
"radical, universal egalitarianism born of Enlightenment ideals" - this is okay.
causality missing from book - this is what Liberal-republican ideals do to your brain.
"it is more patriotic than those who are opposed to it"
"promoting division between, or resentment of, a race, sex, religion, creed, nonviolent political affiliation, social class, or class of people"
slavery relic of pre-capitalist, monarchic world - yeah. confederacy was closer to ancient imperialism, although not expanding actively through war

meta-narratives postmodernism actually isn't all bad. it can be turned around. only good thing: it's the claim Liberal-republicanism and Stalinism don't understand each other
"new narratives" - ethics obsession. history is made of ethics. anarchism. or, effect of framers and Liberal-republican Ideals on regular people. "liberal democracy" is a pile of ideals, not a material process as Lenin describes a state to be.
non-racism versus anti-racism
identity politics loses mass appeal - true once, not true any more. identity politics is actually how you get mass appeal now.
attempt to erase maoism? source of many racialized narratives
why personal storytelling / phenomenology? Hegel. that's all. limited value. but the value is there.
"western philosophy inherently white" - certainly not. things which are essentially the same have spread throughout japan without much harm. CRT confuses the harm of physical populations competing against each other, pushing out Black people, with the harm of ideas that come out of the populations
lots of white people killed by police - huh. my only response, this has been a flawed attempt to create social links or organizations, which otherwise erode every day.
Hannah-Jones accidentally says Nazism solved racism [2] - ok. this one is interesting because if you look closely it contradicts everything else Maoists and postmodern identity politics were saying, about how killing minorities entrenches racism rather than getting rid of it. which is approximately true. she didn't learn her own lesson.
antiessentialism - way better than class vs race argument. better argument for lived experience than the ones they use. however, supports materialism.
relationships - product of isolation. actually similar to what Lenin said, but only as a product of anarchists thinking CRT is more revolutionary than it is. [3]
cultural appropriation - phenomenology. demand for anthropological work to be accurate. I find this one pretty annoying but again there's a way to present it correctly. 2008 & obama to now - perhaps CRT was only way to put pressure on Democratic party. there are basically no other ways.
capitalism crushing minorities; few available; uniting is better [4] - CRT misses that some privileged people suffer and have every reason to end capitalism