💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › kyle-tussing-on-western-democracy.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 11:55:03. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: On Western Democracy
Author: Kyle Tussing
Date: February 25, 2016
Language: en
Topics: democracy, colonialism, history, anarchism, socialism, communism, policing, elections, leftism, social control, black nationalism
Source: http://jettisonmag.com/politics/1312/on-western-democracy-or-why-im-not-feeling-the-bern/

Kyle Tussing

On Western Democracy

This is a response to the recent and well articulated Jettison article I

was mentioned in, “Socialists on Sanders” by Marc Blanc.

During the American Revolution, white Virginians serving in militias and

the Continental Army were pissed. While poor whites were conscripted

into the revolutionary army, rich white slaveholders were able to exempt

themselves from service using their wealth. Petitioners in the Charlotte

County militia said the slaveholders benefitted twice over by avoiding

fighting in the war while getting rich off of their slaves while the war

continued. (1) A strict Marxian view may suggest that the poor whites

would ally themselves with black slaves against the wealthy Virginians.

This did not happen. Instead, to curb anger, new enlistment rules

stipulated that new recruits would be given a “healthy sound negro”

between the ages of ten and thirty, gold or silver, and three hundred

acres of land at the end of the war. Class conflict in white society was

mitigated with the further oppression of a colonized group.

Various black nationalist personalities describe the United States as a

colonial-settler empire. Europeans moved from their homeland to a new

land, wiped out the indigenous population, and then imported a

population to produce a surplus for white society to live off of. This

imported African population was colonized. Settler society revolved

around slavery and all settlers benefited from it. Whether it was the

lumberjack whose wood built slave ships or the fisherman whose “refuse

fish” was sold as slave meals, revolutionary nationalist J. Sakai

writes, “all sections of white settler society- even the artisan,

worker, and farmer- were totally dependent upon Afrikan slave labor.”(2)

While the forms may have changed, this general relationship has

persisted. Today, the United States throws a higher percentage of its

black population behind bars than South Africa did at the height of

apartheid. (3) Once in prison, these individuals are paid between $0.20

to $1.20 an hour while generating $14.54 an hour. (4) This surplus, also

generated from the colonized world in sweatshops and other labor camps,

flows to the powerful and then back onto the greater white society to

lessen any conflict. Cheap products at Walmart are cheap for a reason.

“Made in Vietnam.” “Made in Thailand.” Obama’s white rule with a black

mask is neocolonialism, taking a figure from the colonized and having

this figure retain white rule.

White leftism has tended to protect settler colonialism. In the early

1900s, on the west coast, Japanese immigrants were working in

agriculture, railroads, and timber. The white left’s favorite Eugene

Debs and his Socialist Party, supported and stirred up mob violence

against these immigrants so white workers could steal their jobs and

benefit from the infrastructure laid down by the immigrants. (5) This

time a settlement in white society based on colonization wasn’t offered

as a peace deal by elites, but violently established by white people on

their own initiative with the support of their “radical” organizations.

As Kwame Ture (formerly Stokley Carmichael) and Charles V. Hamilton

write, “The whites react in a united group to protect interests they

perceive to be theirs.” (6)

Jean-Jacques Rousseau was an enlightenment thinker influential to

American and French revolutionaries in the 1700s. The men who forged the

new American nation took special care to read his work. In On the Social

Contract, which is perhaps Rousseau's most iconic work, he takes time to

describe how a stable government would operate. In chapter 6 he lays

this out: the reliance on neutrality within a territory. The strategy is

to collect enough force that simply is not active resistance and direct

all these actively loyal and neutral social channels into a “single

moving power … made to act in concert.” (7) In the past, loyalty oaths

to the ruling order were demanded, with the threat of death. Now, if you

don’t say the Pledge of Allegiance, you are socially chastised.

Modern policing’s goal is to ensure the stability of the status quo.

This status quo is preserved through the neutrality of the majority, the

“silent majority.” To maintain neutrality is to engage in policing.

Police officers are trained extensively in conflict resolution

strategies. For example, in December 2014 a protest I attended in

Athens, Ohio over the murder of Eric Garner blocked Court Street in

front of the Courthouse, marched to the intersection of Court and East

Union, and proceeded to block the intersection. The first thing the

police did was to set up orange traffic cones to redirect traffic. This

allowed those driving past the initiation of conflict to maintain the

identity of “neutral” instead of taking sides, and in the end that meant

siding with the police. The protest fizzled after a while, principly

because resistance wasn’t strong enough to go further. To be strong

enough, more people would have needed to join in the confrontation.

Successful policing neutralizes the population and removes them as a

factor.

Police are not just uniformed men, but also apparatuses which direct

movement into Rousseau’s single moving power. The police are cameras in

a stairwell, so people are made to govern themselves. In the

architecture of the stairwell the camera is strategically positioned to

allow it to see more space and forcing individuals to move from point A

to point B. This single moving power, which has also been called “the

general will,” “the public good,” or “The People” is dependent upon

citizenry; those who participate in the activities of the body politic.

(8) These activities are attached to identities which reproduce daily

life: worker and owner, customer and seller, subject of law and police

officer, peaceful protesters and proud voters, etc.

Bernie Sanders is not real resistance to Western democracy. Sanders is

channelling anger away from forms of direct confrontation into the

single moving power of “The People” by turning this anger into something

governable, into the reproduction of citizenship, into the passive act

of voting and hoping. Western democracies must have a mass of neutral

individuals, regardless of their personal opinions, which they have the

God-given freedom to express. These individuals will remain undisturbed

and, very literally, unmoved. These are citizens, who are unmoved and

materially unengaged. One can vote for Bernie in hoping he can build the

world they wish to see, but one is barred from actually creating that

world or materially confronting this one. Western democracy is the

politics of non appearance. Actual resistance is radical presence within

space, refusing to be neutralized by police apparatuses.

Bernie Sanders is not real resistance to American empire. Sanders could

create a middle class utopia, but it would come by further exploitation

of the colonized. Karl Marx was correct to analyze in “Value, Price, and

Profit” that wage labor is a paid ratio between how much the capitalist

makes and how much the worker makes off of a surplus, but a colonial

worker’s wages can be raised by taking more resources from the colonized

and conserving the same ratio. Even if higher wages are attained by a

reduction of the ratio between the capitalist and the first world

worker, the surplus still developed in the colonized world and would not

be stable without hyper exploitation. Sanders is jumping on the “raise

the wage” bandwagon, recuperating such demands into the settler-colonial

system. Sanders may despise the settler-colonial system, but he as an

individual cannot change a social structure from the ground up. As an

elected official, his job is to “preserve American democracy.”

In Marc’s article, I was described as viewing Sanders as more than a

“Democratic sheepherder” because some of his supporters may lose faith

in him and participate in radical action against American empire, such

as building networks and infrastructure outside of the government so

that we can live without it. This is more of an indictment against

Sanders than even quasi-support for his campaign. Me voting for Sanders,

on condition that he gets the Democratic nomination, is no support for

Sanders either. I’m voting purely on the fact that my mother is sick and

he would have a better healthcare plan than the Republicans. I’m the

uninterested, selfish, single-issue voter news pundits despise.

As for “protest voting,” one wonders how much of a protest against the

status quo voting for Jill Stein really is or whether voting can be

resistance at all. It seems to be the same logic as a Sanders vote,

channelling anger from material confrontation against the power

structure as it exists and physically manifests itself in society into a

passive act of vocal opposition. Passive acts are the backbone of

Western democracy. If such voting is supposed to be a “radical

statement,” the statement seems to be vote for X instead of Y and Z, but

still nothing more than remaining passive. Protest voters might be

better off just staying home on election day.

Real change will physically challenge the domination of space by

American empire. Real change ends the neutralization of the population

and accentuates lines of loyalty which run through it. Real change

destroys “The People” so we finally see each other as people regardless

of borders, a self conscious humanity. Real change abolishes citizenship

roles. Real change needs active participation and material contribution.

Real change is not socialist, anarchist, communist, or any other “ist”

that can be attached to someone’s identity like a tumor. Real change

organizes communities to provide for themselves without the supplies of

corporations and governments. Real change will never be voted into an

office.

1.McDonnell, Michael A. “Virginia’s Wartime Mobilization Leads to Class

Struggles.” In Major Problems in the Era of the American Revolution,

1760-1791, edited by Richard D. Brown and Benjamin L. Carp, Boston:

Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, 2014, p. 199-200.

2.Sakai, J. Settlers: The Mythology of the White Proletariat From

Mayflower To Modern. Montreal: Kersplebedeb, 2014, p. 15.

3.Alexander, Michelle.The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of

Colorblindness. New York: The New Press, 2011, p. 6.

4.Dyer, Joel.The Perpetual Prisoner Machine: How America Profits from

Crime. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2000, p. 19.

5.Sakai, J.Settlers: The Mythology of the White Proletariat From

Mayflower To Modern. Montreal: Kersplebedeb, 2014, p. 161.

6.Ture, Kwame, and Charles V. Hamilton. Black Power: The Politics of

Liberation. New York: Vintage Books, 1992, p. 7.

7.Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. “On the Social Contract.” In Classics of Moral

and Political Theory, edited by Michael L. Morgan, Indianapolis:

Hackett, 2011, p. 887.

8.Ibid, p. 888.