3 ms·
If they wanted to make an argument about economic exploitation of workers by capitalist institutions, they would have done so. Instead, once great replacement w
by komali2 1y ago
If they wanted to make an argument about economic exploitation of workers by capitalist institutions, they would have done so. Instead, once great replacement was brought it up, they began defending it as real. For them, and many, it's about race.
I'm with you - corporations absolutely exploit cheap labor at the expense of all else, including their "home nation" (a concept alien to corporations; corporations are money go up algorithms, nothing more). That corporations will pillage other countries for cheap labor is baked in to the fundament of capitalism and was often written about as something we'll need to figure out when we get to late-stage capitalism if we want to continue doing this system.
Let's not confuse racists as our ideological allies, though they may indeed be class allies that have unfortunately chosen a false reactionary explanation for the degradation of their country and comfort. Not just any false reactionary explanation, the oldest one in the book, so rote and cliche I'm honestly surprised people still fall for it. "It's not the billionaires that control the means of production and all aspects of society that are making your life worse, it's uh.. uh... the Je - oh we can't do that one anymore? The Bla- oh wait that's not allowed anymore either? The INDIANS and MEXICANS!!"
- Hyperboreanal 1y ago[dead]