While you are not wrong that mexico is stolen land, it does pant an artificialy narrow picture of the United States to refuse to entertain the idea that the US then stole about 1/3rd to 1/2 of its area from Mexico. By not entertaining this idea we are hiding a large part of the US’s Imperalism,
I think the issue is in referring to Mexico as ever having it to be stolen in the first place. The land swapped hands from one colonizer to another, in revolution this doesn’t change that the entrapped indigenous would be the driving force of progressive change. There’s certainly something to be said about the expansionism and imperialism of the US even towards another settler colonial state, but the framing here implies that returning the land to the Mexican government would be progressive.
the framing here implies that returning the land to the Mexican government would be progressive.
I’d say yes, in our current situation, especially under Morena or other progressive gov’t, since they’ve not intended to make a majority white lebensraum out of the nation…
“Progressive” what do you mean? Mexico has its own racial hierarchy. The reconquista would certainly not be supported by the natives living in the surrounding reservations/populations, as Mexico would to all evidence strip them of the little soverignty they have. Mexico attempting to claim native lands is 100% labensraum.
People need to educate themselves on the unique dynamics of white supremacy in Mexico. Just because a native married a slave owner to survive through a brutal caste system doesn’t mean their decendants are natives. Just because Mexico appropriates and distorts indigenous culture doesn’t mean actual native communities aren’t treated horribly. Replacing a white labensraum with pretendian labensraum isn’t progressive! That goes for Mexican nationalism and its extension of Atzlan which has wormed its way into “ML” orgs
While you are not wrong that mexico is stolen land, it does pant an artificialy narrow picture of the United States to refuse to entertain the idea that the US then stole about 1/3rd to 1/2 of its area from Mexico. By not entertaining this idea we are hiding a large part of the US’s Imperalism,
I think the issue is in referring to Mexico as ever having it to be stolen in the first place. The land swapped hands from one colonizer to another, in revolution this doesn’t change that the entrapped indigenous would be the driving force of progressive change. There’s certainly something to be said about the expansionism and imperialism of the US even towards another settler colonial state, but the framing here implies that returning the land to the Mexican government would be progressive.
I’d say yes, in our current situation, especially under Morena or other progressive gov’t, since they’ve not intended to make a majority white lebensraum out of the nation…
“Progressive” what do you mean? Mexico has its own racial hierarchy. The reconquista would certainly not be supported by the natives living in the surrounding reservations/populations, as Mexico would to all evidence strip them of the little soverignty they have. Mexico attempting to claim native lands is 100% labensraum.
People need to educate themselves on the unique dynamics of white supremacy in Mexico. Just because a native married a slave owner to survive through a brutal caste system doesn’t mean their decendants are natives. Just because Mexico appropriates and distorts indigenous culture doesn’t mean actual native communities aren’t treated horribly. Replacing a white labensraum with pretendian labensraum isn’t progressive! That goes for Mexican nationalism and its extension of Atzlan which has wormed its way into “ML” orgs