Welcome again to everybody. Make yourselves at home. In the time-honoured tradition of our group, here is the weekly discussion thread.
☭ Matrix homeserver and space
☭ Theory discussion group on /c/theory@lemmygrad.ml
☭ Find theory on ProleWiki, marxists.org, Anna’s Archive


I know this is an unpopular opinion, but i honestly hate the term “treats” and “treatlerite.”
To preface, im not a fan of social democrats, especially in the global north.
But it just denigrates the actual analysis of why people align themselves with social democrats and why they might be popular in favor of this moralist caricature of “mwahaha i will vote for new hitler if hes offering me PS5’s and chocolate” when in reality it’s often more complex and conversely actually possible to do something. As with my criticisms of third worldism in general, it’s only difference from orthodox marxism-leninism is that it gives up in the imperial core because of mechanical materialism. “Treats” and “treatlerite” is just adding a moralist tinge to it
I suspect it’s a bit of a memeification of a more poignant quote by Aimé Césaire, which you’ve probably seen. The one from https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Library:Discourse_on_Colonialism
Treatlerite, by comparison, seems to imply that people are okay with genocidal Hitler-like policies mainly because they get treats out of it. Which reduces complex dynamics of class and caste contradictions to basic hedonistic drives.
The irony here is that Césaire was encouraging, in the words above, “to study clinically, in detail, the steps taken by Hitler and Hitlerism and to reveal to the very distinguished, very humanistic, very Christian bourgeois of the twentieth century”. In other words, to put great detail effort into understanding just what the hell is going on with white people precisely, especially the bourgeoisie of them, and how insidiously they hide behind faux pro-social narratives.
And reading Indi’s more recent articles makes me think Iran worked out precisely what would make the white bourgeoisie finally hurt and is going through a gradual process of making it happen: https://indi.ca/the-after-math/
But, similar to Russia’s gradual, plodding advances in Ukraine, they are not in a rush. They don’t need to make it all happen tomorrow. They only need to make sure that the trajectory keeps going down for the white bourgeoisie, that it is, in a sense, “a controlled explosion” as much as possible.
I think a similar understanding of the imperial core working class is needed and analyses of them often seem inadequate, from what I’ve seen. A framing like “treatlerite” doesn’t elucidate much. Sometimes the implication made is that the treats are treating the symptoms of the awful conditions, but if that’s the case, then it’s not the treats themselves that are sought after, it’s other needs and the treats are a coping mechanism; and if that really is a big part of what’s going on, that means the imperial core working class are a lot closer to revolt than they may seem at a glance. But I don’t think this explains all that much because having a means to treat symptoms does not explain the active support that many still have for the system and how it works.
One thing that repeats in my mind, is that it’s vital to look at the internal caste-like systems of imperial core regions. Such as in the US, which, roughly speaking, goes down something like: white man, white woman, black man, black woman, indigenous man, indigenous woman
Is the white working class just a mini version of the white bourgeoisie in terms of racism, colonial practice? Or is it more complicated than that? I’d think the contradictions would have to make it more complicated. That the white working class is intentionally meant to be racist enough for the white bourgeoisie to recruit from them as needed, but their racism (in today’s world) is often more of a passion-based racism than a plotting, logistics-based one. This makes a kind of sense to me because if the working class is good at logistics, they are harder to control, whereas passion alone can be directed via media and the like.
But I am only trying to expand the conversation, not do a comprehensive analysis.
You are more likely to see this behavior among wealthy suburbanites, not really among proletarians in North America or Europe, tbh.
It does have a real “vibes based analysis” ring to it. Its just a rehash of “bread and circuses” which was just moralizing against poor people for trading the “democratic” Roman Republic for food and entertainment from Ceaser. Its judging people for not giving up their own real comfort and security for the chance at a hypothetical better future, an act which has no precedent in history.
For the majority of people, they need to have nothing to lose before they sacrifice everything. That is the standard Risk analysis of the human mind aka. human nature.
“Bread and circuses”
Basically shaming poor people in general who still need social recreation and joy to order to avoid burnout, anhedonia, and major depression just so they can make it to the next day.
Meh, I’m no fan of using the term in a serious context cause it’s a bit juvenile but there’s a reality to ‘voting for new hitler if hes offering me PS5’s and chocolate’
It’s not really confined to the first world either, I see it all the time in my corner of the third world. The truth of the matter is most people are gonna be ‘treatlerites’ which is why those who are not ‘treatlerites’ (professional revolutionaries) have to come up with a plan to provide ‘treats’ (personal consumption) under a socialist order. The difference in strategy between the USSR and China comes to mind with this. Obviously subject to the prevailing conditions of whatever country we’re looking at.
There are a lot of “Treatlerites” in the Dominican Republic and elsewhere.
It’s not just first-world BS, though there is plenty of that and more.
Honestly, a lot of “second world” countries are like this (those that were in the Warsaw Pact or apart of the socialist camp during the previous Cold War).
Good grief, even Bolivia had this problem when I was there in 2019 during the coup against MAS and Evo Morales’s cabinet.
But honestly?
It is basically just rich suburbanites, never mind dumb pious Christian fascists.
Even the urbanites who went to private schools and were apart of Western multinationals had this bent.
Didn’t even matter their background. They had everything and then some but wanted more.
The Indígenas, the campesinos, the poor and downtrodden, the rural folk, the city workers… They knew who was on their side.
It wasn’t the treatlerites, certainly not the people that kept working on the Board of Directors of the multinationals there or the NGOs allied with the private schools there or old the shops and restaurants that had CNN Español on the TV and nothing else, etc…
“Bread and circuses” is what we castigate the poor for so we can still pal around with prideful champagne socialists.
Too many Western communists get angry and prideful that poor people don’t come flocking to their banner.
But honestly
Poor people know what’s up.
Do you?
/TED Talk completed
@ronweasleysl@lemmy.ml
Uhhh
I don’t know why I put that last question there; it wasn’t directed specifically at you or anyone.
It kinda just sounded cool, idk, I was just trying to conclude my speech.
…Okay, look, I don’t know what I meant by that, it’s provocative!!
Recommend avoiding the word “denigrate” as it has racist origins.
This comment provoked me to go on a little search for its usage and history. I think this short essay on the word is useful. https://ejournals.bc.edu/index.php/lingua/article/view/5456/5086
I think one of the conclusions it offers is somewhat valid, that the English language has used the white vs black, light vs dark as a literary and poetic device for centuries with religious links as well. It can be hard to disentangle well-meaning attempts to censor certain terms and styles of speech from having to combat a whole nest of developed cultural norms (that aren’t necessarily outright racism).
huh, interesting