76
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] PKMKII@hexbear.net 25 points 3 months ago

This is true, but the cause and effect was not always uniform. Often the federal military presence happened because settlers would encroach on native lands and then plea to the federal government for support when they bit off more than they could chew.

Which was a constant resource strain for the central government. That’s why the crown and later the federal government tried to put limits on westward expansion. It wasn’t out of some respect for the natives, it was because enforcing the settlements was costly both from a real dollar perspective as well as manpower.

[-] Diuretic_Materialism@hexbear.net 21 points 3 months ago

often the federal military presence happened because settlers would encroach on native lands and then plea to the federal government for support when they bit off more than they could chew.

This is an often forgotten element of Laura Wilder's famous frontier novel "Little House on the Prairie". The Wilder family, and a number of other settler families, were attempting to squat Osage Nation land, their belief was that while their actions were technically illegal the US government would eventually take their side and let them keep the land.

Turns out they were wrong, their presence caused political tensions with the Osage and other plains tribes so the US Army was sent to evict them.

Also worth noting, Laura Wilder's books were just meant as personal memoirs, she was more known in her life for writing gardening and cooking guides. Her frontier stories were largely promoted by her daughter Rose Wilder Lane who was a hardcore libertarian and friend of Ayn Rand, and openly promoted the books as a showcase of the nobility of frontier life.

[-] HexbearGPT@hexbear.net 10 points 3 months ago

once you get the ball of capitalist social relations rolling downhill, it can be hard to stop. it's a self-reinforcing system: steal peoples land, make them poor, tell them they can stop being poor by owning land so they go steal other people's land that aren't under the regime of private property and the state.

some day this will run out of steam. I hope.

[-] Biggay@hexbear.net 4 points 3 months ago

I mean when its moving fastest would be in fascism, no? The social relations of capital push harder and harder to a point where a state moves to consuming its own fragmentable populace, and then also pushes to expand it borders militarily to accomodate that civil society.

[-] HexbearGPT@hexbear.net 2 points 3 months ago

I dint know it transforms everything at its borders into a part of itself pretty damn quickly.

maybe the edge of capitalism is always fascist?

[-] Biggay@hexbear.net 2 points 3 months ago

I think its always imperialist, given that its one class in a nation aggressing against another nation while in a fascist sense its all happening in one nation. when it cant expand itself and relieve its social tensions in directs those forces inward, cannibalizing itself.

this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2024
76 points (98.7% liked)

chapotraphouse

13539 readers
747 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS