by Earth Liberation Studio https://x.com/EarthStvdio/status/2073055914979147882

The Counter-Revolution of 1776:Slave Resistance and the Origins of the United States of America.

As the United States of America, celebrate its independence anniversary declared on 4th July, 1776, we take a look at the history of America, the events that led to declaration of independence, and most importantly why declaration of independence was not a cause for celebration among all Americans, particularly for the native Americans and the enslaved African Americans. “For Native Americans, it may be a bitter reminder of colonialism, which brought fatal diseases, cultural hegemony and genocide. Neither did the new republic’s promise of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” extend to African Americans. The colonists who declared their freedom from England did not share their newly founded liberation with the millions of Africans they had captured and forced into slavery.”

The so-called Revolution was according to Professor Gerald Horne, was a ‘Counter-Revolution’ a conservative effort by American colonists to protect their system of slavery. Contrary to anonymous role often assign to African Americans in the American Revolution (which Prof. Gerald Horne refer to as Counter-Revolution) the prof. lucidly outline their roles and their major impact. The book is a great shift in paradgim.

Professor Gerald Horne, is the author of the book “The Counter-Revolution of 1776: Slave Resistance and the Origin of the United States of America.”

https://kritisansar.noblogs.org/files/2017/12/The-Counter-Revolution-of-1776.pdf

Megathreads and spaces to hang out:

reminders:

  • 💚 You nerds can join specific comms to see posts about all sorts of topics
  • 💙 Hexbear’s algorithm prioritizes comments over upbears
  • 💜 Sorting by new you nerd
  • 🐶 Join the unofficial Hexbear-adjacent Mastodon instance toots.matapacos.dog

Links To Resources (Aid and Theory):

Aid:

Theory:

Financial Support to the Bearsite

  • ashinadash [she/her]@hexbear.netEnglish
    4·
    2 days ago
    More yapping

    […] In this connection it should be noted that the relations of production cannot for too long a time lag behind and be in a state of contradiction to the growth of the productive forces, inasmuch as the productive forces can develop in full measure only when the relations of production correspond to the character, the state of the productive forces and allow full scope for their development.[…]

    An instance in which the relations of production do not correspond to the character of the productive forces, conflict with them, is the economic crises in capitalist countries, where private capitalist ownership of the means of production is in glaring incongruity with the social character of the process of production, with the character of the productive forces. This results in economic crises, which lead to the destruction of productive forces. Furthermore, this incongruity itself constitutes the economic basis of social revolution, the purpose of which IS to destroy the existing relations of production and to create new relations of production corresponding to the character of the productive forces.

    Okay well how long is “too long a time” Joe? Awful long period of lag between the relations of production and the character of the productive forces phoenix-sweat

    • ashinadash [she/her]@hexbear.netEnglish
      3·
      2 days ago
      more

      Oh, does the neoliberal thing where they deindustrialise and outsource a lot of commodity production to the imperial core act as a bandaid on the “lag between relations of production and character of productive forces” thing? Todo: dialectical reading of neoliberal capitalism.

      Edit: see!

      But having developed productive forces to a tremendous extent, capitalism has become enmeshed in contradictions which it is unable to solve. By producing larger and larger quantities of commodities, and reducing their prices, capitalism intensifies competition, ruins the mass of small and medium private owners, converts them into proletarians and reduces their purchasing power, with the result that it becomes impossible to dispose of the commodities produced. On the other hand, by expanding production and concentrating millions of workers in huge mills and factories, capitalism lends the process of production a social character and thus undermines its own foundation, inasmuch as the social character of the process of production demands the social ownership of the means of production; yet the means of production remain private capitalist property, which is incompatible with the social character of the process of production.

      These irreconcilable contradictions between the character of the productive forces and the relations of production make themselves felt in periodical crises of over-production, when the capitalists, finding no effective demand for their goods owing to the ruin of the mass of the population which they themselves have brought about, are compelled to burn products, destroy manufactured goods, suspend production, and destroy productive forces at a time when millions of people are forced to suffer unemployment and starvation, not because there are not enough goods, but because there is an overproduction of goods.

      Surely the character of the productive forces is no longer social if the productive forces are actually cheap labour from proles in the imperial core. Alternatively, this might describe the current moment of USamerican capitalism, but it also makes me think about how most of the buying power now comes from upper classes in the US.

      • ashinadash [she/her]@hexbear.netEnglish
        3·
        2 days ago

        I finally finished it, but I’m compelled to keep a copy of it on me amd bust it out when literally any geopolitical question appears. I hope to study and understand its concepts more sharply.