>>are the bantu in south africa immigrants? i mean, at what
>>point do people stop being immigrants?
>
>I don't there's an end to immigrant status. To disclaim that
>status is like deleting one's history.


but that's to elasticize the definition of being an immigrant to the point of nullity. if you're going to go that route, the native americans were immigrants, too, right? so is everybody outside of kenya.




> i'd say at the point
>>when they are no longer recognizable to people of the
>>culture they left as being one of them.
>
>But we are physically and socially recognizable...that
>should account for something.


mmm... i don't know what you mean by "socially" recognizable but physically recognizable counts for nothing imo. if that counted, i'd be turkish in spain, tuareg in tunisia, tamil in france, dominican in the us and moroccan in italy, bc that's what i was physically recognizable as.




>
>>
>>well, but they did. i mean, look, it was a european named
>>karl marx who wrote one of the first critiques of
>>capitalism. there were socialists all over europe, and i
>>should also say that the french workers party was co-founded
>>by marx's haitian son-in-law, paul larfargue, and the
>>british communist party was co-founded by the indian r p
>>dutt. i mean, europeans *suffered* under capitalism, and the
>>dark satanic mills of manchester before it was exported to
>>the colonies.
>
>Yeah....Marx championed socialism. But what bothers me is
>that he was only concerned with intra-European
>working-class. Anti-capitalism only became an issue when
>"Europeans" suffered from its consequences.


i don't know enough marx to debate you, but what i've always understood was that the point isn't that only european suffering counts, the point is that capitalism as a stage of production has to be gone through before one gets to socialism, so those nations who were still feudal had to industrialize through the capitalist model first.


>
>And to add, the glorification of European philosophers give
>Europeans further reason to assert their superiority. Marx
>did not invent socialism. Socialism was present in other
>societies long before he mapped out his theory. It's like a
>concept doesn't get approved until it gets authorized by the
>white man.


well, why isn't identifying pre-capitalist forms of governance with european theories a form of begging for the authority of the white man's theories?