• sodium_nitride [she/her, any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    19 days ago

    What it comes down to is this part

    in this context the Indian elite act like Honorary Aryans, they would like to be the top “Whites” so exceeding the US would not be outside of their class paradigms.

    Increasing wealth and accumulating value are fundamental drives of capitalism. White or not, the desire to be seen as Honorary aryans has little to do with it. And it’s not as if they can’t keep acting white while the nation itself pursues a nationalist capitalist development path (look at Russian liberals)

    • darkernations@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      19 days ago

      Someone can drive the car without understanding how the engine works. Russian capitalists hands were forced as they were denied the oppurtunity in sharing Western Imperialism and military hegemony (NATO). But I don’t believe in economic determinism; the Russians grew a spine against Western Hegemony and no doubt the legacy of Soviet history and foundations helped.

      The query was whether Indian capital as a class has self awareness at present to not end up like EU, South Korea or Japan - I argue I’m not sure they do at this stage - and their relation with White Supremacism is partly the reason why; an idea that the Westerners ultimately have got it right but just may be Indian capital could have a bigger piece of that pie.

      Now India may never end up like the three aforementioned countries/regions because their decolonial history combined with their population/resource size while kowtowing as a counterweight (so far, but not for long maybe) to China in Western Eyes meant they did not need to concede territory directly to US military (though they did indirectly with Pakistan).

      It is idealistic to consider domestic cultures do not have a dialectic relationship with its international relationships; we often hear liberals claim that western countries foreign policy is separate to their domestic policy.

      India’s relationship with its colourism is not separate to its international relations, they are intimately linked.

      • sodium_nitride [she/her, any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        19 days ago

        Domestic policy is always linked to foreign policy (no marxist-leninist should ever deny this), but we’ll have to “agree to disagree” about how much causal weight colorism specifically should be given here. Not that capitalism is a linear system to begin with assignable weights to causal inputs.

        • darkernations@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          19 days ago

          Fair enough and maybe I did lean a bit heavily in a way that gave the appearance of singular aetiology in defence of an ultimately throwaway quip.