• StalinistSteve@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I will say I analyze it quite differently – Mexico’s state relies on the same settler colonialist system as the US, and thus would never dare lash out on the system that its entirely predicated on. Mexico would need to cease to be Mexico to be able to be anti-imperialist in a meaningful way.

      • By this argument Cuba also cannot do anything because it was set up as a settler colonial nation, and has that same system baked in. I understand that settler colonialism needs to be addressed, but to imply that because a nation was once settler colonial it must always be bad leads to arguments where no improvement can happen, and a change from an attitude of trying to fix issues to one of we can do nothing because the start was tainted.

      • SadArtemis [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Perhaps also culturally within its identity- and the fact half of the US is essentially just stolen Mexico, and their proximity to and close interactions with the YanKKKee devil. These combined with the direct proximity (border) and sheer size means what problems the US stirs up in Mexico will find their way back home (IMO).

        • StalinistSteve@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          8 hours ago

          I would be wary of the idea of America stealing Mexico, both states are on stolen land. Kinda like saying Michigan is stolen Canada.

          • While you are not wrong that mexico is stolen land, it does pant an artificialy narrow picture of the United States to refuse to entertain the idea that the US then stole about 1/3rd to 1/2 of its area from Mexico. By not entertaining this idea we are hiding a large part of the US’s Imperalism,