This is an archive of the former website of the Maoist Internationalist Movement, which was run by the now defunct Maoist Internationalist Party - Amerika. The MIM now consists of many independent cells, many of which have their own indendendent organs both online and off. MIM(Prisons) serves these documents as a service to and reference for the anti-imperialist movement worldwide.
This is an archive of the former website of the Maoist Internationalist Movement, which was run by the now defunct Maoist Internationalist Party - Amerika. The MIM now consists of many independent cells, many of which have their own indendendent organs both online and off. MIM(Prisons) serves these documents as a service to and reference for the anti-imperialist movement worldwide.
Maoist Internationalist Movement

Hyphen-nation

May 6 2007

"Afro-American," "Japanese-American," "Korean-American," "Cuban-American," "Arab-American"--MIM opposes the hyphenations. They are the political expression of empire partnerships. We prefer "Asian-unAmerikkkan" and "Arab-unAmerikan" etc.

If we said, "Afro-Amerikan" or "Afro-Amerikkkan" it would be to indicate parasitism infecting the Black population inside U.$. borders. We would be being at least slightly sarcastic or critical. So we prefer the term "Black."

The root national group of U.$. imperialism is English settlers. Germans and Dutch came along as well very quickly. These groups merged and eventually included even the Irish and Italians into one white nation dominating the united $tates. The story of how the Irish joined into the dominant nation of the empire has been told in detail.

When we see "Afro-American," as a term, we cringe and we think of how the Irish merged into the Amerikkkan population. Beating back "Afro-American" thinking is part of the class struggle.

The struggle for integration divides into two for MIM. On the one hand, the civil rights aspect is progressive in pointing out the difference between how whites treat themselves and other ethnicities. On the other hand, successful civil rights movements result in an enlarged empire, enlarged military forces and increased super-profit sharing. As a result, MIM supports the integration struggle only in some tactical situations. In any contest between our national struggle approach and the integration approach, we support the Malcolm X over the Martin Luther King. Recently we struggle against those saying the migrant workers should be carrying U.$. flags instead of Mexican flags. We support the national struggle of the Mexicans oppressed and exploited by u.$. imperialism. The U.$. flag is the leading flag of pillage and war in the world.

Some have complained about MIM's use of terms for some groups as not very catchy-- "Asian-descended peoples of North Amerika." We also cannot just say "Arabs." "Arabs" should refer to first generation people. Once inside the u.$. borders, the land, economy and culture start to have their sway and we have to speak of a distinct ethnic group. Making this worse, the Arab-descended and Asian-descended populations may congregate in Chinatowns or Dearborns, but they do not issue demands for land. We might also think of the Jews before the existence of Zionism in the places where there was a Jewish community, as in certain neighborhoods of New York City today. For these groups, nationalism looks more like community-ism--being in charge of a city district for example. Huey Newton raised the concept of intercommunalism for these groups that would fail to generate enough strength to install a state and remove imperialism. Similarly, MIM has argued for the joint dictatorship of the proletariat of the oppressed nations to admit that only an active alliance of oppressed nations has a chance of putting imperialism to death.

MIM's political estimation of the would-be hyphenated peoples inside imperialist countries is that they have ambiguity. Some are co-opted into conservatism by the wealth of empire. Sometimes, movements such as the Black Panthers arise from the hyphenated peoples. These peoples have much in common with what Mao referred to as "national bourgeoisie." Currently 96% of Blacks miss imperialist Bill Clinton as a president. ( http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/16/poll.2008/) So if we start from that and call that some kind of "solid core" or "firm basis" for revolution in the united $tates, we must be talking about a Democratic Party takeover at best, not communist revolution. The reason that the hyphenated peoples are tempted to think that way is that the white nation dominates the superstructure and hands out super-profit rewards to see things the white way. Those who are for an end to exploitation think globally and look at the commonality of interests among those needing to do away with imperialist exploitation. The internationalists do not "have to have" a majority inside u.$. borders. We do "have to have" the proletarian minority to act in line with the interests of the world's globally exploited--in a situation of operating behind enemy lines.

When MIM reviews the publications and organizations of the hyphenated peoples, we look past the bourgeois networking, careerism, specialized publicity for individuals and bourgeois culture. These are all uncontroversial among the white nation. So doing the same things the white nation does is not much of a contribution.

We look for the ambitious projects and struggles that distinguish the hyphenated peoples from imperialism. The task of proletarian leaders operating behind enemy lines is to show these groups of people, not their commonalities with white people, but their distinctiveness that is in line with the interests of the world's majority. When it comes to Vincent Chin, the whites killed him because they thought he was Japanese, when in fact he was Vietnamese. It is an excellent demonstration that there is an Asian-unAmerikan interest group created by the crimes of the oppressor nation. There is no better recent indication of the natural distinctiveness of the hyphen-nations than the fact that no ethnic group in its majority other than whites supported Bush in 2004 or the Iraq War to start. Those calling for our oppressed nationalities to integrate into a nation that voted for Bush and favored the start of the Iraq War are nothing but war criminals, whether they call themselves "Marxist" or not.