ProbablyKaffe

So my state, Washington, is expected to grow by 2 million people by the 2030s and our airport (SeaTac) is expected to grow too crowded to have as many one way destinations as it has right now.

A major Republican just put out an op ed saying that we need to build another airport, but nobody wants to live next to it. So to solve this, we need to plan a new 250k+ city and give it an airport. The level of NIMBYism we are entertaining is a planned economy to keep the landed folks rich.

It's problematic that settlers in a settler colony don't know what the environment looked like before their ancestors colonized the land. I'm not saying nature in the abstract but the specific environments of the Americas that were destroyed due to homesteading and colonizing. They want a return to "green" but that "green" is imported flora and fauna.

They can brainstorm all day but when it comes down to praxis, if they are reproducing settler Colonialism of the environment, they are a problem. If Solarpunks in the colonies don't have an intimate understanding of their local native species, they are just colonizers, not much better than people who keep their lawn green.

Edit: relevant image I just ran into

That one Chobani commercial is still a cornerstone in the Solarpunk "movement", at least on social media (where I expect it lives and dies). There is a "de-advertised" version where someone took the time to remove all of the references to the dairy magnate. There is no criticism of the environment depicted in the art being full of colonizing species, only derision in it being produced by Chobani. This is worrying because the settlers in the settler states, even the "environmentally conscious", can't even imagine a form of living alongside nature, only a continent sized homestead. Environmental collapse is more than just carbon emissions and asphalt, the environments of the Americas have been collapsing ever since the colonizers came and exterminated tens of millions of bison, tens of millions of beavers, wolves, dammed rivers that wipe out salmon populations. It's problematic that people here don't know what nature actually looks like, especially those who play around with "revolutionary aesthetics".

I like the idea of being sustainable, growing your own food, and living naturally. I used to dream about starting a commune or homestead, but now I’m starting to think the idealization of it is petty bourgeois and part of the settler mindset.

It absolutely is the settler mindset. Homesteading is an economically stagnant practice at best. Homesteading served a few historical functions. First, it was an outlet for the downwardly mobile classes of Europe (at first, just England) to escape the monopolization and enclosures of land. Now, all these Europeans coming over for their homesteads had to come out, take land that was developed by other humans, destroy it, terraform, and fill it with European taxa (honey bees, apples, grass, mice, and salad weeds like dandelions), settle it, and defend it from recapture. Homesteading has been an occupation and colonization tactic of people and nature from the start, and Jefferson's ideas turned it into a literal war tactic on Indian Country. In macro, homesteading was a way to have loyal settlers occupy territory for the high bourgeoisie to later expropriate. This takes the form of the land being seized on debt defaults, land sold to extractive (oil, mining) interests, land sold to real estate interests (suburbanization). Often times to pay the debts back the planters need to exploit the earth at greater and greater intensities, eating away at the soil environment until the land itself dies as in the case of the Dust Bowl (the victims of which, got free land seized in California and Washington from interned Japanese farmers).

Homesteading itself isn't a real economic practice, it serves a specific function in colonization (of people and environment) and can't exist independent from the larger market society. There is no way for it to be revolutionary, as it is an atomized form of the feudal village farmer, and only succeeded with the importation of outside labor (servants slaves and migrants). It's a yearning for the life of a yeoman (who's existence was a sign of Capitalism developing), and the greenwashing surrounding it calls back to not nature, but the total colonization of nature by man, in America it means turning a piece of Turtle Island into a model of Europe (looking at you, Solarpunk and Cottage Core).

Overall I think homesteading is poor use of land. We need collaborative and socialized food production so we can limit the amount of land necessary to meet the needs of our people. Homesteading as an escape from Capitalism is utopian and it failed over and over for the same reasons.

He's a Communist. He's people first, so he is a good Communist. He ran a poverty alleviation program as a provincial secretary which got him the national position, which he has been overseeing poverty alleviation at the national level. The program he ran took wealth and Capital from his coastal province Fujian and built up the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region. The poverty alleviation in Xinjiang that occured in the last decade is a continuation of Xi's work. He was really the guy Xinjiang needed in a time of crisis with deep poverty where the citizens there have a larger barrier to migrant labor opportunities due to language barriers (many older Uighurs don't know Mandarin or Chinese script and only use Uighur script).

Xi's ideology in terms of which theories he upholds is honestly less relevant (even so, he upholds ML), because he is the lead organizer of an AES state where attending to the needs of the people is most important. For him and China's context this means improving peoples' lives without bringing too much chaos, but always identifying problems by their primary contradictions so that they are eventually solved.

I wear and have a lot of pink things. I have a few pairs of flower earrings. I like cute things. If I drink I prefer fruity cocktails.

We are overpaid to produce useless shit that is overvalued under monopoly capitalism because software as a service is hyper efficient rent seeking. Because we make rich people so much money there is industrial level propaganda to make our work out to be some revolutionary science that will solve all of humanities problems.

Welcome cousin

Blinken, Sullivan, and Nuland are 100% card carrying neocons. The Neocons who crafted the Iraq invasion are in the Democrat camp now.

Both the Realists and Neocons are anti-China. The Realists are the ones that took down the USSR and think the Neocons are blowing it.

Using pre colonized borders for the confederacy?

Borders are a colonial construct. Indigenous claimed territory was specific to the territory's economic function and specific resources. The confederations' granting of territorial use-rights may not necessarily take the shape of precolonial relations, but it's fine to look at it as a blurry model of the future.

When you say “white domination is the settler majority system itself”. Does that mean that the land having a vast majority of the population being settlers + one man one vote is the problem? You intend to only have a vangard party rule that made of people that support land back, decolonization, and unionization of all industry?

Yes in the same way as "one person one vote" is necessarily not existing at this moment in AES countries as well, or in any theoretical ML state which would intentionally subjugate its vestigial Bourgeoisie and proletarianize them. Though most land in the US is not settled by Americans but reserved by the federal government for future extraction. Much of this will be immediately expropriated by the existing indigenous nations. Most homesteaded land works the same, it has basically been reserved under private ownership until the haute Bourgeoisie expropriates it and sometimes de-classes the settlers depending on the price. Beverly hills hillbillies being the successful image of that process for the petty bourgeois settler. Every town in America has a class of real estate agents who's wealth came from selling their family's stolen land, ala Primitive Accumulation. In simple terms just because your Bourgeoisie stole property doesn't mean you're the one entitled to its expropriation, the rightful owner is in the people it was stolen from.

It's not done history, it's ongoing as I mentioned in other comments. Most recently the drilling project in Alaska. Pretending it's done is the same as pushing the "So-called Primitive Accumulation" stance, which Marx made fun of. Stolen land is still stolen resources and supremacy over these resources is the source of white supremacy and US Imperialism.

even in the context when political power is materially in the hands of previously colonized peoples.

Yes as in the lands claimed by the Americans will largely be returned to sovereign indigenous nations. The overall territories of the US, Canada, and Mexico will be governed by confederations of indigenous nations, the Black nations, and the settler descended peoples. Through the withering of the decolonial states will this occur:

If the material conditions supporting white domination stop supporting that domination, how does that domination still exist?

Those material conditions being sovereign access to stolen territory. Voluntarily or by force these will be reclaimed. Force will be necessary to defend the transfer though, even if largely voluntary. White domination isn't only in the form of inequality under the settler majority political system, white domination is the settler majority system itself. Settlers cannot have equal individual power to the colonized individuals, i.e. the American system. We will not be assimilated. We will take control over our systems.

Or is it that you want 0 political power for the descendants of colonizers?

Only in the way that the Bourgeoisie loses political power as a class, they earn it back by working for socialism. Americans will still control what they work and their settlements, and where interests interact with other nations it will be resolved through the decolonial states.

The Americans grew as an annexationist society, their power comes through their constant annexations. This ability will be de-fanged in the form of Land Back.