The contradiction of colonizers vs colonized is stronger than the contradiction of the ruling class vs working class in the imperial core. Colonialism led to the development of capitalism, and not the other way round. This is why socialism has only ever developed as a result of overthrowing colonialism in Global South countries. This is why socialism has never developed in imperial countries, because the working class of imperialist and colonizing nations is complicit in the exploitation of colonized peoples.
If colonialism created capitalism, then the way forward for communism is decolonization and anti-imperialism. We can keep pushing idealist lines that the only struggle is a class struggle but the history of socialist struggle has been the struggle of national liberation movements against colonization and imperialism. Socialism is a science that develops as material conditions develop and not a dogma that needs to be adhered to because Marx had said something.
Marx’s analysis was lacking in terms of imperialism and colonization, that is why Lenin’s analysis is required. Marxist-Leninist analysis was further developed to create the Juche Idea by Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il as a stronger ideology against imperialism.
The future depends on decolonization. Decolonization will create the conditions for communism. Communism won’t create the conditions for decolonization.
Why won’t the working class of Europe and its settler-colonial outposts of US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand lead the revolution for socialism? Because giving up imperialism would mean a drop in the standards of living of the working class in these countries. The wealth and standards of living in these nations are a result of centuries of stealing resources from colonized nations and employing slave labor to do the work.
“The truth is this: during the period of England’s industrial monopoly the English working-class have, to a certain extent, shared in the benefits of the monopoly. These benefits were very unequally parcelled out amongst them; the privileged minority pocketed most, but even the great mass had, at least, a temporary share now and then. And that is the reason why, since the dying-out of Owenism, there has been no Socialism in England. With the breakdown of that monopoly, the English working-class will lose that privileged position; it will find itself generally — the privileged and leading minority not excepted on a level with its fellow-workers abroad. And that is the reason why there will be Socialism again in England.” – Engels
Even today, 43% of the jobs in the US are made-up “management” jobs and 80% of such management jobs are held by white people. Google the labor organization of the world and you will find similar trends for all imperial nations whereas developing countries’ labor is primarily involved with agriculture and industry. Of actual production. 70% of the average 12,000 items found in a Western supermarket have a tropical ingredient export.
So giving up imperialism would mean that the labor aristocrats of these nations will actually have to do the work, instead of continuing to drain natural resources and labor from Global South countries.
Will just mass consciousness and love for colonized peoples transform the imperial working class into giving up their privilege? What next, expecting the bourgeoisie to give up their wealth because it’s only fair? Even the bourgeoisie need communism to survive the impending climate disaster. Logically everyone should choose communism. But the bourgeoisie won’t and neither will the labor aristocrats of imperialist nations. The revolution will be led by the most oppressed groups globally, and not the relatively oppressed.
The idea of the “poor white workers” of America, and even Western Europe (except the Irish), is a settler-colonial propagandistic lie. Like Che had said, the revolution will be led by Africans, Asians, and Latin Americans. ✊🏼