User:Keny/Sandbox

Indigenization theory, also known as Indigenism and TBA thought, refers to a family of anti-colonial, anti-imperialist and third worldist political ideologies influenced by or derived from the social theories and the collective works of the ANTICOLONIAL-INTERNATIONAL, especially that of its founding leader INSERT and the later contributions of INSERTOTHERPEOPLE during the later half of the 19th century. As Indigenism developed over time it eventually came to encompass various branches, schools of thought, ideological traditions, social and insurrectionist movements across Asuran empires and later the general Global South.

Indigenist theorists are centred around the decolonization and liberation of the developing world from the industrialized imperialist world powers referred to as the third and first worlds respectively, the decolonization and promotion of indigenous cultures, an end to Asuran socio-cultural dominance and ultimately the creation of an polycentric, multi-polar and solidaristic world order benefiting all nations and peoples.

Indigenists reject the presiding Asuran liberal-democratic world order, the imposition of liberal democracy as the international norm of statehood, globalized free-market capitalism and the demonizing effects that colonialism has had on the perception of native cultures and seek to create a more diverse cooperative social order of "indigenized" states and equivalent polities across the developing world. Indigenism is considered as a more well-defined defined and explicitly revolutionary form of Third World Internationalism.

Due to the diversity of ideological approaches that fall into the category of "Indigenist" due to its wide the applicability, high emphasis on cultural preservation and their generally support for more left-wing and socialistic economic systems, Indigenism and its daughter currents and schools of thought has largely been described as highly syncretic, combing aspects from across the traditional Asuran political compass.

History

TBA

Social and political theory

Historical development of World Order

[history of how things came to be and stuff]

World System Model

In his work Analyses of the Three Worlds Order, MAINTHEORIST categorize the countries of the world broadly into three groups; the First World, alternatively known as the "core region", refers to the industrialized developed world as typically defined by the nations of the Global North, particularly Asura and more conservatively the great powers of the region, and make up the the bulk of the imperialist powers. The Third World, also known as the "peripheries", refers to the territories, colonies and later post-colonial states which make up the developing world which are typically less advanced and less industrialized or even agrarian. The Second World countries share aspects of both the First and Third Worlds and are seen as either lesser imperialist powers (typically former settler colonies and regional proxies of the First World) or relatively developed Indigenized states.

MAINTHEORIST came to the conclusion that the current presiding world system came into being during the 19th century where members of the core competed with each other over the labour supply and untapped wealth of the peripheral societies, however later theorists trace the uneven technological development during the colonization of the New World and the exploitation its people and resources to fuel the growth and expansion of Asuran powers across the world.

Theory of Imperialism

Under Indigenist world system theory, the First World still maintains is dominance over the Second and Third Worlds through the global division of labour which which grants them productivity dominance (monopoly over advanced industrial technology and knowledge pool), trade dominance (diversified economy and monopoly over capital goods) and financial dominance (concentration of capital in the First World) which allows First World nations to access the vast resource wealth and the cheap labour pool of the Third World and reap enormous profits, while also ensuring a market for capital-intensive goods in Third World nations by limiting the development of the Third World through trade dependency and typically also overt means such as direct military intervention, proxies and coups. Additionally the First World also maintains cultural dominance over the Second and Third Worlds....

Productivity Dominance

Brain drain and loss of human capital to the Core.

Trade Dominance

Trade Dominance is used within Indigenist theories to describe how Core economies benefit off of superior terms of trade with the Periphery, often taking place in the form of value-transfer mechanisms like unequal exchange, which allows for the unaccounted-for transfer of wealth from the Core to the Periphery and the declining terms of trade of Peripheral economies. Through their international political and economic clout, Core economies force the breakdown of trade barriers on Peripheral economies to allow for the export of finished goods, which severely damage the nascent manufacturing sectors of Peripheral states which are unable to compete with their already well established and more productive Core counterparts. This forces Peripheral economies to specialize in the export of particular primary products and weakens domestic markets, which makes Peripheral economies far more prone to instability due to volatile prices.

Similarly, Core economies typically erect trade barriers to shield their domestic economies from Peripheral competition, particularly in sectors where underdeveloped states maintain a greater comparative advantage such as agriculture. This shielding of domestic markets often times benefit Core monopolies who are subsidized these practices, while increasing the production and export of goods in subsidized prices to the Periphery, driving out domestic competition, often manifesting in dumping practices. Similarly, firms from the Core that operate in the Periphery take advantage of the lower labour costs. Monopolies operating in the Periphery typically make ample use of transfer mispricing and intra-firm trade, with a subsidiary firm operating in the periphery exporting to produced goods at a lower price compared to the international average to another subsidiary firm in Core, which sells the product on domestic consumer markets are significantly higher prices to increase profits.

Financial Dominance

Autocentric accumulation (balance development via increasing wages as productivity increases to expand internal markets)...

Class analysis

The classes of the Third World are grouped up into eight categories.

• Priestly class: Religious elites and institutions. Under orthodox Indigenist theory the term originally meant to refer solely to missionary institutions established during the colonial period and still play a role in the stigmatization of traditional culture and ensuring the cultural domination of the third world. Later theorists further subcategorize the priestly class into the Tribal-priestly class representing traditional religious leaders and the imperialist, established Missionary-priestly class.
• Tribal-noble class: Secular and quasi-secular traditional leaders and the pre-colonial nobility.
• Landed class: The feudalistic or semi-feudal lords and may also be expanded to include commercial landowners.
• Industrialist class and national bourgeoisie: The less refined Third World equivalent of the capitalist elite, which is comparatively smaller than their First and Second World counterparts, but take up a noticeably higher portion of wealth.
• Peasantry: The under-educated, typically rural agrarian class which constitute a majority of the population of Peripheral societies.
• Middle class: The educated urban class which take up skilled jobs and make up the Intelligentsia and bureaucratic apparatus of the Third World. Along with the Industrialist class, they are the most exposed to the influence of the First World and thus suffer the most from the colonised mentality brought upon by the Core.
• Proletariat: The urban working class. Together with the middle class and bourgeois make up the Urban classes.
• Ostracized underclass: Which includes the destitute, criminals and those intentionally marginalized by the prior colonial system which was carried on in some degree into the modern day. Later expanded to also include the social outcasts and lower castes like those of the Dalits and Osus of Dharavadi and Western Majulan pre-colonial societies.

Revolutionary consciousness is typically checked by members of the bourgeoisie, landowners and fragments of the upper middle class who benefit from the global division of labour and collaborate with the First World in the exploitation of their respective nations to further their parochial interests over others. The priestly class and colonized Intelligentsia prevent the middle class and better-off fragments of the proletariat from siding with the peasantry through cultural dominance ― control over cultural, educational and political institutions — which allows them to dictate acceptable social norms and de-legitimize the pre-existing native cultures in favour of those of the First World. The primary purpose of this is to alienate the middle and working classes from their native identity and heritage, creating a disconnect between the urban classes and the peasantry, and normalizing the power relations that benefit the First World. The peasantry, underclass and rest of the working class is further put down through more overt means such as state coercion.

The status of the tribal-noble class typically varies, and has been the topic of much debate among different Indigenist schools. In some cases they are noted for siding with the peasantry typically under threat of annihilation by the state as they restructure themselves along lines of what is considered "acceptable" by the First World, but in other cases they typically also play a role in forwarding the interests of the colonial powers, as shown in colonies under indirect rule where they served as the primary means through which the First World exercised authority over and extract resources from the Peripheral societies at the time.

Great Revolution

The Great Revolution refers the eventual collapse of the world order following successive revolutions across the Third World after mounting dissatisfaction with the global system by the lower classes, eventually giving way to the creation of a national consciousness and eventually an overthrow of the post-colonial system. Indigenists believe that the revolutions throughout Third World eventually bring down the global political, economic and cultural hegemony of the First world. The aftermath of the Great Revolution would be the creation of a far more egalitarian and polycentric world order marked by the peaceful coexistence of various indigenous models of statehood, a diversity of socio-cultural and political traditions and a far less exploitative global division of labour.

The Great Revolution isn't seen as singular event, but rather a gradual process marked by several individual revolutions in various Third World countries. These revolutions will dismantle the post-colonial system that were in place and replace them with Indigenized forms of statehood that abide by the traditions of their respective Third World societies, and disassociate themselves with the the economic structures that suppress the development of the Third World, allowing for far more rapid industrialization and eventually self-sufficiency from First World influence.

Impossibility of a First World Revolution

When questioned about the !Marxist proposition of a revolution in the First World led by the proletariat, MAINTHEORIST refuted the very concept, stating that revolution in the First World is functionally impossible simply because the working class isn't a true working class as is the proletariat of the Third World, but rather a labour aristocracy which is pacified by the benefits given to them by exploitation of cheap labour in the Third World, allowing them to enjoy far greater living standards than their Third World counterparts. Because of this it is largely believed that even if a revolution in the First World was possible and led by the working class, the new regime would simply degenerate towards social imperialism as members of the First World Proletariat would be unwilling to sacrifice the benefits they receive under the current global system.

Total decolonization

Economic, Social, Political, Cultural

Schools of Thought

Omarist school

[guided democracy under a vanguard party that leads the revolution and oversees the rapid development of the indigenized state, more focused on modernizing, accused of being too asurocentric]

Obibuzorian school

[calls for an immediate transition to an indigenized system of statehood, more focused on cultural preservation and total decolonization, usually less authoritarian but depends on the system of governance, Umunna fits here]

Criticism

Anti-Asuranism

Status of non-Asuran imperialist powers

Tuchan isn't authoritarian because they have high smartphone penetration

Socialist and anarchist critiques

stuff about false consciousness and states being inherently illegitimate