How can we stop going after rich people and focus on reducing the living standards of working whites instead?

You cannot fix racism without inherently focusing on economics: read King.

what bullshit are you spitting. Without whites black starve.

Off you go Zig Forumslack.

Absolutely. No-one denied that. I don't know who the guy in the pic is or what he thinks but sure. Capitalism is inherently racist, as any system that is built on exploitation is.

How else do you interpret "compicity and the material benefits" as if not as unearned privilege to be removed?

Because he thinks billionaires and poor white people should have the same priority when they pick their targets of powerful people to blame?

There are no benefits to being white, if you're white and poor no one cares about you and there's no mechanisms to help you out of your position. On average, white people are better off than black and hispanic people because white people have been properly integrated into the middle and upper layers of a hierarchical economy for longer, and we live in a system where your opportunities in life are often dictated by inheritance, social capital, upbringing, etc. It's just the system running as it is with the historical converges it first encountered. If we're to essentialize it as "whiteness" being central, then how do we explain east asians, indians and israelis making more money on average than white people in the US? Race essentialism and the implication that the system runs on it is a terrible tool for interpreting reality that people enjoy using it because pointing fingers at those who can be harmed (like 95% of white people) feels good. If you're a Marxist-Leninist, and therefore a materialist, and you subscribe to this, you are one confused individual.

Good things they're there to feed you then, otherwise we wouldn't have your brilliant takes

Guys, I think it's trying to communicate.

Ohh you mean Zimbabwe is such a cultural paradise without whites ruling it. Those blacks are just facing oppression when they owned everything had full choices and the country turned to shit without whites.

Zimbabwe is such a wonderful country right?

I mean it was fucking great when white minority rule existed too, that's why it collapsed.

Tell me if blacks are such a benefit to our society. Why aren't they a positive tax contribution?
Its just cause muh racism right?

Zimbabwe collapsed into shit when the communists took over.

South Rhodesia was already shit.
Also lamo, ZANU-PF wasn't "anything-ist" apart from Mugabist. Even liberal wrags like The Economist admit to that.

Southern rhodesia was not shit. They had food education and healthcare. But muh communism happens and then it turned to shit. Its just a conincidence. ITs never communists fault It's never the ideology thats wrong its everyone else. Its always other factors. The ideology CAN NEVER BE WRONG.

Its just a coincidence so many white farmers were murdered and then others fled the country and then later leader begged white farmers to come back and feed them. That was just some rhetoric and some obviously coerced plea as they faced further starvation the more whites fled the country. But it was just white oppression right? The whites farming were oppressing those blacks with food abundance Right?

It is. Of course, by "removed" I don't mean whites should have the reverse done to them, that's still racism. The point is to eradicate race. Race is not a genetic thing, but at the same time people who say race doesn't exist are not looking at things materially. Race is tied to the material conditions an is a system that divides the spoils of exploitation among one group and furthers exploitation among another group. Clearly that system should be gone, and you're right, to get rid of it, capitalism needs to go.

I don't think he was saying that, I think he saying putting all the blame on racism on billionaires can be used as a deflection away from working class racism, which certainly exists. Just look at Trump's voter base. Again we see how racism is used for exploitation, Trump uses race to hand wave away all the problems caused by capitalism and pin them on migrants. Its not the capitalist class outsourcing your jobs, its those damn mexicans taking them all! Blame them, not us!

There certainly are. Whites don't have to put up with systemic abuse because of their race, moving up a bit to the lower middle class, whites don't have to face constant racial abuse online to the point its difficult to even exist on the internet if you are not white because people always reduce whatever you're saying down to race.

Because they're skilled workers. They're the Chinese and Indian upper class. Israelis don't face oppression, jews do but Israelis are the direct recipients of the spoils of colonialism and racism. Still, most of the capitalist class, not money earners but people who actually own capital, in the USA are white.

I'm not being race essentialist. I'm not saying these race categories are inherent biologically or even a biological thing, they're a part of the system.

Well they're not enslaved anymore by white farmers, so that's an improvement.

We believe in science except in genetics. Because The idea that humans have varying genetic intelligence is obviously wrong. Its just a lie. Afterall Everyone IS EXACTLY THE SAME AND DON'T YOU DARE SAY OTHERWISE.

What a weak excuse and argument. Working class racism. what bullshit. There are benefits to being white. they are the race that made the modern world and made everything you are using.

All of the technology you use was developed by whites. Then to tell them they have to be forced to give everything away to other races cause muh feelings. What a joke.

They had chronic shortage and problems in all three (partially due to sanctions because they were a rogue state), and also shortage of fuel and skilled military personnel. Imagine worshipping an African failed state that ended with economic collapse and military defeat because they were too retarded to not put the majority of the country's fuel in a single, barely guarded depot.

As for Mugabe's communism, he was one of the first African 'communists' to drop the ideology and seek American aid. The history of decolonization is full of leaders opportunistically switching sides and ideologies on the basis of who gives the most aid. Of course, since you don't actually have a clue about the history of the era, you'd ignore this.

Attached: FIDEL-CASTRO.jpg (630x350, 59.16K)

LMFAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
At this point I'm unironically believing this is a psyop.

As they starve die and face diseases a lack of education A lack of any kind of support infrastructure. Golly that freedom is sure swell Its so swell they have to beg for aid FROM WHITE COUNTRIES.

Where did I deny genetics? I said race isn't anything to do with genetics, because it isn't and its fucking obvious it isn't since race was a grounded concept long before DNA and Mendelian inheritance was even fucking discovered. Races change depending on how they can be used for exploitation. In the thirties, Nazis said Russians were inferior barbaric Asiatic hoards that needed to be exterminated. Now they say Russians are the based last stand of the white man. How the fuck do you explain that? Did Russians undergo some super-evolution in the last 70 years?

*They provided education and healthcare to 10% tops of the population.
That really isn't fucking difficult tbh lad.
Also the fuck you chatting a load of the white settlers started leaving well before the bush war even started: mostly because then came the end of british colonial rule. Also as said the country was a shitshow from UDI onwards, the white Rhodesian minority was bad at rulling and only kept proper when it had support from Britain. But yeah I bet a society where economic resources are distributed based on melanin rather than ACTUAL FUCKING COMPETENCE WITHIN CAPITALISM is obviously destined for greatness. Oh and that's not to mention the corruption inherently rooted in a political system: look at the nature of Rhodesian party politics, and you will see a state that formed its own destruction.
At the end of the day, White Minority rule was stupid: you are beating a dog then crying fowl when it bites your hand.

That lack of support infrastructure comes from the nature of colonial rule tho…

He isn't. You're giving an opinion which has no worth or real substance backing on the basis that you, stupidly, vaguely agree with it. The rest of this absolute cretins posts include "Why gun ownership is actually racist, please disarm the working class" and "Bernie Sanders is a FAR LEFT WHITE RACIST, SOCIALISM = SLAVERY". You are agreeing with a straight up bourgeois propagandist on the basis of identity politics.
The absolute state of the Twitter left. Imagine basing your opinions on being trolled.

Well whatever, but you didn't post that here, don't just post a random tweet and expect me to know this dude's life story. And yeah, Bernie Sanders is a racist, not a "left wing racist", but he is a racist who supports imperialism and colonialism.

I hate this fucking word, its a right wing buzzword that doesn't mean anything. Yes I'm anti-racist, because I'm a left wing marxist not a fucking liberal who ignores material conditions and pretends everything is hunky dory.

What does this even mean? Yes it is relevant to socialism if people are being constantly racially abused online because its racism. You know, racism, that thing left wingers and marxists oppose? Or I suppose Lenin was just being an idpol social justice warrior when he condemned antisemitism?

am*Rica must be nuked. There is no other way

That is your take. The take of several people who subscribe to privilege politics is never to abolish race or capitalism or even make any drastic change in society at all, but just to pass enough laws and make enough pressure to force equality in these little points of "privilege", always to the expense of the "privileged" group. For example, when people say some industries are dominated by white people or men, they rarely trace it back to capitalism and take radical conclusions, they usually just want their presence there to be forced and institutionalized. So when we hear about the "privilege of whiteness" among poor and middle-class people, we know what to expect based on *their* patterns of behavior, not yours. And *they* are the dominant ones when it comes to social justice politics and how to "solve" its problems. You're free to have your opinions, but don't project them on the masses of social-justice people and don't accuse us of strawman when we judge them based on their past antics.

Race is tied to material conditions, but in the same sense as geography or social capital, which can also both help determine economic prosperity if looked at statistically. Capitalism has virtually no use to any of those concepts and they're not vital to it, they're just part of the historical junction at modern capitalism's arrival, and capitalism, being a system of unequal development by its definition, inherits and perpetuates it. They're not vital part to it which is why race and "white supremacy" are bad tools to grasp existing inequalities theoretically.

He didn't even mention or talk about racism as a pattern of behavior, he's addressing racism as a system of material privilege and whiteness as part of it. He's not talking about working class view on races but working class as alleged material, financial, economic beneficiaries of a system of white superiority that doesn't exist. Once again: white people, on average, are beneficiaries of past historical segregation that is merely perpetuated by the system because it's difficult to change overnight. The system and its inefficiencies should be to blame, not an imaginary existing system of racial hierarchy wanting things to stay this way.

What exactly is the systemic abuse we're talking about? Police? Police brutality also exists in poor white communities, so again race is not the factor. Poverty? Same thing. "But blacks are more likely to be poor" but then once again we're talking about the historicity of racial segregation and the perpetuation of its economic legacy by a system that has no mechanisms of its own to erase it. Not a current plan or design. The bit about online abuse I don't even know how to address, it honestly feels like you're living in a parallel universe.

Yes, they're skilled workers. But if white supremacy was a thing, that wouldn't count. Whites would be the richest on average regardless of other ethnicities skills and effort. So here you're making my point: there's no racial supremacy built into the system, there's only capitalism wanting profits and efficiency (or whatever its managers interpret efficiency to be) and encountering the presence of skills unevenly distributed in society. If creating skilled or hard workers of other ethnicities can challenge a perceived system of racial inequality, than race is not its decisive factor.

It's not psyop, at least not for the most part. It's bullshit theory being taught in academia as Marxism is gradually marginalized and bullshit opinions being tolerated in left-wing circles.

...

Bernie doesn't believe in white supremacy or racial segregation, so he can't be a racist. Period. Perpetually extending the meaning of Racism to encompass other things is just a post-modern way to keep this buzzword alive as an insult.

Leftists use "identity politics" all the time. It means giving identity (race, sex, gender, nationality, religion) a central place in your analysis of the world. You're welcome for the definition.

What "material conditions" are you talking about? Data can point to discrepancies in quality of life and financial prosperity in virtually all spheres of life, and make inequality seem pre-determined based on all sorts of factors, from the place you're born to your height. Are we supposed to rally behind all of those inequalities as causes of their own?
We fight racism as a pattern of behavior and and as an institutionalized, systematic pattern of exclusion sanctioned by state laws. Anything else is a waste of time, because you're essentially talking about economics as the *primary* factor.

Lenin opposed anti-semitism where he saw it organized or legislated. Fighting tangible exclusion like that is one thing, giving it a central place in your worldview is another. While fighting anti-semitism he also told the Jewish Bund, who wanted autonomy within the RSDLP and the right to to frame its own policy in matters affecting jews, to fuck off. It's almost as if he couldn't tolerate a display of, wait for it, identity politics.

And just a question: Lenin fought anti-semitism in Russia, where the average Jew was a lot more well-educated than the average christian, had much higher incomes, and often owned the means of production. What's the "material conditions" of prejudice here? Where do economics and identity intersect, making it real as you say? Based on everything you said in this thread, we should be against the jews and for the christian masses for having unequal amounts of economic privilege.

And so we should criticize them for it, and do. But the problem with these isn't that they're talking about racism, its that they're detaching from capitalism. I agree, I'm just saying you shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater. The problem with groups like BLM or "female CEOs" is that don't challenge capitalism or the root cause of racism. Capitalist are happy to have a female CEO if she's happy to carry on exploiting women.

But the system and the hierarchy are one and the same. The system inherently creates racism to justify exploitation. Racism isn't just as simple calling people derogatory names, its a function of the system that even so-called "left wingers" fall into because racism is so natural in capitalism they don't even think about it. For example, how many of these intersectional types correctly identify racism within America, but believe blatantly racist lies such as that the North Korean people are all brainwashed insects that can't think for themselves or Kim Jong Un will personally rip their heads off? Or how many are accusing Russians of being these nefarious villains who want to rule the world? This is also racism, but its racism designed to away any critical thinking abilities and lump entire countries of people the West doesn't like into caricatures so they can justify imperialism. And that's not going to go way, because its capitalism itself that demands this be done.

That's not the point, we all know police brutality (I mean, the entire prison system by proxy is police brutality) exists in poor white areas, but blacks are targeted because they're black. There is a deep seeded hatred of blacks in the US consciousness, so police follow them around, harass them and suspect them more deeply. And then blacks are used as slave labour in prisons. The CIA spread the crack epidemic in black neighborhoods, we know that.

Are you? Black people can't even online game because if the players know they're black they'll abuse them. 45% of the online abuse toward MPs went to Dianne Abbott, no doubt because she's a black women. That's a problem in the information age (its a problem anyway, racism should never be tolerated) because people fucking need to be online to function.

No it wouldn't. This doesn't make any sense, no-one is saying whites are all rich. They're saying whites benefit from racism and exploitation in the USA.

But the system is capitalism, so yeah there is racism baked into it.

It is a buzzword. "Identity politics" is just a bullshit term people lob at each other as a red herring, all politics involves some form of identity.

This is liberalism incarnated. Saying "oh well bernie sanders hasn't said gas the darkies therefore he isn't racist" is anti-materialist. You're not looking at how capitalism perpetuates racism.

But this just makes no sense. Of course people's identity is central to the their analysis. Really its just saying basically "shut up, stop talking about race/sex/gender, I don't like it!" Of course, ALL politics is identity politics, Donald Trump is a capitalist billionaire and it informs all his policies. But people don't call that identity politics. Right wingers want "traditional values" (women get back in the fucking kitchen and make sure your life revolves around men), people don't call that identity politics. Identity politics only seems identified as that when its oppressed peoples who are speaking up about injustice they face.

Yes, we should rail against all inequality. That's one of the points of socialism and inequality is one of the contradictions of capitalism.

Legalism is not reliable in a bourgeois state. Capitalism needs racism period, it doesn't matter what legislation you put in.

Well it is.

But are they? These just seem like weasel words so that if a black person speaks up about racism they can say "stop giving race a central place in your worldview!" and shut them up instead of engaging with the ideas. I mean this guy was also talking about gun control, which I don't like, but that's not about race. Its true intersectionality is a rubbish philosophy, but the problem isn't that they're talking about racism, its that they're not analyzing it from a marxist, materialist standpoint.

That's not really true. But jews were being constantly raided in pogroms where people would round up a group, go into their villages, lynch them and then steal all their shit. If that's not the economic base perpetuating racism, I don't know what is.

Which is uh, what we're trying to do in this thread.

No, they're not. If that was the case, then the system wouldn't be able to survive changes in the hierarchy. In the US, white people can become a minority, have their average income go below the national average and lose positions of power and status - all of which are happening - and the system would stay alive and well. Because racial hierarchies are part of the historical junction that capitalism encounters and to a degree exploits, not part of it.

Wow, thank you for explaining this distinction that I spent the entire last post addressing. I hadn't even thought about that.

I literally addressed this in the sentence right next the one you greentexted. Any unfair treatment blacks get is not due to blackness, it's an ideological, outward reflection of poverty. All over the globe police is brutal with those who display the visual signs of poverty, even if their race is the dominant one. They're the ones who don't have the tools to fight back. And in the US, race being among those signs is consequence, not cause, and shouldn't be addressed as an isolated factor.

Good lord, I don't even know where opinions like this come from. It's like you used nothing but tumblr until yesterday. I can guarantee you that black people are out there using the internet in safety, don't worry.

They're saying there is a system of WHITE SUPREMACY that is capable of distributing MATERIAL BENEFITS. If white people are not the economically dominant group by several metrics than this is just evidence that this white supremacy doesn't exist.

only class matters rn

Woke liberals are the worst

Attached: b57.png (603x435, 58.81K)

Zig Forums feels sorry for itself about how PoCs hate the hwyte man and deny the existence of state sanctioned white supremacy and any culpability hwyte people might have in its continued existence episode 200,876.

You're bad at naming series user.

No you weren't, you were strawmanning. There's nothing in his post that's inherently wrong or anti-marxist. Sure, now someone talked more of his tweets where he isn't a marxist, but that's why screen shotting some randomers tweet devoid of context and creating a conversation around it is stupid.

This is metaphysics and just racist lies. Race IS part of the system. Its not that whites are in a hierarchy above everyone else like the king of the castle, its that whiteness is DEFINED as those who materially benefit for the purpose of capitalism. White people are not becoming a minority because whiteness isn't genetic. They'll just cast the net of what whiteness is further, for example, including european Latin Americans into whiteness. Whites are falling behind the national average, but so is everyone else because billionaires are becoming more common raising that average.

How can you even say that when the US police force is notoriously racist and its been shown numerous times? Even liberals accept this. And its not just blacks, look at how native americans are treated. The USA is rightfully their land, but they're forced onto reserves and they can't even have that land in peace because the US appropriates it without compensation to build oil pipelines.

This just a childish liberal mentality. "Ohhh, someone's talking about racism on the internet, go back to tumblr!" Its the sort of nonsense you expect on Zig Forums. Who's doing identity politics now?

This is just liberalism. And whites are the economically dominant group among the rich. They make up a substantial chunk of capitalists.

Everyone here agrees capitalism perpetuates racism, it just doesn't cause it by design in its present manifestation, or requires it to exist. And Sanders isn't a capitalist anyway.

People's identity is only central to their analysis if they haven't been given the right tools for analysis in the first place. I'm latino and have to attempt to understand capitalism as outside the prism of my experience because otherwise I can't have a lucid understanding of capitalism as existing regardless of present inequalities, sentiments or problems. I can't develop a *historical* and *dialectical* view of capitalism, because I took my sensibilities as the starting point. My take on Imperialism my country suffered will be insufficient, because instead of being able to see its economic and political patterns isolated from any particular historical manifestations, I'll see prejudice against latinos.

1. Wrong and 2. He has a lot of poor people who lived a completely different life agreeing with him, so identity is proven secondary even in the examples you can give.

Lmao we all call right-wing traditionalist and white victimist shit identity politics. Lurk more.

We should rail against inequality that exists from city to city, physical trait to physical trait? Lmao good luck bro.

And no, Socialists don't fight all inequality, read Marx:
"The elimination of all social and political inequality,” rather than “the abolition of all class distinctions,” is similarly a most dubious expression. As between one country, one province and even one place and another, living conditions will always evince a certain inequality which may be reduced to a minimum but never wholly eliminated. The living conditions of Alpine dwellers will always be different from those of the plainsmen. The concept of a socialist society as a realm of equality is a one-sided French concept deriving from the old “liberty, equality, fraternity,” a concept which was justified in that, in its own time and place, it signified a phase of development, but which, like all the one-sided ideas of earlier socialist schools, ought now to be superseded, since they produce nothing but mental confusion, and more accurate ways of presenting the matter have been discovered."

You're literally spouting outdated bourgeois idealism.

The entire racist superstructure you're fighting against has its origin in legality, read a book. And no, capitalism doesn't need racism any more than it needs heightism or any more than it needs the South to be poorer than the North. Again, just historical junction.

Here's the guy who was against strawmans, everyone.

Yes it is. All over Europe actually.

That's uh, prejudice and state-sponsored segregation. It's literally the thing we've been talking about as an actual system of oppression, unlike postmodern interpretations of inequality. The "economic base" here indicates Jewish privilege according to the very criteria you used ITT. Your theory is just really, really bad and confused.

Attached: laff3.png (376x302, 199K)

if black people literally starve without white people then how have they survived all this time in the fucking desert for hundreds of thousands of years? I'm just wondering how this all fits into your narrative.

No, I wasn't. I already explained it to you and you completely avoided the question because you know this point is unsustainable, so stop repeating it like a child.

Yes there is, he's acting like there is an ideological system of white supremacy that can supersede the economic basis, which is anti-materialist and statistically wrong.

Today I learned economic metrics are metaphysics.

I already explained the historicity of that to you and I won't explain again.

"Even" liberals accept this? Liberals promote this idea because liberal identity politics is their thing, and you're trying to give that a pseudo-Marxist spin. And my point imply the cops don't target black people, once again you're pretending I said something that I didn't because attacking a strawman is the only thing you got.

Lands belongs to a specific race of people, nice materialist take.

And if they were given enough political power to a put a stop to this, how exactly would capitalism suffer?

And before you attempt another strawman, this isn't me saying we shouldn't do anything that doesn't kill or hurt capitalism, I already made a point about legal and political exploitation and how it deserves a counter-reaction. But capitalism doesn't need indigenous people in this arrangement, just like it doesn't need black people down and white people up. So my point about all of those being ideological and superstructural stands. That's all I'm trying to say, and you're refusing to acknowledge it because you want to tell yourself that every time you yell "down with white supremacy!" you're making tangible damage in the system and being a Marxist, which you're not.

Please, you don't even know what liberalism is.

A state sanctioned white supremacy in a state where non-white people are the biggest recipients of assistance programs, now I've seen everything.

People are not to blame for historical circumstance. Only an idiot would attack a black person in America for the high quality of life it acquired as the beneficiaries of american imperialism in Africa, even though a point based on Identity Politics for that could easily be made. That's not how you do anti-capitalism, that's how you conflate anti-capitalism with questions of secondary importance.

It does require it to exist. Look at muslims are treated, like fucking insane ticking time bombs ready to go off at any time. Tommy Robinson, the notorious islamophobe, is deeply connected with Mossad. Why? To justify imperialism in the middle east and make it out that the USA and Israel needs to "civilization" the savages. I mean this isn't fucking controversial, Ayn Rand literally said arab genocide was OK because Israel was "bringing peace and democracy" to the middle east. Its just manifest destiny all over again.

You can't seriously believe that.

It can be both. This is why I think the term identity politics is stupid, because of course identity is going to come into it. Ben Shapiro was whining the other day about people hating Howard Schultz because he's a billionaire being identity politics, and in a roundabout way, it is. But who gives a fuck, fuck Howard Schultz and billionaires.

Yeah but why do they support him? Because he out-flanked Hilary on the outsourcing of jobs issue and promised to bring them back. Now bringing back jobs isn't racist, as a socialist I would fucking end all those companies that outsource and create full employment, but how Trump does it is what proves how capitalism needs racism to navigate its contradictions. Trump can't end or punish those outsourcing companies because he's a capitalist, so how does get around it? He uses working class white supremacy and racism to blame the mexicans for the vanishing of their jobs instead of the real culprits, the companies that export them to the third world. This only possible because of racism, its just utter bullshit and anyone with eyes knows mexicans aren't stealing jobs. He needs racism to take their critical thinking abilities away.

Hardly.

Yes.

-Marx, The Communist Manifesto.

Well yeah, but that's inherent to the landscape. When I say inequality I don't everyone should be the same, I mean getting rid of all exploitation and oppression.

Erm no it doesn't. People have been racist and exploitative regardless of the law. I mean the Iraq war was illegal for a start.

Yes it does, or racism would be disappearing. Capitalism needs racism for a start to justify imperialism.

No it isn't, the idea that whites are being taken over in Europe is just some Zig Forums bullshit. White people aren't disappearing from Europe anytime soon.

The State is just a bourgeois apparatus, it itself can't create racism, it legislates racism because the bourgeoisie make it legislate racism. And I don't understand how people singling out minorities to steal all their fucking shit isn't the economic base creating racism.

I've already addressed most of those points and I'm not going to repeat myself

Enjoy wasting your life yelling at clouds

Honest to God curious of about which point you're even trying to address with this quote.

Black people being economically segregated in the US started with laws ensuring that. Even black slavery had legal precursors. That's what I was talking about.

Lmao white being taken over? What? The point I was addressing is you saying that Jews weren't economically privileged in Russia:

>That's not really true. But jews were being constantly raided in pogroms where people would round up a group, go into their villages, lynch them and then steal all their shit. If that's not the economic base perpetuating racism, I don't know what is.
You're too intellectually limited to follow a simple argument, your theory is confused and you have nothing but liberal talking points mixed with ML keywords. I'll stop trying to teach you something because it's obviously a waste of time and I'm tired of following your ADHD mind from one unrelated point to the other, but my overall advice is: kys faggot

You were strawmanning. Nowhere in that tweet did he say we should reduce the living standards of white workers.

No he isn't. Where? Because he said white workers can be racist as well? How's that anti-materialist? I mean now we know he isn't materialist, but that tweet alone isn't anti-materialist. We know racism stems from the economic base.

They are when you use them like you did. Just because whites have a falling income doesn't mean racism is over.

Jesus this is like pulling teeth. Please stop using that fucking word, its doesn't mean anything useful. Its a hand wave. So you're saying that racism in the police force against blacks doesn't exist, and to say it does is liberal identity politics or anti-marxist? That makes no sense.

It does when you go somewhere, genocide that people to wrench it off them and take all their resources. The idea of people's isn't anti-materialist, and its separate from race.

If they were given it by the bourgeois state it wouldn't make a difference, since what the oil companies are doing is already illegal, they just don't give a fuck. Now if the Native Americans were to pick up weapons, create a vanguard and fight back violently against the oil companies, like those in south america have done, that would be a serious challenge to the capitalist system.

I didn't say it "needed" them in that specific arrangement, I said it needed racism. Capitalism by its very nature however WILL go for them, because capitalism is a profit driven system. Whoever gets the most profit wins, and if they have to navigate laws and genocide people to get it, they will. And they have. And they are right now. Bolsonaro is trying to take indigenous people's land off them to give it corporations. Does capitalism "need" that land to survive? No. But it needs racism to justify taking it.

smh you can't help someone this stupid

He's saying that massive cities and rookeries should be broken up and the population more evenly distributed.

No it didn't. Columbus started enslaving people before he was given any authority to do so. Believe that the law creates racism is saying that the state has primacy rather than the economic base and bourgeoisie, which is bullshit. The state in capitalism is a tool of class conflict against the workers, its not some independent entity or class. The legislation to enslave blacks was put in place because the bourgeoisie wanted to enslave them and set out the terms of how their "property" (black people) would be managed, not because some bureaucrats wanted to do it and the capitalists had nothing to do with it.

They weren't economically privileged. The Tsar fucking hated them and restricted where they could live and organized pogroms against them. That's why so many emigrated or were attracted to the revolutionary movement.

I mean, you keep saying this, you never demonstrate how its wrong. I mean you think the fucking law and state are an entity independent of class that can will racism into existence and that Bernie Sanders is a socialist, so don't accuse me of being a liberal.

Look at this, Mr. Maturity.

...

Uhh, what? Care to extrapolate that?

Well you're attacking something about his class identity. But like I said, who cares. They deserve it.