this post was submitted on 29 Feb 2024
226 points (100.0% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15910 readers
2 users here now

It's the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to [email protected]

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Hold on a minute. Maybe they are right? The "white class" is an infinitely mutable class. Containing only those who are part of the imperial "in group", and excluding all others. For example, the Irish are considered white now but haven't always been. I think some Arab (brown people in white-speak) folks are considered white nowadays too.

So if the "white class" is abolished, so too is the moral superiority complex of the west. Then we can go back to the good ol' days or whatever.

I, for example, would be part of the translucent skin northerners in this Brave New World, instead of white in the current iteration of society.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

The problem is that fundamentally misunderstands what a class is. Whiteness is a socially constructed tool used to protect and uphold the bourgeois in the imperial core and economically dominate those considered non-white, but it isn't a class in and of itself because it does not imply anything about economic production and ownership thereof or labour and its surplus.

Elimination of the bourgeois would eliminate whiteness as a social construct because the bourgeois' economic domination would end and the need to delineate white from non-white would also end, so your instincts here are right, they just needed a little nuancing.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Race may be a tool of the bourgoisie, but, now created, can certainly survive the death of capitalism as its own sort of zombie. Defeating capitalism is necessary step in defeating racism, but it's not the only step.

Prejudice and privilege have existed before capitalism, and race is just another vector for the realization of these two things. As long as people recognize race, there will be those that use it to exalt or diminish a people.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Yes and no. As Marx argued, racism is a tool that divides the working class. Overcoming racism is essential in order to defeat capitalism. As Marx said of the English working class's views of the Irish:

Hence it is the task of the International everywhere to put the conflict between England and Ireland in the foreground, and everywhere to side openly with Ireland. It is the special task of the Central Council in London to make the English workers realise that for them the national emancipation of Ireland is not a question of abstract justice or humanitarian sentiment but the first condition of their own social emancipation.

To quote Robert Knox and Ashok Kumar's recent introduction to an issue of Historical Materialism:

Marx essentially bequeathed three points to later Marxists’ thinking about race. The first was that race and racism are deeply connected to capitalism’s spread internationally. The second was that racism is bound up with internal competition within the working class, and serves – both as a conscious project of the ruling class and directly via the labour movement – to undermine the basis for a revolutionary movement. The third was that Marx did not assign race or racism an independent causational force: it was clear that Marx did not think people were enslaved, exploited or dispossessed because of their racialisation, but rather owing to definite social conditions. The latter also points us to a significant limitation of Marx’s reflections: whilst Marx’s analysis did not ascribe any particular causational power to race, he nonetheless took for granted the existence of racial categories. As such, ‘race’ as a category was not subjected to the same historical and materialist analysis that both Marx and Engels would deploy in relation to other phenomena, and it was this task that later thinkers in the Marxist tradition sought to undertake.

But you are right that, of course, racism will also still exist after any revolution and will have to be at the forefront of the proletarian's mind.

For those interested, Knox and Kumar's article is an easy read and really helpful here: Robert Knox and Ashok Kumar. "Reexamining Race and Capitalism in the Marxist Tradition – Editorial Introduction", Historical Materialism 31 (2023): 25-48. The two special issues of Historical Materialism are here and here. Some articles are open access, but you can always email the author if you want the article.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

Right. Racism is bound to class conflict in the current political and economic paradigms, but can still be used to litigate other conflicts. People can and will try to cynically bend it to whatever purposes they see fit if not addressed directly as a problem

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I should have been more clear. This is sarcasm (I think you would call it that). Clearly the "white class" rhetoric is idiotic, but it is possible that someone might believe a reactionary view wearing the skin of leftism, which is more or less what I wrote.

It's easy to look at problematic parts of our world ("white" lead genocidal imperialism) and believing that changing one aspect without considering the system that gave rise to our world will solve our problems. Maybe I took an advanced liberal propaganda enhancement pill before writing this lol.

The only war I wish to fight is the class war.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

Totally makes sense comrade fidel-salute