Holla Forums here

I have a sincere question. Is anti-racism part of Marxian ideology? Does racism have to be opposed more than say gnosticism or other false consciousness? Is it more important to oppose racism than capitalism?

Other urls found in this thread:


Hint - nobody here is marxist. Only tankies.

Yes, though Marx would probably be considered racist by today's standards. The idea is that the international working class shares a common enemy in the international capitalist class and is exploited by them in the same way no matter their skin color. Race and nation are just nonsensical categories which distract people from their common material interests - hence "Proletarians of all nations, unite!"
Racism should be opposed to the same degree as any ideology which prevents people from realizing their shared interests and banding together against the common enemy of all people.
No, but racism prevents effective resistance to capitalism as it will have you fighting working class Mexicans and blacks or whatever instead of uniting with them against the ruling class.

Socialism requires solidarity between nations. If you they are hostile to each other, there is no reason for them to not undercut each other, create zones of no worker rights and private ownership of the economy to which all capitalists would flock to. Needless to say, this re-create capitalism.

The serious answer is why does racism matter so much to you? It makes you look identical to the tumblrites complaining about pronouns and men. Instead of pronouns it's "genes" and instead of men it's blacks.

Stalin hated niggers and you should too

You can still be a racist Marxist if you put aside those spooks for proletarian internationalism. That being said its not healthy to be spooked and I'd advice you rid yourself of them.

You can kill every black person and brown shade on the planet drowning them with jew blood and it still wouldn't solve the problems of capitalism. Because contrary to popular belief most of the people ass raping you are rich white fuckers who are carnivores in an ecosystem of capitalism.

I fucking love this.
"wie geht's Fritz" isn't even dutch, It's german or something along those lines.
"Hoe gaat het, Frits" would be proper dutch

On a scale of 1 to 10, 1 being indifference and 10 being an enemy of the proletariat which you rate your opposition to racism?

So for you anti-racism is pure practical not ideological?

Ideologically speaking gnosticism is a polar opposite of Marxism. Gnosticism is a rejection of the material world and a total rejection of the basis of Marxian philosophy.

I don't understand the big deal of being opposed to racism.

It gets in the way of the revolution and is primarily concerned with identity instead of anything meaningful like class.

It's 70% practical and 30% ideological. True socialism also have a nationalistic component, i.e. helping ethnically oppressed peoples (I mean legitimately oppressed, think Palestinians, Kurds, etc.) achieve autonomy and statehood. But contrary to rightwing nationalism, this nationalism is supposed to be non-competitive and regarded as a common struggle against the elites that govern us all, no matter the physical location.

The way I read it, it is supposed to be German, not Dutch, in the first place. Since, you know, he's trying to get the German worker(s) to work harder by telling him that the Dutch are doing oh so well.

But maybe it's just that the cartoonist didn't know better than to mix up German and Dutch.

I think Holla Forums should join forces with Holla Forums. We both want to destroy this Jewish capitalist system.

Find jewish communists and destroy the narrative that all jews are greedy.

No, and honestly only a liberal is going to tell you that it is.
People here are probably tired of seeing me post these but I think their interesting critiques of guilt-driven, liberal anti-racist politics.

A genuine Marxist-Leninist would never defend something like this. In first place, Pan-Africanism is a non-communist notion which, although useful in the bourgeois-democratic stage of African peoples’ struggle (for purposes of anti-imperialist union, etc.), it ultimately turns out to be a counter-revolutionary concept in posterior socialist and communist stages. This because Pan-Africanism is mostly based on cultural and racial concepts and not on class materialist ones. We, Stalinists-Hoxhaists, know that class concepts determine everything. This constitutes one of the basic pillars of the whole communist ideology. Therefore, it is extremely reactionary to say that to see things from a class viewpoint is to be narrow-minded. Another serious mistake committed by ZANU is its refusal to make differentiations between white settlers. Throughout their historical documents, ZANU’s leaders homogenously refer to “the oppressive regime of the white racist settlers” and declare:

“Our party unites everybody against their common enemy – the white settlers.” (Historical documents of ZANU, Political Program of ZANU, November 27, 1973, translated from version in German language)

As can be concluded, ZANU does not even make a firm distinction between the white landowners and capitalists (who go to Zimbabwe only to increase profits through workers’ exploitation), on one side, and the poor toilers of European descent who emigrated to Zimbabwe to improve their lives but who also ended up being exploited and who are in a situation equivalent to that of black workers, on the other side. ZANU should have encouraged union with these last ones, because both oppressed black and white Zimbabweans workers have the same class interests, purposes and enemies. Indeed, their union only increases their strength in the combat against racism, capitalism and imperialism.

I think that sums up the way I think about the issue pretty well, we shouldn't encourage any kind of racism, including the reverse racism of """"POCs"""" that reddit-tier socialists and idpolers tell us isn't true racism.

How about no

I can totally imagine working with people that don't share my ideas to a T to take down a common enemy. But most people on both sides. don't have that attitude. It doesn't help that Holla Forums thinks we are all SJWs or cultural marxists just because we are in favor of socialism.

Everything you said is logical and consistent. And I see where you're coming from with a perspective of class over everything. However, I could never accept that perspective as my own because I give priority to my race over everything.

You're hopeless, reals not feels my ass.

"Anti-semitism is the socialism of the stupid".

When literally every other racial group has in group preference and is aggressive to every other out group you can either play the same game or lose.

The muslim working class who live a mile from me target and rape girls from the white, indian and black working class. The black working class steal from the white, indian and muslim working class and the indians are generally good people.

If class was the most important divider then why do people in the same class act so hostile to each other? Nobody forces them to, they chose it.

No. I just think you're an idiot.
Arisu is cuter, by the way.

I'd argue this is the superior way of doing it. I mean, "Nederlands" turning into "Dutch" makes little sense. It's far more logical that "Deutsch" should become "Dutch" whilst "Nederlander" and "Nederlands" should be translated as "Netherlander" or "Netherlandish" or whatever. That way we can also stop implying that there's any real continuity between the "Germania" of the Romans and the German state of today.

I could say that race is real, there's biological, social and spiritual elements to race.

If there were more than a thousands gnostics on Earth I'd probably be very opposed to them, but luckily the Catholodox Christians already sorted that issue out centuries ago in their quest for more money and power.

I don't think that's right. Simply knowing that the game they're playing is stupid gives you information which they don't have. You don't have to play to win on their terms. Play the metagame instead. If you truly are intellectually superior, you should be able to use the situation to your advantage and make them play your game, even if they don't know it.

Jesus, it's true what they say about nazis and the occult

He said game. But I wouldn't think about it like a game. In games you have the luxury of picking your opponents. I think of it more like war. In war you don't always get to pick your opponents. Sometimes they pick you and you have no choice in the matter.

Race is a religion, another opiate of the people.

What you're referring to is tribalism. Of course it'll never go away, just like you'll always trust your family more than your neighbors. But you still can be nice to your neighbors and not a complete ass. Unfortunately, rightwingers don't understand this.

That's an interesting anecdote, but if we are to be stuck on the level of anecdotes I can give one that is diametrically opposed to yours in terms of conclusions. Anecdotes are next to useless in productive debate.
A socialist would say that the reason why the working class forms these opposing ethno-racial groupings is because of deprivation, which leads to antagonism - combined with identity politics this leads to a lack of class consciousness and thus division based on ethnic lines.

Tippity top kek.

Actual handling of logistics, risk, etc, is handled by other workers like actuaries. It is a profession in itself. Management is a logical conundrum.

You are retarded

There are people out there leeching off from both the worker and the manager

Read a book

War is a game, at least under the definition I'm using. Sure it's more complex than checkers, but it's still a contest where each side is trying to out-smart and out-maneuver the other so that they gain the upper hand.

If you want a more traditional war-based analogy, consider a battle where everyone is fighting over one city. If you don't give a fuck about that city, that gives you tactical options that the others don't have. It's stupid to let your enemy dictate your goals to you.

Not necessarily

No u fucko.

And that's where you're wrong fucko. Capitalism will still exist without "muh jews". Right now China has #1 population of millionaires.

Would you be fine if rich people of your race are cucking you up?

You can choose where you'll fight, where you'll withdraw, where you'll advance and where you'll hold. But you don't get to choose your enemies unless you're the aggressor.

well as long as you're working to institute socialism, if you want to just call capitalists Jews that's honestly fine by me.

No, this is retarded because in the end people like him will also go for some random Schlomo working as an ice-cream seller in Tel-Aviv while non-jewish capitalists won't be overthrown only because they don't have mutilated dicks

Yes, in so far as Marxism represents the liberation of all humanity and not some race of it. If there is some race which is still oppressed by racists (e.g poltards and their retarded, degenerate worthless ilk who scapegoat the members of some race) then the battle isn't over.

Yes, gnosticism has nothing to do with this. Racism and false consciousness are both impediments to liberation.

Not necessarily. There are different kinds of racism and of capitalism. Certainly the "racism" of today is quite different from the racism of Marx's time when it was thought the black race where born to be slaves, and runaways were actually mentally ill. Equally so, the capitalist system is not remotely like it was like in Marx's time and exploitation is completely different from the exploitation of factory labourers of old.


We're not really into the whole ethnic cleansing, genocide, Nazi masturbation fantasy thing, hard pass famalam.

I would fuck your mouth comrade

Stalin was literally Hitler's wet dream

He was a fascist scum that should have been expected executed

The only difference between wage-cucks in the whole ideologically bourgeoise spectrum in politics, including SJW and Nazis, is their fetish for a certain kind of "bull" cucking them of their surplus value.
In the end, they're in essence all the same wage cucks with only different fetishes for whom is cucking them.

For that to happen, Holla Forums should at least become a big fucking nazbol gang.

Yes, we should work with Holla Forums to give them their own country. Then we can nuke it.

You know, I've always thought the word 'reductionist' was a daft, meaningless put down. But maybe I'm wrong. To assume that Muhammad of Saudi Arabia's interests and my own align because we are both employees is simplistic to the extreme.


that's fucking great


What a nice example you chose, Saudi Arabia is literally named after the family that controls and exploits it as a personal fief. You couldn't find a more fitting example of what socialism/communism is trying to take down than that degenerate "nation".

no.Marx hated jews.Stalin used to send jews to the Nazis.

Anti-racism isn't marxist, but racism is anti-marxist. Racism divides the working class and avoids class consciousness.

If they want to live like that, let them. Don't force me to live with them in their fucking new dark age. If they don't want to live like that that is for them to choose and enact. What I reject is the idea that I should stand in solidarity with them simply because they're employees. Their status as employee is only one aspect of their lives. Other aspects are far more deeply entrenched and you cannot assume that these will just drop away cause socialism.

Yours and Mohammed's political aims should be defined by your shared class position.
Indeed, aspects such as religion, cultural or national identities are deeply entrenched - that is because they have been deliberately entrenched in such a way, to divide people to undermine mass movements or to drum up support for political aims - see nationalists or SJWs.
Socialism aims to eliminate these irrelevant identities from politics, and instead promote class consciousness. As a part of the "have-nots" you have shared political goals with other "have-nots" (such as not being exploited) locally and globally.

I don't deny that we have some common interest (though I will not compare my 'exploitation' to that of a Chinese Foxconn employee) but IMO we cannot ignore the differences and hope they just go away. Imagine a situation where total war was launched by the proletariat the world over against the capitalist class, and that we won. Within a week these forces would be turned on each other over how exactly the new world will operate.

Additionally, you talk of eliminate identities. Fine. Look at how some in the west react to this. The entire 'cultural marxism' thing is an angry response to a perceived attack on values and traditions. Now imagine the backlash in the arab world in you attempt to deconstruct their much more deep held ideology.

Marxism neither is pro or anti racism though Marx himself was racist. It was about focus on the workers and the means of production and once those were acquired then everything would fall into place and that includes no racism but it neither advocated for nor was against. It was about keeping your eye on the prize.

Cultural Marxism is not an legitimate backlash against anything, it is the continuation of a historical propaganda effort to distract people and rile up the causes that serve the ruling class. Only someone with incredibly poor information could take it for something genuine. You need to understand that idpol movements are propped up and exist for a very specific reason which is the distraction from a shared struggle.
People would realize how detrimental focusing on these differences are if they knew what their real struggle was.

That is why you don't do anything on the level of Holla Forums infographs and college liberals, you do with the genuine theory and arguments.

Wrong pdf, here is the that talks about this meme-tier "backlash"

There is no reason why you can't organise on a national/regional base. However, one must realise that even though the exploitation of the Foxconn employee and yourself is potentially on a different scale, the source of it is the same - international capitalism. And understanding that capitalism is indeed an international phenomenon that also requires an international answer means that your local labour or socialist organisation cannot simply close their eyes from the "big picture" and isolate themselves from the social movements of the world at large.
Do you believe they would form along the national, religious, cultural lines? I believe it would be far more likely to form on ideological differences - at the point of a post-global revolution point at least.
I'm definitely not denying that reactionaries are gonna react - the question is if reactionaries (esp. of the exploited classes) are behaving in a justified, rational way. For any socialist the answer is no.
Is the arab world's "ideological base" more deeply held? Can you expand on this?

Even if I accept the idea of international struggle I do not see why multi-kult and not just tolerance but acceptance of barbaric dark age BS must go hand in hand with it. As such I am precluded from 'leftism'.

I believe the old grudges would resurface instantly and that boundaries would be pretty similar to how they are today, perhaps more fractured. Cooperation can and does develop between groups, but this must be allowed to happen organically. It also takes time.

I don't even know what point I'm trying to make anymore, beyond that the absolute commitment to internationalism is making leftism inaccessible to at least half the population in the west. And without precedent, you cannot claim your view to be objectively the correct one.

That doesn't make sense to me as a socialist. Don't confuse liberals with the socialist left - even if the practical reality in most centre-left political parties is that they are social liberals with some social programmes sprinkled on support of capitalism. Socialism has no ideological base or reason to accept barbaric cultural practices. If you are confusing acceptance of coexistence of different races or not judging people based on their other coincidental attributes with, say, acceptance of honour killings or other such barbaric acts, you are quite deep in the Holla Forums quagmire.
If you are claiming that international cooperation between labour movements or the proletariat leads to or necessitates acceptance of such practices, you'd do well to note that socialists have always been at the forefront of eliminating such absurd irrational cultural practices.

What does organic mean in this context? What kind of cooperation is inorganic?

And yet the western world has been committed to internationalism, to various degrees, for over a hundred years in the form of global capitalism. Neoliberalism from the 70s on, much like classical liberalism is essentially universalist.

Quite, but what precedent we have of nationalism (or particularism in general) is grim. Nationalism is ultimately not suitable for a general international system, especially in the post-atomic era where large-scale conflict is an existential question for not only the warring nations but all of humanity.

Because international struggle doesn't equal bunch of brown men raping white wymn.

Most of the products used in the first world are produced by 3rd world proletariats. Few developed countries going through revolution will not end capitalism. Capitalism is global. It cannot be replaced by effort from just few nations.


Without capitalism racism becomes virtually meaningless.