Can we purge this book already?

Can we purge this book already?

The cancer has metastasized.

Is this the new "White Pri-vilege" for today's college students?

I've seen references to this from idpol faggot, but I didn't truly comprehend the cancer till I saw that cover

It's not that bad tbh. I mean, the central argument, that there is not white working class, is retarded as fuck. But it is an interesting history of how racism has been a constant obstacle in creating class consciousness and organizing workers in the United States. But yeah, the whole "reactionary white workers" mostly just a meme that gets pushed by the Democratic Party, idpolers, gets pushed by Liberals who don't know any proletarians in real life, not much basis in reality from what I've seen, and far from a concrete explanation as to why we've never had a revolution in the West.

Seriously though it is amazing how the neoliberal left has turned "class politics" into "white supremacy" among left liberals in America.

*extremely works for the FBI voice*
Read Settlers

Making issues of class and political economy into matters of "culture" makes manipulating public discourse a breeze, you literally never even have to touch to topic of alternative modes of production of the abolition of our current system, it's completely off the table, while Liberals and reactionaries get to squabble endlessly over what flavor of Capitalism they want.

I want to strangle libs.

Even if you accept that thesis, what next? Liberal identity politics is pessimistic as fuck. You can't actually change anything because racism which means the choice either narrows down to diverse immiseration under neoliberalism,ie. noble but doomed, or full fascism. All that's left for us is performative self flagellation. and who wants that, honestly?

I had to sit through a presentation from BNY Melon the other day about women's issues, she spent 10 minutes talking about the plight of women who don't have bank accounts, something like 1 billion+. Versus attaching that to general poverty like a normal person would, they were upset that these women couldn't "manage their wealth and finances" and be independent!

I wanted to die

Oh yes, as we all know, history began with the Mayflower.

And "proletariat" was a Roman term for citizens with little to no property. All it really means is "unpropertied" (or if you want to be technical, it meant "one who produces children", so-called because unpropertied citizens were counted by their children instead of their property). There's really no oppression quota you have to fill to be proletarian, you just have to be unpropertied.

I don't accept his thesis for the exact reasons you've pointed out here in this post. The idea that white workers are hopelessly reactionary to the point where they can't even be organized isn't just defeatist, it isn't even consistent with reality. That being said, it's not like racism isn't real, and the labor and communist movements of the early 20th Century in the US were pretty reactionary when it came to their stances on non-white communities, but all of those things can be dealt with without having to resort to idpol and standpoint epistemology insanity. At the end of the day Marxism is all about material conditions and material realities, by focusing on this we actually have a far better chance of actually solving the problems of racism and sexism then any idpoler that thinks society can be completely reduced to idealist cultural relations.

Proletariat, in the Marxist and anarchist sense of the word, means one who has no property and therefore has to sell their labor power on the market to survive. This subjects them to all manner of humiliating degradation, which eventually strips them of their humanity and makes life itself worthless - the proles are, in the eyes of capital, only worth anything as productive pieces and docile consumers. It's disgusting.

The book was written by an American and it's meant to be a case study on the way race has effected class relations in the United States as a settler colonial society. He isn't arguing that Pilgrim settlers invented the Proletariat kek, aside from that you're right, the Proletariat are those who do not own land or the means of production.

Does not compute

Isn't that the Maoist Third Worldist bible?

It's r/socialism's bible

When I did some research on Maoist Third Worldism, that was the first book that showed up. Isn't J. Sakai a Maoist Third Worldist? Which is not the same thing as r/socialism. Jason Unruhe is anti-IDpol.

I really don't think that the Ru is much of a Third Worldist, he's more like an aggressively anti-social tankie type who likes to laugh at dead 'first worldists' and hates to read. I don't think he'd even be taken serious by the TW milieu if he doesn't accept the existence of White Supremacy.

so he's an /r9k/ worldist?

...

You mean like Nazi book burnings?

No.

eceleb thread

Well, doesn't he live in his Mom's basement in Ontario?

I'll have you know that during the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution reactionary literature and arts were banned and destroyed by the masses. Tolerating counter-revolutionary ideas is liberalism.

Its best to let reactionary literature exist so it and be critiqued and people can understand why its bad/retarded

There sort of needs to be a distinction from Jason Unruhe/LLCO style Third Worldism and the sort of racialist Post Colonialism that J.Sakai promotes. There is a difference even if it is subtle.

Holla Forums was right again

r/socialism constantly shills this book if you say anything about white people