Saw this on /r/socialism. Thoughts?

The capitalists and international Jewry cannot be separated – etc.

Its bullshit, race and genderinquility are caused in part by capitalism, especially race. These things can only be solved once society is freed of its exploitative inherent nature of capitalism, which shapes the culture.

You cant simultaneously sow a bullet wound and extract the bullet. You first get out the bullet, then you fix the wounds it caused.

Capitalism didn't cause it, it perpetuates it. Racism and gender inequality has been existent long before Capitalism. But I agree with how it should be fixed.

What does this mean?

I understand that certain races can suffer worse under capitalism but in the end the enemy is the same. But what I see a lot of nowadays is that the enemy is 'whiteness' and/or 'men' rather than porky/bourg

Capitalism causes racism and gender inequality that exist right now.

The racism and gender inequality are nothing like they were in feudalism. They may look similar, because both are caused by class systems, but they are very very different.

...

...

I think we should participate in anti-racist activities and movements to build relationships based on good faith. We should be their to offer our critiques and solutions but not commandeer the political action. Working class communities can benefit from some immediate relief like police reform.

Am I off base?

Racism and sexism as we understand them today are social trends that developed out of material relationships throughout history. If we remove those relationships and replace them with communism, they will disappear. That being said, we should also confront racism and sexism directly when it appears, we just have to do it in a non-retarded and sensible way (and as Huey Freeman said, "not every nigga who gets arrested is Nelson fucking Mandela"), and also not lose sight of our ultimate goal.

It should say "ameliorated".

no, read marx
jewish question
into the trash with you

people who read this as such are fucking vulgar marxist morons with no fucking reading comprehension

emancipation into the current system is faggotry
feminists and other idpol shit btfo

read marx

This is pretty gud. Problem is Holla Forums blames immigrants for this problem when their country has been fucked harder by porky

No, most "anti-racist" activities are hijacked by the bourgoiesie. Socialism is inherently anti-racist and anti-sexist, as such we shan't participate in anti-racism or anti-sexism events that have no link to class struggle.

Pushing for betterment of the conditions of the working class is always a goal socialists and communists should pursue. If a certain ethnicity is overrepresented in the working class, it is a mere coincidence. Their ethnicity is wholly irrelevant, because ethnicities form based on shared culture. Shuffle all ethnic groups around in society and after two or three generations you have new socio-ethnic groups. Rednecks, blacks in ghettos, neither are genetically different from rich whites or blacks, but they constitute a different ethnic group.

Right. I'm talking about winning people over by directly helping them not abandoning class struggle l. We shouldn't be card carrying members of liberal social justice groups. How else are you going to reach people? How do you get people to be open to listening to you without building some kind of relationship? Integration with the community is essential.

This, Marx should have been deported from England and be Executed by the Prussian State.

;~;

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist_feminism

...

...

Did you get convinced of culturalism by reading economics?

Are you retarded?

Every fucking thread
C L A S S S T R U G G L E D E V I A T I O N

Not even trolling or baiting. There are plenty of feminist criticisms of capitalism that come straight from Marx.

What the hell is culturalism?

Saying that culture is more important than economics and that you should fix the world by changing culture.

Marxist feminism is based on economy. Which is why it is not happening anywhere near meme feminists of Cultural Marxism fame.

Base Superstructure.
They work around and through one another.
Though, of course you can't change anything by merely critiquing the latter. The point is to show their interrelationship.

This is also why I hate 'tolerance' as a slogan, as if the problems of racism were merely the result of not tolerating enough.

That's not Marxist, bro. Marxism says that class UNDERLIES everything.

As if we needed more proof of the bourgeois character of /r/socialism

Is there much difference in saying class underlies everything and class is the most important?

And so on.

I don't think that they work around each other so much as one (social issues) is almost entirely determined by the other (economics).

All of these positions are wrong.

The mode of production is what forms the base of how society develops and functions. Class, being the relations of production, are an integral part of this.

Issues of race, gender and the like form around this economic base. Class society is the fundamental inequality from which all other inequalities arise. This doesn't mean that these issues don't exist, but that when tackling social issues, it is of paramount importance to consider the class character of the social issue, otherwise your movement will be impotent and what you gain, if you gain anything, will be insufficient to actually tackle the social problem you're attempting to solve.

Immigrants are a tool porky uses to fuck a country.

Porky wants browns to undercut wages and keep the population (thus ability to handle debt) growing. libtards want browns because they're indoctrinated to see problems with the west as being some systemic oppression and see forigners and forigen culture as something taht will help them fight the man. Not all of the libtards see it like this. Some are just useful idiots virtue signalling by going along with anti-fa. But the ones who've really considered it see the west as a problem and changing demographics as a solution.

To be fair WSWS/SEP are garbage Trotskyites, Trotsky would be ashamed of them

Brocialists are so misogynee tbh

I would definitely say social issues work around economics. This is part of the place where you get the argument that the "problem of society today is a spiritual one; if only we could inject morals into the system then everyone would be nice to one another and we'd be happy." Superstructure, the theory, should be emphasized here because although the structure of society may be a reflection of the relations of production in the in the economic base, superstructure with all its political and cultural praxis determines and informs whether the society is prone to change and transform itself.

saved

WTF i hate brocialists now. I am now a #Femissile.

Porky causes inmigration with his imperialist wars, you can't be anti inmigration if you are pro middle east war.

You're very naive

And can we stop the 'it's divisive! xD!' meme?

What is this meme by the way?

I tried searching, but got "manarchism". I don't really feel pity for Anarchists, but I got close.

How am I naive?

I disagree as that's not taking biology into affect. I think to an extinct racism and sexism will always be with humanity, even after a post scarcity society:

Humans are sexually dimorphic, men and women have different bodies, different hormones, and to an extent different brain structures. While there are always exceptions, and no one conforms 100%, men tend to like man things and women tend to like woman things. There will always be more stay at home moms (and follows less women in the work place) than men, they're just designed and programmed for it. Men will always feel the need to compete and be the bread winner, they will always be protective of their families. Again, they're built and hardwired for it. As long as there is uneven symmetry there will always be differences in how they are treated and their roles in society. It doesn't matter how equal the law is, and how much women want it to be true, but they will never make up 50% of politicians, or scientists, or construction workers, or CEOs. It's not due to inherent sexism in economic systems or government systems. It's just the evolutionary strategy we evolved and carried into our modern world. Now this isn't to say there wasn't ever systematic sexism, but it was sexism that existed in a different time, where such sexism actually helped the survival of the species. Unless humans decide to artificially morph our behavior from genes on up, it will never change. We are fighting an uphill battle on a treadmill.

As for racism, as long as 2 humans are different in any way shape or form they will naturally categorize each other into an us vs them. Tribalism and xenophobia are just natural human instincts. Hell, kids in school get made fun of for having glasses or braces, to think that all of man will overcome the urge to label and segregate inherent qualities of people because of economics or government is absurd. Holla Forums will always exist. It doesn't matter how equal another group is in IQ or achievements or whatever standard you want to hold a group to, they are an "other", they share slightly less genes than their own group. It doesn't matter how absurd or arbitrary it is, it's just human nature.

Now that's not to mean I don't think we should take steps to limit social ailments, but socialism, communism, or even a society where everyone gets 100% of everything they want will not stop humans from being the animals we evolved to be.

GOLDEN

… That says it all, really.

...

...

Is there a concrete reason why you haven't fucked off yet, Holla Forums?

Is it wrong to say that in some sort of "state of nature", men would eventually rule over women simply because they're almost always stronger?

Saying otherwise means we shouldn't really take violence against women more seriously than violence in general.

I fail to see how my post was Holla Forums, I was stating facts. Men and women are different, and the "races" are different (no matter how arbitrarily). This will always cause inequality regardless of socio-economics.

It was a failure since it began

Anarchism: turning Holla Forums into youtube comments one post at a time

What a fucking plebeian you are.

...

ey n1x,if that's you did you check that /edgy/ thread you made? We were having a good discussion (me, you and ancom poster).

Yes. Interpersonal relationships are much more complex than "I rule over you." Physical strength is far from the only factor. There's a reason why weak, frail elders tend to be venerated in "natural" cultures.

We shouldn't. Especially since women are victims of violence less often than men or children.

What these retards will never understand is that struggles of identity are completely arbitrary based on the needs and whims of the ruling class. It's a tool to manipulate people.

ayylmao

I didn't make that thread and that wasn't me you responded to, but dis thread is where the dank discussion is at tbh:

At least you had the decency to put it in the beginning so I didn't have to read the rest of your post

There is no "state of nature".

Or, perhaps more accurately, everything is the state of nature.

Maybe sometime in the distant past, you had warrior tribes where the strong ruled over the weak, but since written history we have not had a society where the strong ruled over the weak. We've had much more complicated societies where physical strength played almost no role in the social hierarchy. This is a fiction created in the last two centuries to justify the rule of the bourgeoisie, even though, ironically enough, most bourgeoisie aren't strong either.

By and at large, inequality does not arise from different traits and abilities. It arises from the modes of production and the complex social relations that form around it.

If what you're saying is that people will never be exactly the same, then obviously. We never demanded this.

No one said that, but ok

Muh spooks
Also the real life state of nature didn't have that. Men didn't dominant women, all the members of the hunter gatherer tribe worked together to survive and rose the children

See the pic
How exactly you think this would happen?

Mandatory visits to the IBG.

What does that even stand for?

Prove it. The faster shark will catch the fish.

So tl;dr genetics isn't real, time for Lysenkoism 2: Electric Boogaloo?

We aren't sharks or fish.

Racism didn't exist before capitalism. "Race" didn't exist 500 years ago.

Best post in the thread.

also saved.

...

Which is why ancient Greeks said that Persians and other barbarians were naturally salves by virtue of their non-Greekness right?

Because the age of exploration (which coincided with the onset of capitalism) created racial interactions between Europeans and non-Europeans on a previously unheard of scale (excluding the Roman Empire), except possibly Moorish Spain.

...

interracial breeding grounds?

Except they clearly divided people into categories and attributed traits to the group as a whole based on geographical and racial characteristics. Sounds like racism to me.

The point isn't that people will recognize differences, but that it won't fucking matter. Yes, you are a nigger and like shit music. That doesn't mean I'm going to hate you for it.

Sounds more similar to Japanese style xenophobia where they lump everyone into either "us" or "not us"

Well I mean it didn't really matter because the Greeks weren't in a position to oppress an empire that was many times larger and more powerful than they were, but that doesn't make it not-racism.

I don't see how that's really any different.

Racism and racialism are is attributing attributes to various peoples based on some ethnic group to which they belong. Xenophobia is just lumping everyone into either "us" or foreigners.

Sounds like it fits your definition.

Don't dismiss that line of inquiry entirely out of hand. Genetics is a perfectly valid material condition. The point though is to have a proper understanding of molecular biology and its impact on the human experience, without making claims unsupported by evidence or drowning in mystical platitudes

The Japanese have had similar opinions about different foreigners.

The point being that the "us" group for ancient Greece was the Hellenic people, but it changed and expanded over time. It's not some set law of behavior. There's no reason why the "us" can't be all of humanity.

HIERARCHY HAS ALWAYS BEEN BASED ON SOCIAL RELATIONS LIKE BLOOD TIES, LAWS OF SUCCESSION, FRIENDSHIP, LOYALTY, ETC, NOT ON ANY KIND OF "MERIT" OR "SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST" BULLSHIT

GENETIC TRAITS HAVE FUCK ALL TO DO WITH THE FORMATION OF HIERARCHY

SOCIAL DARWINISM AND MUH MERITOCRACY ARE STUPID CAPITALIST MEMES THAT DEVELOPED IN THE LAST 200 YEARS, THAT'S NOT ACTUALLY HOW HUMAN CIVILIZATION FUNCTIONS

You may have me confused for another poster. You may also want to reread
Holla Forums-tier misunderstanding of evolutionary theory and misapplication of its concepts to hierarchy and human societies is something I'm specifically challenging here.
Aggregate differences independent of social constructs can be seen to exist, and whether or not capitalism is in any sense meritocratic, and whether or not genetic variation finds any expression within capitalism, they will find expression in a non-coercive system. You are the one who has missed the point.
This also means rejecting essentialism and attempting to work out the molecular basis for these observed variations that they might be understood more correctly and that we might make effective predictions to serve society.

This. The fact that Europe was ruled for centuries by literal inbreds is testament to this.