A homeless, poor, white male still has more privilege than I will ever have regardless of the money

At least he admits he knows nothing of economics, so that's fine. He shouldn't ever discuss it.

Yeah, I'm just hoping he takes the blinders off soon, instead of thinking a socdem like Corbyn is a secret Antifa Trotskist sleeper agent.
But I agree with him on liberal muh privilege checkers.

Never forget when Rebel rekt him :)
youtube.com/watch?v=QS1bqBwetbM

White muh privilege is a Thing and only whites do not want to acknowledge it or feel offended the mere proposition of it's existence.

Racialists should all die.

hello Holla Forums

nah, not really.
It's mostly about class.

I couldn't care less.

wow you're so cool

Who is the gorgeous woman in that picture?

You

Pretentious replies like this are the exact equivalent of "back to your Talmud studies schlomo", except that here we have to signal for intellectualism.

valhalla.jpg ?

Search by image, faggot.

pretty much this
this is why I like this board more than Holla Forums, on Holla Forums's Holla Forums you basically get saged if you agree with someone who is jewish
that's how autistic Holla Forums is.

No i am not trying to black him out
I Don't say the polacks ideas and opinion are red lines we don't want to speak about or talk about all i am saying is the following :

This is shit thread .

How is this wrong ?

Unlike Holla Forums we are ready to talk and discuss with full respect our version of the jew "porky maybe ? "

i mean the reason why I post here more often than i visit Holla Forums's Holla Forums is because you can learn something new from a leftist perspective even tho we shitpost a lot
on Holla Forums people just paste autistic graphs nonstop, without citing their sources or anything >

I wonder if this is how most blacks feel when they hear alt-rights blame then for everything.

No wonder the media stokes this shit, it's pretty enraging.

Why does cunt go live in a white nation? And not a non White one?

This is why it's wrong to blame entire group of people because of actions of few, no matter how you spin it.
The moment you start talking about "all white people", "all black people" etc. you will rustle some jimmies (unless that was your intention, which I think a lot of people do).

He wouldn't feel opressed outside USA.

Thing is, the fact that this generalization is so stupid seems so obvious, even from an idiot's perspective. Maybe the emotional reaction is just hard to resist for some reason.

Lets consider that no-one takes black Hitler seriously

Stopped reading there

Is this another 'You wont BUH-LEAVE what this random person on the internet said this week!' video?

If so, no thanks

TBH it's hard for anyone to with a serious face to say that blacks have it just as good as whites nowadays. The remnants of former racist laws and customs still exist on top of this, young blacks are still subject to more poverty and the lumpens it tends to create. You don't even have to be a New Left liberal to see this, and I suspect the only reason people here refuse to vocally stand on this basic thing is because they're afraid of being considered 'idpol' simply for accepting this as reality. You don't have to go all the way and say 'capitalism is inherently racist and white!' or w/e to conclude this either.

what does this have to do with us?

It's a brocialist thread, what do you mean?

this 4 this

I honestly don't understand leftypol's obsession with sargon. He's mildly liberals and slowly drifting towards the altright. He mostly talks about internet culture and gaming and stuff. Why would you treat him as some sort of authority figure and care so much about what he has to say?

Should've stopped right there, we're not all reactionary ex-Holla Forumsacks.

Could be that people are trying to see and hear things that aren't there in an effort to claim Sargon as one of us instead of a typical centrist liberal like most of opiniontube's politically active userbase is. Mostly in an effort to alienate his libertard/alt-right viewership from him and appropriate the rest gradually.

People will cling on to anything he says that sounds even vaguely like leftist rhetoric before proceeding to meme the shit out of it and later forgetting about the whole thing completely. It happens every time.

Yes, black people have it worse in America mainly due to historical reasons. However, the issues at play currently for as to why Blackos can't get out of this seemingly perpetual poverty is due to the structure of the system itself. This has very little to do with race, and focusing on race instead of the structure itself is idiotic because it ultimately doesn't solve the problem. Sure, maybe as a result of a few policies black-white inequality will disappear, but largely the same amount of people, black AND white, will still suffer from the issues present within capitalism.

BLM supporters don't even do this, opinion discarded.

Because leftypol pretty much has the same views as sargon and his ilk, they unironically believe that sargon and his ilk are correct, you can see this in the way they react to certain things.

Yes, they complain about the structure, but they complain about the structure in terms of idpol instead of actually relevant economic terms.

policy.m4bl.org/economic-justice/

Bullshit.

See, this is the problem with how some of the retards on this board interpret idpol as meaning 'any acknowledgement of race being a factor'. This is not idpol. What's idpol is pushing forward arguments that seat the entirety of a problem's causes or proposed solutions in an identitarian context. This is patently not the case when someone simply says 'blacks are generally marginalized by historical factors like adverse legal standing and the remnants thereof in the form of racial profiling and stinging'; it does not seat the problem as innately racial, but as relatively racial.

I'll post this maymay again because this shit really needs to be understood.

See, some retards even believe that civil movements against race-related inequality of treatment are somehow idpol, when they're incredibly level-headed or even quite materialist in their thinking most of the time.

>Job programs must provide a living wage and encourage support for local workers centers, unions, and >>Black-owned businessesRestore the Glass-Steagall Act to break up the large banks, and call for the National Credit Union Administration and the US Department of the Treasury to change policies and practices around regulation, reporting and consolidation to allow for the continuation and creation of >>black banks>Black communities globallyBlack led or Black supportedFinancial support of >>Black alternative institutionsA Federal and State Jobs Program that Specifically Targets the Most Economically Marginalized >>Black People>Black OwnedSupport economic empowerment in low-income >>Black communitiesBlack communities>Black workers

I don't really see a problem with any of this save the last point. They're concerned with issues at home, which is understandable when things are as bad as they are in Black America. I don't think they have a snowball's chance in hell of actually getting any of this, but if they did, what precisely would stop white people with on average way more social capital and connections from using the same tactics to organize and demand the same shit but for everyone else also?

You must be new, anything outside of class conflict is idpol.

Granted BLM has some of that, but they also delve into specifically black oppression. An area that is extremely foreign and hard to grasp for middle/working class whites. Therefore, there's nothing irrational about not wanting to bother with the idpol aspect on a Leftist board. What's irrational is decrying the whole movement as idpol. Something that I never did, I was merely addressing a invalid criticism made about BLM.

Wrong, BLM cares about the poorest people first and they happen to be black. Policies to help these communities first will have a macroeconomic effect of helping surrounding poor communities, that's how Capitalism works. Business owners flock to areas where workers have money, and then jobs and higher incomes spread out from there. It's classic bottom up economics. If you want to solve poverty, you go after the poorest first and expand.

You're over thinking it.
I watch Sargon for the same reason I listen to Ghost from True Capitalist Radio, because it's funny to watch them lose their shit.
Also, I might be a masochist.

The movement is literally called Black Lives Matter. Don't be ridiculous, please.

Because we've constantly ignored the poor black struggle just like you're doing right now. Just like the rest of this board.

Are you a liberal?

...

Fixed

web.archive.org/web/20100414172730/http://nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/who.html

Homeless lives matter.

Literally has never happened.

Sorry I upset you, here's some more Steven Crowder videos for you,

youtube.com/watch?v=5wFpD-GR5kc

You're right. Black people are the only important poor people. Let's just focus on black people because, let's face it, the system is racist.

Idpol has poisoned your minds.

It's called 'Black Lives Matter' because the contemporary judicial system works much more adversely for blacks than others. That all lives matter is a no brainer and it's not 'Only Black Lives Matter'. Are you a crypto-lib or just really shit at nuance?

Lydia Graham.

Her instagram:
instagram.com/ohlydiagraham/

I was right when I said you were a reactionary and I stand by that.

The system IS racist, though. There's empirical data to support this.

If poor people are classified as a race, sure. Otherwise you're just being retarded.

youtube.com/user/StevenCrowder

youtube.com/user/TheAmazingAtheist

youtube.com/user/SargonofAkkad100

Here you go, liberal.

...

It's not IF, blacks are the poorest group in America, stop being a reactionary, you Sargon of Wikipedia dicksucker

citation needed
i'm quite sure there are groups of people in america that do worse than them

...

BLM is americanocentric BS that doesn't give a single fuck about the root of the problem and exists only to give a steamvent for the prols.

...

Retard.

I like how beyonce looks like a very tanned white girl tbh.

nice arguments

...

Try again maybe? Leave behind the opinions this time.

you haven't made one.

Record labels make it a point to find a lot of diversity in artists to make the industry look varied for those who listen, including poor blacks.

Sargon is legitimately retarded though.

...

I understand the nuance. It's not relevant because I challenge the assertion that all, if not most problems faced by black people aren't parallel to the struggles of any poor person, regardless of skin colour. Black people aren't targeted for being black, they're targeted for being poor. Black lives matter is not a rallying call to stop poverty. It's a rallying call to stop >>black poverty>>/tumblr/

Again, they're poor because the system keeps them poor, not because the system is racist and actively hates black people and tries to keep them poor because fuck skin color. The system works against poor people, not black people, and it affects ALL poor people, which is a far larger group than just poor black people.

This comrade understands.

Is this now an episode of dark skinned American blacks attack light skinned American blacks?

Either way, Beyonce isn't poor. She's not alone in being brown and not poor, is she?

can we do this please?

This amount of reactionary trash, a racist system does not mean, white rich people getting together in smoky rooms and plotting the demise of blacks.

It means:

And who are the poorest, most ignored, most trashed race? Blacks. Therefore, a movement for black emancipation raises all ships regardless of skin color even if you can't do basic economics.

A version of your response to this can be found on r/StevenCrowder

This won't be a thing because poor pepople are frequently ridiculed by those with more wealth.
You can get away with making fun of homeless people but not balcks. That's a society we live in.

It absolutely is. You otherwise wouldn't unironically say BLM is a movement purposely ignorant of general injustice of the disenfranchised in society.

This is a sophist attempt at materialist thinking (which for the record, civil rights movements like BLM definitely also lack); because if the poor were targeted merely for being poor, we'd see a roughly equal amount of poverty regardless of ethnicity, which is patently not the case. There are structural causes orchestrated by bourgeois interests that previously made sure, black on white, that blacks were considered legally inferior to (especially) whites in terms of rights and muh privileges. Even in a completely blank context of the idea that these are now abolished, it's absolutely delusional and reactionary to propose that these effects do not still linger, or not still actively present (albeit in a very reduced form) in the legal systems. If poverty truly is the most important factor, and it surely is, you have to go all the way in deconstructing causation and see other factors as mediating and reifying for the same issue.

BTW,
kek. Hope this was a typo.

And it wouldn't achieve anything. Why? Because BLM, as idealist of a movement as it is, is born out of a people who so vicariously live through their disenfranchisement that they've birthed it [the movement]. This is why the reactionary counter-'movement' of All Lives Matters exists only to be contrarian and patronizing towards a legitimate struggle. Poor Lives Matter is also, if you claim to be the class essentialist you are, also a similarly incredibly idealist proposition that states the tensions of class struggle lie in the fact that some proles are just worse off then most, when it's ultimately a contradiction in material interests kept alive by bourgeois power structures and propaganda. It's the same hill to die on for your argument, and the same attempt at trying to universalize what already is, if you understand any nuance at all, what would keep into account particularity.

No it doesn't. It will just make black people equally as poor as white people. That's the point. You're ignoring the crux of the issue here. The overall percentage of poor people will not magically decrease just because black people won't be the poorest people anymore.

To be fair on sjws, lets do s thought experiment. If you take two people, one a white, straight, able-bodied, non-trans and another person with any of those things changed, the second person will have a harder time. In the middle class it doesn't matter as much but the further down the line towards poverty, the less you are like the first person the more fucked you are going to get. And it just happens that a majority of those happen to be under the middle class which us back to the questions that sjws and their ancestors, the new left, have been asking for decades. How come so many black people are poor? How come so many trans people are murdered? How come the poorer a woman is the more likely their lives resemble something out of India?

Yeah and you don't know what they've been through. In fact people continually deny that what they have experienced has been substantial. How do you know this black man didn't come from a lower middle class or even a poor background, or live in such an area? How do you know his experiences are really that bad that they do overcome this class consideration?

But more importantly, how come people accuse sjws of oppression olympics when this is THE EXACT SAME SHIT

At the end of the day, class and how much money you have is still the single most important deciding factor in your station in life and said consequences, but that's not an excuse not to listen and think.

Also

Hi Holla Forums

All snark aside, I would support the movement if a situation like in your image actually existed.
What we see in reality is very few blacks being shot by police, at least compared to usual reasons of death. There is by no means an epidemic and the police are usually justified in shooting. What is however rampant if crime in certain black ghettos and violence within the black community, which is why the police is active there in the first place.

Saying all lives matter is of course an obvious thing, but also a senseless one. There was never the notion that black lives didn't matter, if that was the case, police would not intervene in the ghettos and just watch the blacks murdering each other.

The related images tell the story of a black police officer that became disillusioned with the BLM movement, I suggest you read it, it sheds some light on the terrible conditions in the black ghettos.

Except we don't because, as you mention, there are historical reasons for this divide. Black people are the poorest because of past racism which led to poverty. They are not poor nowadays because of modern-day "structural racism" as BLM claims.

I've never claimed they don't. I claim they're not the issue at the heart of the problem. It's difficult for a poor family to go from being poor to being even just middle-class. Given the historical poverty of black people in the US, it's no wonder they're still the largest poor group. However, the issue is still not a racism issue. Consider Italy- the south is still largely poorer than the north. Sure, there is some small level of racism towards southern Italians, but the main issue at play here has very little to do with the skin colour of the poorest people, and racism by itself is by far not enough to explain the difference between the north and the south.

It absolutely does. Look at how this shit tarnished the reputation of the police – the defacto vanguard of bourgeois society historically established just to suppress crowded protest (and not crime)*.

The rest of your argument is, quite literally: 'if you don't establish full communism, you shouldn't do anything!'. It's left com tier ultra-leftism and I'm surprised to see your Rojava flag, which is a movement directly formed out of a desire for identitarian (national) liberation of the Kurds. How can I not make the same reductionist argument here that this is 'idpol' because it doesn't explicitly imply universal human emancipation in its title and activist slogans?

For the record, I do agree that BLM as a movement is incredibly idealistic. No doubt about it. It's entirely shown by the fact that people like McKesson can ride on its popularity to become mayors who push for privatizing education. The point is to identify the movement's key pieces of rhetoric and what they desire. This is an undeniable just cause that we should not dismiss. In fact, BLM should be used as an opportunity to raise its scope of action. Dismissing it as 'not revolutionary (enough)' is cushy crypto-liberal bullshit that doesn't deserve any serious consideration.

* libcom.org/history/origins-police-david-whitehouse

I'm not even from the US.

but we did had a Castas system.
I knew I was going to get called Idpol or some paranoid faggot would redirect me to Holla Forums but capitalism is just the parasitic leach that is sucking life out of all of equally so there is that.
About whites they have to acknowledge they have it easier around the world just because of their fucking skin colour.

Anybody who cries out "idpol!" whenever "black people" and "communism" are strung close together in a sentence needs to shut the fuck up and read some actual fucking communist history.

Fucking thank you. This meme-tier understanding of what identity politics are is absolutely cancerous and reeks of liberalism. It's no surprise the same retards who misuse the term are Sarclown fans – that faggot is the spitting image of reductionist left liberal rhetoric.

Blithering idiot.

this

here, some complimentary theory

Wew

Hi reddit

Anyway it was just a twitter hashtag before it was a group, that explains the name that so many liberals have a problem with

Haha!
Well played.

Didn't know I was on Holla Forums.

Jesus Christ what a great list.

Does anyone have any specific literature they'd recommend regarding black integration in the New Deal and Labour/Socialist movements before 1964? Liberal SJWs on social media are now spreading the horseshit myth that these have always excluded people of color, and I know that's a lie but I'd like some data and literature to quote as a retort.

Smh. I wrote a lenghty post about Victoria Woodhull here once where I explained Marx and Engel's beef with her properly quoting from their own words. I should have screen capd it with the sole purpose of using it whenever this image is posted.

Anyway, to make it short, she wasn't expelled because she was into free love or she was a feminist or whatever, she was expelled (and tolerated until) she virtually attempted a coup on the american segment of the International.

To be fair, the AFL and other major labor organizations in the 20s-40s were explicitly racist and excluded black workers from entering leadership positions or even rank and file. Often, the companies would put forward their own preferred Union orgs that were mostly white only. It wasn't until the CIO was pressured by low key communists that any major labor organization made racial discrimination a basis for action. And even then, most black labor activity was in the form of black majority constructed and led unions. The Share Croppers Union is a good example of this.

Communists in the US have had an ambiguous relation to unions. The AFL and other unions would often work actively against anything smelling of communism (and in the 30s, social equality meant Communism). The US never formed the kind of grand coalitions of trade unionism and political party activity that were prevalent in France, Italy, and Germany.

Communism in the US has always distinguished itself in its major role in political, social struggles–particularly around race. Large scale unionism was never the goal, nor was it feasible strategy.

Scientific socialism all the way.
Purge the freelovers.

Wrong. The only books a communist ever needs to read are the ones Marx wrote. Everything else is garbage.

I hope you're being ironic

Idpol is where you take an issue and divide people along lines based on identity, saying one group is the problem and the other is the victim. The problem is it reduces an issue to race or gender or whatever instead of seeing things in terms of systems.

I think I did screencap that response and now I can't find it

Sorry bro

this is totally new tho.
back during the election it was all "fuck you whitey and B████ too".

Worthless.

IdPol is the single most successful pile of garbage capitalists came up so far in this century.

Intersectionality is code word for Identity

...

Hopefully they will segregate and teach us racists a lesson.

this tbh.

This video is correct.

It's true. He has the muh privilege of being part of the master race.

Nigga, it is crypto-liberal bullshit.
Look who's funding and using it.

According to Holla Forums, homeless white man has more potential than this nigga.

Counter argument: rewatch the video

Great job fighting for the establishment! Putting more capitalist dough into the pockets of Soros! That'll show us!