Probably not really the worst, but people in lefty spaces online are always so much more concerned with whether white people are allowed to say the N word or who is technically the most oppressed than actually liberating the intersectionally largest group of oppressed people in the world (the working class).(ban evading spam and astroturf)(Mentally ill fag that spends hours of his life nearly every day trying to spam and spread right wing astroturf and generally shit up the place)
>>2118dunno. the uygha probably is trying to force some sort of retarded false consensus that somehow antisemetism is prevalent within this board, and masking it with anti lgbt to sound based or some faggot shit like that
>>2119lol where does this happen, shut your retard mouth and go back to /pol/, shit thread, sage
>>2115>The mods remove anything critical of or questioning of the LGBTIABBQ+ movement'sThe critique in question:
<umm Gorky said fags are fascists and they also stick their hot cocks into men's hairy assholes (disgusting, therefore immoral). What is the best way to kill them all when socialism comes? Amazing.
>>2126Read settlers by j Sakai
There is no white proletariat
(spam) >>2115>but at the same time will let you say the N word if you preface it with antisemitism.Lol the Jewish nigger quote from one Jew talking about another Jew is "antisemitic." Goddamn. If one White guy called another White guy a White uyghur, it wouldn't be anti-white you retard.
But /leftypol/ has always been really comfortable about uyghur because it's "chan culture," but start calling everyone a russian saboteur and accuse them of russian saboteurry and russian saboteur behavior and see how fast you get banned.
>>2128>but start calling everyone a russian saboteur and accuse them of russian saboteurry and russian saboteur behavior and see how fast you get banned.Lol k*ke is actually word-filtered now.
Ok do chink next.
>>2133claudia jones grave is to the left of marx's for a reason
ML who defined what intersectionality is, it is a ML idea not a liberal one and people would do good to learn it properly rather than the retarded asorbtion liberalism has given it.
>>2141It's a dumb joke. I don't get what's the issue. Other slurs are word filtered anyways. Part of the joke is that /pol/ gets word filtered but we can slur with no problem. As always, if you ever use a slur with it's intended purpose, like calling a black person a knee ger, or a k*ke to a jew, fag/faggot to a gay person, you will get banned, as people get banned for it all the time. I don't think a jewish black person makes any sense, unless they're ethiopian jew I guess, but IDK. I don't really think about it much.
>>2112More egregious and uncontroversial is worrying whether certain speech is racist or not, but never talking about how the system itself is designed to be racist and that democrats are the moderate wing of fascism, and that slavery still exists, and that AOC and Bernie are fucking sham. These people also never give a fuck about the global south either. It's all about the lunacy of american politics.
>>2144The joke is that you can't say n*gger, but you can say jewish nigger, presumably because marx said it. Also /pol/ gets filtered but we don't.
>>2146That's not true, lying fuck.
>>2147Bruh.
>>1295180Fuck off, /pol/ scum.
>>2133No on the theoretical level it says that class is an identity, which makes it incompatible with Marxism.
In praxis it is detrimental to the cultivation of class consciousness, it brings too much hyper-individualism.
>>2135I agree the rules of the attention economy apply, talking about it regardless whether it's in a positive or negative tone, it's attention score rises. But what do you do once somebody has already brought it up, and the attention beam is already feeding it. I guess we could try to hijack the topic and redirect the debate towards something else.
Lets make this thread about raising class consciousness
anybody got suggestions ?
>>2145how to criticize someone for being obsessed with phrenology:
>Lassalle is an idiot obsessed with phrenologyhow NOT to criticize someone for being obsessed with phrenology:
>jewish nigger >>2154no, "jewish nigger" is what marx called lassalle in a letter to engels. how is marx calling lassalle a "jewish nigger" a dig at himself?
tankanon said
>>2145>It's a dig at that jewish nigger's obsession with phrenologywas marx "that jewish nigger" tankanon is referring to?
>>2157I find it very funny to think that marx was quite the shitposter in his times, and some dumbfucks are triggered that we use that quote as a reference to that and to allow us to use politically incorrect slurs while avoiding the filter, making both polyp and reddit tourists seethe
>all of his criticism of lassalle's politics and ideology could be done without idpol.the man suggested to marx he should whore out his daughter. Insulting him went way beyond politics, and you read way too much into what is basically a shitpost. You're just outing yourself as a dumb newfriend
>>2161> some dumbfucks are triggered that we use that quote as a reference to thatit's not about being "triggered" it's about the fact that it is not being used as a reference. the vast majority of times I've seen people be called JN on here, it was just as a flat insult, without any of marx's letters being referenced at all. it was used purely as a shutdown, without any cleverness behind it. And now some of the visiting /pol/yps know it's a way around their word filter: a way to complain about their two least favorite groups at once.
> making both polyp and reddit tourists seetheif the purpose of something is simply to make people new people seethe and leave (thus keeping the community small and alienating) then it is immature and pointless. that was my point all along. it was pointless when marx said it, it was pointless when we say it now. Like there is nothing to be gained by making an obscure refernece to something marx said. Yes, bourgeois liberals bring it up to "cancel" him in bad faith. Fuck those people. Doesn't mean we need to step into the pile of shit they left on the floor to prove how little we care.
>>2134>claudia jones grave is to the left of marx's for a reasonShe was great. Highly influential figure.
>Her time within the CPUSA further developed her Marxist-Leninist politics. An adept writer, organiser and theoretician, she utilised her position in the party to advocate for poor Black women workers, bringing together theoretically: race, class, gender and anti-imperialism. Although her approach highlighted the limitations of the CPUSA, she remained determined to develop this intersectional ideological framework for Black radical feminists to further expand upon.https://www.versobooks.com/blogs/5030-the-forgotten-legacy-of-claudia-jones-a-black-communist-radical-feminist
>What made her intersectionality socialist was that Claudia Jones differentiated between the ruling class that generated and that benefited from oppression, and the working class that internalized oppressive ideas and behaviors despite their class interests. This meant organizing a working-class strategy of fighting oppression, as she summarized in her 1949 essay “We Seek Full Equality for Women,”: “The triply-oppressed status of the Black woman is a barometer of the status of all women, and that the fight for the full economic, political and social equality of the Black woman is in the vital self-interest of white workers, in the vital interest of the fight to realize equality for all women.”
>This didn’t mean subordination issues of oppression to the class struggle, but of challenging the women’s movement, trade union movement and her own party to fight every manifestation of sexism and anti-Black racism in order to raise the level of struggle: “We can accelerate the militancy of Black women to the degree with which we demonstrate that the economic, political, and social demands of Black women are not just ordinary demands, but special demands, flowing from special discrimination facing Black women as women, as workers and as Blacks. It means first, to unfold the struggle for jobs, to organize the unorganized Black women workers in hundreds of open-shop factories and to win these job campaigns. It means overcoming our failure to organize the domestic workers…And it means that a struggle for social equality for Black women must be boldly fought for in every sphere of relations between men and women so that the open door of Party membership doesn’t become a revolving door because of our failure to conduct this struggle.”https://springmag.ca/claudia-jones-intersectional-socialist >>2151it is literally just work with the underclass and remember we are all oppressed by the upper class so stop fragmenting
it is literally anti-ID pol and the fact you seem to think otherwise tells me you havent actually read claudia jones work lol
>>2171americans pretend to understand what it is and have associated it with liberalism because they suck mainstream medias cock without noticing and have internalized the anti-sjw narrative surronding it and/or have been exposed to liberals bastardizing it online (which is basically the same thing)
Its a ML perspective and in line with lenins ideas around the underclass + she advocated for the USSRs progression for women as a great example ect
>>2167>The status quo is the status quo, and the bourgeoisie typically lean towards libertine social morales. what matters is that the bourgeoisie owns the means of production, not their "social morales"
> It wasn’t outrage over the mean ol bigot Tsar Nicholas that caused the Russian Revolution, he was ousted in a bourgeois coup. You are mixing things up. People hated tsar nicholas for many reasons. For his tsarist autocracy and for his (and by extension, the army and the okhrana's) antisemitism. Lenin denounced tsarist and white army antisemitism frequently and reminded the workers that there were jews among both bourgeoisie and proles.
>It was the German-backed puppet republic’s attempt to normalize bourgeois morality into law that proved the final straw for the proles of Russia.it was kerensky's government insisting on staying in WW1 while people were starving that was the final straw, not liberal social values or some shit. you're spooked. It was the Germans who actually opportunistically helped Lenin return to Russia thinking he would sue for peace or at the very least sow chaos. Lenin signed Brest-Litovsk while Kerensky would have kept fighting the Germans like England and the USA wanted him to. Lenin bringing an end to WW1 made Russia's allies in WW1 seethe hard and accuse *him* of being a German puppet. But none of this had to do with the social politics. Nobody overthrew Kerensky because of women's suffrage or some shit like that. They overthrew him because he insisted on continuing to fight the same imperialist war that the tsar had been fighting before he abdicated.
> The same pattern can be found in communist revolutions across the world.the completely ahistorical bullshit you are saying does not constitute a "pattern."
>Like it or not when the time comes the communists and social conservatives will be one and the sameThe communists in the USSR were militant atheists who opposed the church and other socially conservative institutions you absolute pseud. Private property is also a conservative institution. Conservatism is defending the bourgeoisie as they currently exist. Liberalism is bourgeois incremental reform. Reactionaries wish to return to how things used to be. None of these are socialist.
> the radical liberals will be on the side of international capitalliberals and conservatives are both bourgeois. they just have different emphasis in strategy. Socialists are separate from both liberals and conservative bourgeoisie.
>>2176>a mistranslationlol
>>2187yeah I mean just check out the photograph of the actual letter that one anon posted a while back
>>2193lincoln was not an abolitionist, he was a free soiler. he advocated making the western territories free states but allowing the south to keep slaves. the south was triggered by this because it would mean non-slave states would eventually get a majority in the senate and do peaceful abolition. the south wanted to secede to prevent that from ever being a possibility. it was lincoln's more radical republican colleagues like thaddeus stevens who were abolitionist. Lincoln was a centrist free-soiler. Emancipation proclamation exempted loyal southern states and only applied to disloyal states. 13th amendment had a loophole for carceral slavery. slavery was never really 100% abolished but marx did celebrate the end of agrarian chattel slavery.
>Why is it so hard to think someone could simultaneously not agree with slavery but also think Blacks are inferior?
>“There is a physical difference between the white and the black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together… while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any man am in favor having the superior position assigned to the white race.”yes I'm aware many abolitionists were racist, and I'm aware of this lincoln quote. people argue over whether it was calculated to win the election or not, since he said it on the campaign trail. people make history, but they are not free to do it as they please.
>>2193The only negative comment you see of Marx to black people, it is this letter and particularly that line. Because of that reason, people try to cancel him on Marx's antisemitism, which includes this line, but also his response to Bauer, the famous OTJQ, which is misconstrued by the right to be a denunciation of Jewish people. That is basically the most dirt they have on him, besides being an alcoholic, relying on Engels for patronage, and having an affair, which the right also brings up frequently.
There is simply no strong evidence to support this hypothesis and strong evidence to support the contrary.
As for Lincoln, yeah I don't know, but also not surprised.
>>2165They want to grow, and are self-admittedly stagnant (see fbi.gov leaks and general accusations of being feds by target audience) at around 200 people. They're not ready to die for a cause and they don't have enough people to make that worth it anyway.
Honestly, do you think they have a path to victory by beating up cops? It's the same people at each protest, they can't afford to be perma-arrested, just slaps on the wrist by cops who probably don't hate them as much as anteefus.
>>2204It's not about the n word or not.
>It is now quite plain to me — as the shape of his head and the way his hair grows also testify — that he is descended from the negroes who accompanied Moses’ flight from Egypt (unless his mother or paternal grandmother interbred with a uyghur). Now, this blend of Jewishness and Germanness, on the one hand, and basic negroid stock, on the other, must inevitably give rise to a peculiar product. The fellow’s importunity is also uyghur-like.Whatever, Marx didn't like jewish niggers, negroes, whatever word you want to use. It's not the beginning and ending of a person.
>>2138> Probably going to directly cause large scale ethnic repression.It already is. Look at Ukraine and the Donbass region right now.
It’s woke to call Russians a bunch of homophobic orcs who need to be genocided.
>>2207https://wikirouge.net/texts/en/Democratic_Pan-Slavism_(1849)
>How did it happen that over Texas a war broke out between these two republics, which, according to the moral theory, ought to have been "fraternally united" and "federated", and that, owing to "geographical, commercial and strategical necessities", the "sovereign will" of the American people, supported by the bravery of the American volunteers, shifted the boundaries drawn by nature some hundreds of miles further south? And will Bakunin accuse the Americans of a "war of conquest", which, although it deals with a severe blow to his theory based on "justice and humanity", was nevertheless waged wholly and solely in the interest of civilization? Or is it perhaps unfortunate that splendid California has been taken away from the lazy Mexicans, who could not do anything with it? That the energetic Yankees by rapid exploitation of the California gold mines will increase the means of circulation, in a few years will concentrate a dense population and extensive trade at the most suitable places on the coast of the Pacific Ocean, create large cities, open up communications by steamship, construct a railway from New York to San Francisco, for the first time really open the Pacific Ocean to civilization, and for the third time in history give the world trade a new direction? The "independence" of a few Spanish Californians and Texans may suffer because of it, in someplaces "justice" and other moral principles may be violated; but what does that matter to such facts of world-historic significance? Unique IPs: 36