>>2910039Cultural issues are a major focal point of New Left-derived thought, which is the dominant strain of leftism in the West today. Having multiple points of analyses dilutes revolutionary potential because it creates a purist effect that inevitably alienates large swathes of the proletariat who would otherwise be sympathetic towards class conflict. This is partly, in my view, why Western leftism has been so effectively neutered (labor aristocracy effect also plays a role too). It's thus no coincidence that this redirection towards pointless cultural quibbles was almost entirely engineered by OSS and CIA "academic" spooks.
Human agency is mediated by material conditions; prejudices, no matter how rational or irrational, are partly the product of one's environment. Shaming these prejudices is thus counterproductive, in my opinion. We should instead address the conditions that produces these prejudices in the first place. The "chuds" may be xenophobic, homophobic, sexist, or whatever, but they nevertheless feel the contradictions of capitalism the same as we do. The modern Western left, with its puritanical focus on culture, only pushes these "chuds" into the arms of reactionary populism. A proper left-wing movement should build on shared material grievances and majoritarian class politics that can absorb cultural differences.
>I don't think anyone on this website rejects that idea, since it is probably the fundamental thesis of this website.This website is also incredibly niche in the grand scheme of things. However, the undertones of idpol on here does exist, albeit it's much less pronounced compared to IRL leftism. However, even on this site, people are very tribal in their material interpretations of the political economy. Leftcoms versus MLs versus anarchists. First Worldists versus Third Worldists.