Reverse racism

You seem to consistently confuse "systematic" with "formal organizations". That's completely missing the point about what systemic racism is or, for that matter, what a system is. If you can understand that the economy is a system that compels the exploitation of workers, then you should be able to understand racism as structural/systemic. Otherwise, we may as well reduce class struggle to individual bosses being mean to individual workers. If you do not get this pretty fundamental difference you will forever be mired in liberal politics.

Meerov, I hear there are some positions going at Fox News if you're looking for work.

Meerov, if I'm being generous, I'd say that you're allowing the nonsense of Twitter politics to misconstrue any decent understanding of what organized class struggle anarchist currents actually look like in the US.

If I'm being ungenerous, I'd say that your attempt to somehow equate white and black racist attitudes belies your own underlying racism.

In any case:

(a) I can't say it any better than Khawage, who has clearly won this thread.

(b) Anti-semitism, like white supremacy generally, has a systematic function. It's not the same as anti-white bigotry.

(c) My challenge to you was to find just one struggle that that was undermined by anti-white bigotry. Farakhan is a dick and should be challenged. But you haven't actually provided an example of Farakhan and his organization undermining a particular strike or social struggle. Challenge fail.

On the other hand, anti-black racism within the working class has undermined countless struggles through history. To this day, it operates to both undermine attempts at solidarity and provide a "psychological wage" (to quote W.E.B. Dubois) that binds the white working class to the wider capitalist social order.

I'm assuming that you have spent a significant amount of time living and organizing in NYC because it would be just silly to make such sweeping, bigoted reactionary opinions on an entire population based solely on hearsay from people who were at Occupy, seven years ago.

Obviously I feel that taking the opinions of Occupy alums unchallenged is perfectly reasonable because it didn't disintegrate in part in a shit storm of bitterness and recriminations.

Here, Meerov, I've found another very important social issue for you to be concerned about, I look forward to you enlightening us with another lengthy text about this real and serious problem: http://delingpoleworld.com/2011/05/30/lord-fellowes-is-right-posh-people...

Way to ignore the substantive post and go for the joke one.

Meerov, I'm going to quote your own words back at you, just from this thread. Some of these are where you're describing accusations of racism (or just privilege) against white people, some are where you accuse black people of racism.

1. "Calling meerov racist is a 'left insult'"

2. "If you say I'm privileged, it's racist stupidity."

3. "If you call white people privileged, they'll tell us to fuck off and vote for Trump."

4. "Left wing people who don't agree with something insult people as racist etc."

5. "The NBPP and Farrakhan are racist, 'this is it'."

6. "If someone says housing should be redistributed, they're racist."

7. "A huge number of black proletarians in NY are anti-white racists."

8, "Why would you be surprised if I say a large number of people are racist?"

#3 and #7 are most illuminating here. You think that white workers will "just fuck up with us and go vote for Trump." if you call them privileged , and therefore no-one should use that terminology. You don't even argue that people are calling white workers racist, but in fact that any usage of privilege theory is in fact racist in itself - against white people.

However you're very happy to call a 'huge part' of the black proletariat in New York anti-white racists - not that they're in a structural position of privilege or whatever you're criticising as left insults, but out and out bigots.

If you're so concerned that calling people racist is going to alienate them into voting for far right electoral candidates, why wouldn't your statement that a huge part of black New Yorkers are racist make them 'just fuck up with us and go vote for Farrakhan'? And yet you're spent the entire thread arguing that people are inconsistent.

Did you google Rasmussen? They've been the subject of several articles accusing them of bias and inaccuracy.

I didn’t even call you a reactionary, I said some of your disingenuous trolling amounts to proposing — in a bad faith manner — “reactionary ideas.”

What you said about black proletarians in New York is not only an “alternative fact,” it’s another groundless reactionary idea.

Meerov21, what motivates you to post such fake news?

dp

black people can have internalized racism leading them to judged black people more harshly than white people eg https://www.theroot.com/the-doll-test-for-racial-self-hate-did-it-ever-m...
so "black people say most black people are racist against white people" (in one survey) doesn't necessrly make it true, even if the survey accurately reflects their views

white privilege means that everything else being equal a white person has an advantage compared to eg a black person, a poor white person has an advantage compared to an equally poor black person, eg they will be more likely to get a job, they will find it easyer to get a better playing job, if they run into trouble with the police they will be treated less harshly etc eg

https://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2014/06/27/white-high-school-dro...

I'm sorry for going for the trollbait and engaging in this discussion.

Meerov21, if you continue to swim backwards against history and actively defy truth, go ahead with pushing your reactionary ideology. Perhaps you can build it into a movement to defend whites against anti-white racism; you could call it "WHITE LIVES MATTER."

It definitely would be popular with cops.

Meerov, you really just don't get it, do you?

As for this:

What's been explained to you again and again is that people are drawing a distinction between

(a) systematic racialized oppression built into the overarching political, social, and economic structures of society ("the system") and

(b) individual or fringe group bigotry directed against whites

And, God knows, I don't expect you to get this, but as has been suggested, black people internalizing racist attitudes against black people is far more of an issue than this supposed massive and widespread anti-white sentiment that you seem to be magically aware of .

Here's an example of someone crying 'anti-white racism' and 'privilege' to try to push through attacks on workers. They manufactured a story about nurses having to apologise for being white and recite some script about privilege, in order to try to push through some kind of outsourcing or contract change. So rather than anti-white racism dividing a workforce in fact someone invented an entire situation to give the appearance of it.

https://indigenousx.com.au/the-truth-behind-the-nursing-code-of-conduct-...

Which is still racism, even though you might be squeamish about using the 'R' word, depending on who's being racist. Yes, it's clearly different to the systemic racism of 'white supremacism' as it doesn't have the whole social, economic, political and historic clout behind it, but it's still unpleasant and not something to apologise for, soften, semi-justify or 'try to understand' like a big daft liberal and say it's not really racist. That plays straight into the hands of the divide-and-rule boss class and their white supremacist stooges. What's important is how to build class unity through common interests in the day to day struggles.

The only time I've seen this done with Farrakhan by supposedly left people is the Workers World Party in the US. There's some discussion of it here, found it when looking for something else. https://www.marxists.org/history/erol/ncm-7/wa-supplement/2-1.html#artic...

There might be examples, can't remember the last time I had a discussion about Farrakhan at all to be honest.

As I mentioned above, the people who had some of the most vicious clashes with reactionary black nationalists like Ron Karenga, the NBPP, have been communists like the Black Panthers - however here has been a huge effort to label the Black Panthers themselves as nationalists/separatists. So while avoiding 'semi-justifying things like liberals', we should equally avoid giving credence to the extremely liberal idea that even talking about white supremacy (or 'privilege', or 'whiteness') is reverse racism, as happened with the attacks on Munroe Bergdorf recently.

That would be an argument that 'white privilege' is dependent on context, but not an argument that it is 'anti-white racism'.

But somewhere like Harlan County which probably fits your description more than most places in the US, still has an estimated 600 black people out of 30,000 https://suburbanstats.org/race/kentucky/harlan-county/how-many-black-or-... - that's about 2%.

Even if you can find a specific almost exclusively white community with 50% unemployment that's policed as heavily as a working class black community it doesn't change the general trend, or that someone from that community who moves to a different city might then experience policing differently to the black population.

This is one aspect of class composition internationally, often called 'uneven development', it doesn't do anyone any good to deny it exists. There are some very counter-productive ideas out there like the 'aristocracy of labour', third worldism, etc. which obscure class within countries or communities, but they are not anti-white racism.

Fucking hell meerov - would actually be a great thing if racism stopped and ended at saying mean things about groups of people but it doesn't, and that is what you're ignoring consistently. (?) Your premise (racism is being mean) is actually almost verbatim the typical right-wing analysis of racism. In the US this analysis was an important development because it effectively gets out in front of civil rights struggles under the cloth of equal culpability because a black person said a mean thing once.

If you've got beef with something some other people have said or written somewhere else, then maybe take it up with them directly, and then when you're posting here you could concetrate on replying to what other posters are actually saying? I too get annoyed when I think about some stupid things liberals have said elsewhere at various points, but I don't write every post here as if I'm responding to someone else in a different conversation.

For anyone interested, there's a good overview of the Nation of Islam here: https://libcom.org/library/critique-of-nation-of-islam-melancholic-trogl...