Losing sympathy with the plight of the ghetto?

[RadioRaheem84]

Working in an inner city neighborhood is not only tough and exhausting but it tests every facet of your core beliefs.

How can Marxists still maintain a thorough understanding of the material conditions of people in lower income neighborhoods without diving into being prejudice? What I mean by that is how can one criticize aspects of "ghetto" culture without sounding racist?

What I mean by ghetto culture, I mean the outright total hatred of any authority, the anti-intellectual atmosphere, the racism against other cultures, etc.?

Is it wrong as to not feel sympathy anymore with the "rapper's" plight about breaking out of the ghetto through violence, hustling or pimping?

Tupac's songs have no significance to me anymore. All I think about is the get rich or die trying mentality regardless of how many songs he wrote which had a modicum of decent political lyrics.

Is it racist to be against these things or can I look at it as something that should be changed when attacking the capitalist system? I mean, I just think back to how Mao and the Communists saw that several provinces in China were filled with opium addicts and that children as young as nine were murdering people for money.

Should I view the "ghetto" as something similar, albeit less severe, or is that too racist of a thought?

Please, I am just asking. I hope I did not offend anyone?

[L.A.P.]

Well first of all what is wrong with hatred of authority? You are a leftist, right? To assume everyone in ghettos are anti-intellectual is a generalization, I come form an upper-middle class family but all my friends in middle school were dirt poor and from ghettos and conversations with them were a lot more intellectually gratifying than the conversations I've had with most of my upper-middle class friends not to mention my upper-middle class friends spend a lot of their time making race jokes and a lot of the upper-middle class kids gave me shit by making Arab jokes (even though I'm not Arab) and the working class kids never gave me shit. An anti-intellectual atmosphere in ghettos as opposed to what? The oh so intellectual atmosphere in upper-middle class suburbia? If you're suburbia is that intellectual then i would love to know what heavenly city you live in?

[Dimentio]

Working in an inner city neighborhood is not only tough and exhausting but it tests every facet of your core beliefs.

How can Marxists still maintain a thorough understanding of the material conditions of people in lower income neighborhoods without diving into being prejudice? What I mean by that is how can one criticize aspects of "ghetto" culture without sounding racist?

What I mean by ghetto culture, I mean the outright total hatred of any authority, the anti-intellectual atmosphere, the racism against other cultures, etc.?

Is it wrong as to not feel sympathy anymore with the "rapper's" plight about breaking out of the ghetto through violence, hustling or pimping?

Tupac's songs have no significance to me anymore. All I think about is the get rich or die trying mentality regardless of how many songs he wrote which had a modicum of decent political lyrics.

Is it racist to be against these things or can I look at it as something that should be changed when attacking the capitalist system? I mean, I just think back to how Mao and the Communists saw that several provinces in China were filled with opium addicts and that children as young as nine were murdering people for money.

Should I view the "ghetto" as something similar, albeit less severe, or is that too racist of a thought?

Please, I am just asking. I hope I did not offend anyone?

The problem with a lot of people is that you tend to romanticise the poor.

Often, the poor could exhibit human traits which obviously are caused by their detrimental situation. Things like backstabbing other poors, selling drugs to children, wanting to get rich, gangsterisms and apathy due to being attacked for striving for something more, all a part of a system where the oppressed themselves are keeping one another in destitution.

The key is not to build up an idealised image of people, but to try to love them as they are and as what they could become. A poor human being is not intrinsically less or more worth dependent on his behaviour. See them as individuals and not as symbols, and try to understand their reasoning.

Too often, people assume that everyone are just thinking like themselves.

[Omnia Sunt Communia]

Tupac's songs have no significance to me anymore.

What about Tool?


Who are you to wave your finger?
You must have been outta your head

Thug 4 life :cool:

[hemlock]

Working in an inner city neighborhood is not only tough and exhausting but it tests every facet of your core beliefs.

How can Marxists still maintain a thorough understanding of the material conditions of people in lower income neighborhoods without diving into being prejudice? What I mean by that is how can one criticize aspects of "ghetto" culture without sounding racist?

I hate to stop you there, but I have experience working in (and growing up in) inner city neighborhoods, and I think your experience must have been particularized to whatever city you worked it at whatever time you did.



What I mean by ghetto culture, I mean the outright total hatred of any authority, the anti-intellectual atmosphere, the racism against other cultures, etc.?

?? So you mean, rural white out-city areas as well? The right wingers of those areas fall into that very descript ideal you just gave.

I would ask, is it "the ghetto" you mean to speak ill of, or simply "the poor", or even "poor black people"? If either of the latter, why modify your wording and call it the 'ghetto' and not simply what you really mean? Side-terming is a tactic of rightwingers (a group which also stereptypes all 'ghetto' people...ie black people... as ignorant and inferior, as well as also shows disfavor for them)

My experience with the "ghetto" is exact opposite. Its teeming with brilliant people whos lives are wasted because they either have no alternatives for life (the job market and criminal justice system are tailored against them), or they have alternative duties that require hard sacrifices (kids, parents that need care).

What "ghetto" are you alluding to?



Is it wrong as to not feel sympathy anymore with the "rapper's" plight about breaking out of the ghetto through violence, hustling or pimping?

If you stereotype all rap as "violence and hustling and pimping" no. If you actually listen to real life rap, not top 40 bullcrap, you would probably know for 80% of hiphop, those descriptions you gave have no semblence.


Tupac's songs have no significance to me anymore. All I think about is the get rich or die trying mentality regardless of how many songs he wrote which had a modicum of decent political lyrics.

??Get rich or die trying was 50 cent (who arrived +7 years after Tupac was long dead). Tupac was one of the more political rappers who (before death row got ahold of him) rapped about racism, drug infiltration into black communities, and police violence.

From your confusing the two, I take it you actually never have listened to any tupac songs? If thats the case, how can you make any fair judgement?

[RadioRaheem84]

Hold the phone Hemlock. No need to come in here with an attitude that somehow apologizes for aspects of lower class culture (of all stripes) and attribute my "ignorance" as something a misunderstanding or generalizing.

Yes, it is an aspect that needs to be addressed. Yes, minorities. Yes, white people too. I was specifically talking about inner cities but I am sure this is a growing problem everywhere.

The point was how to address the problems in the "ghetto' without sounding racist and the first thing you did was do exactly what I asked not to do; think I was generalizing or pinning everyone in there as no good.

Also, Tupac also rapped about hoes, money and killing people. He was about an intellectual giant as a Biggie Smalls. Fuck that guy. I have no love for his fiery brand of shit rap. I prefer Dead Prez.

And I know who 50 Cent is and I wasn't trying to say that the get rich or die trying was somehow Tupac's song.

But this is what I am talking about. You just brought up a perfect example. Tupac rapped about political things, he was a product of the "ghetto", he rose up, but he was also involved in illicit and violent things. Do you want me to forget that simply because I can understand his material conditions growing up in that environment?

I was at least trying to look at the situation the way Malcolm X saw it. Understanding it, but not finding any room to excuse it or condone it simply because it's prevalent in lower income society. We do not do the same with racist behavior in lower income white neighborhoods.

I am trying to show a disfavor to the misery and state of mind that has a lot of inner city minorities trapped in the ghetto. Not to attribute it as something that is inherently their culture. It is not their culture but a condition that can be seen in all lower income neighborhoods. Sometimes I feel that some leftists rather embrace it and almost indirectly defend it.

Like Dementio stated, I used to romanticize the poor. I am breaking away from that.

[RadioRaheem84]

The problem with a lot of people is that you tend to romanticise the poor.

Often, the poor could exhibit human traits which obviously are caused by their detrimental situation. Things like backstabbing other poors, selling drugs to children, wanting to get rich, gangsterisms and apathy due to being attacked for striving for something more, all a part of a system where the oppressed themselves are keeping one another in destitution.

The key is not to build up an idealised image of people, but to try to love them as they are and as what they could become. A poor human being is not intrinsically less or more worth dependent on his behaviour. See them as individuals and not as symbols, and try to understand their reasoning.

Too often, people assume that everyone are just thinking like themselves.

Dimentio this is right on the money. Thanks for the post.

I have never thought that there was anything inherently cultural about crime or being uneducated. These are material conditions that affect anyone independent of race.

The point I was trying to make and I was trying hard not to offend other comrades, was how to seek changes within communities without stepping on toes because a lot of people think that criticizing aspects of ghetto, rural, or inner city "culture" is being racist or prejudice. It's almost as if they identify with the things that hold them back. As if the stigma has become the cultural identification.

I was talking about the same situation comrades in Afghanistan felt about relieving their society of racism, religious superstition, homophobia and sexism. Well, I doubt they thought of these things as inherently Afghan but social conditions. The same when Mao discovered the horrors affecting rural China.

The same I am trying to apply to the inner city (as well as all low income areas). The point is that there is such an identification with these socials ills by some people, that to criticize them as aspects that pervade inner cities is racist, and that I am generalizing because I do not also mention the rural white communities too.

[BuddhaInBabylon]

i know how you feel man....
i come from pretty white trash upbringing, and the apathy and ignorance is the same in the inner cities as well as in the backwoods....it's a matter of awareness i think. to the extent that ghetto kids give less a shit than others, i don't know what to say about that....Maybe there's more to fuck up around you when you live in the city....?

[anticap]

I've never had any respect for the "get rich or die trying" image of gangsta-rap, but I've always had immense respect for those who manage to survive the inner-city without falling to such temptations.

[RadioRaheem84]

I've never had any respect for the "get rich or die trying" image of gangsta-rap, but I've always had immense respect for those who manage to survive the inner-city without falling to such temptations.

I come from that background. Growing up, I hated gangster-ism.

[manic expression]

That's a tough question, the only advice I can give is to be patient. The Bolsheviks were working with really backwards mentalities among the Russian proletariat, but they were patient and look what they accomplished because of it. Living as a revolutionary will make you a model for others, sooner or later people will see that you're standing up for their liberation. Also, I sometimes think that breaking down revolution to the simplest of terms helps in those situations. But I'm sure my experience on this pales in comparison to yours, so I'd be interested in hearing what has worked best for you.


Also, Tupac also rapped about hoes, money and killing people. He was about an intellectual giant as a Biggie Smalls. Fuck that guy. I have no love for his fiery brand of shit rap. I prefer Dead Prez.
Not to turn this into a thread about Tupac, but people who were real close to him said that he was doing what KRS-1 did...getting people's attention with the thug life attitude, and then bring them the real message. Tragically he didn't get to do it because his life was cut short, but we do have stuff like Changes, Brenda's Got a Baby...easily some of the most insightful hip hop ever made. Plus...a lot of Pac's "hoes, money and killing people" had to do with being on the Death Row label...and he didn't have that much of a choice when he was offered the contract. On edit, it's not surprising that Tupac's crew has done a lot of work with Dead Prez.

And one more thing, I think you're selling Biggie real short. People forget to listen to the deeper parts of Ready to Die...the whole point of the CD is that by the end of it he realizes he hates himself, that being "ready to die" all the time made him want to die. Honestly, I've never seen or heard a more moving, unforgiving depiction of depression and/or suicidal thoughts than from Biggie...and I don't just mean hip hop, I mean any artform.

[Sugar Hill Kevis]

I come form an upper-middle class family but all my friends in middle school were dirt poor

Congratulations.

[McCroskey]

I've seen the same problem in inner cities... the culture there (young people mostly) is a macho attitude of "I'd kill if that's what it takes to get rich". They believe in everything I hate as a communist. Youngsters there think that being rich exploiting others is an achievement, they are utterly racist, anti-socialist, and most people I've met think women should be regarded as sex slaves. They don't believe in a society that provides for all, their fight for rights is for the right to be a part of the capitalist system, by whatever means. This is the result of decades of capitalist repression and propaganda, which has shown these people that they are forgotten and that the opposite of being poor is not "not being poor", but being filthy rich. Problem is, when you try to reach young people from inner cities and try to talk to them about the capitalist system and about their role as a part of a community, when you try to make these people aware, and give them a chance to work for a commol goal for the whole community, you will invariably have the opposition of some "left" do-gooders who think you are somehow being racist because, it seems, for them, black people in the ghettoes killing each other over drugs, hookers or money, is a "revolutionary" thing, and part of their culture.

They should talk to their parents, see what they think. It's impossible to spread socialism in inner cities when some "revolutionary leftists" still see some rap songs and gang warfare as being something "racial", rather than an utter disgrace and the most reactionary practice for youngsters whose only crime has been to be born in communities that are forgotten about in the modern market world.

[gorillafuck]

What I mean by ghetto culture, I mean the outright total hatred of any authority, the anti-intellectual atmosphere, the racism against other cultures, etc.?
This isn't at all exclusive to poor neighborhoods. Being in a middle class area, basically everyone I hang out with (usually apolitical or apathetic democrats) hates cops, hates school, and there is racism present.

Poor people aren't more noble than anyone else (people who think poverty is noble are stupid), but it's not like poor people are these ultrareactionaries while non-poor people are progressive intellectuals.

[hemlock]

Hold the phone Hemlock. No need to come in here with an attitude that somehow apologizes for aspects of lower class culture (of all stripes) and attribute my "ignorance" as something a misunderstanding or generalizing.

Yes, it is an aspect that needs to be addressed. Yes, minorities. Yes, white people too. I was specifically talking about inner cities but I am sure this is a growing problem everywhere.

The point was how to address the problems in the "ghetto' without sounding racist and the first thing you did was do exactly what I asked not to do; think I was generalizing or pinning everyone in there as no good.

But you did. You said you were tired of the 'ghetto', then ascribed the 'ghetto culture people' (as in the people in it) to be " total hatred of any authority, the anti-intellectual atmosphere, the racism against other cultures, etc.? "

Im sorry, but its hard to make an honest response when someone says "Dont respond to anything I say about Cars", and then goes about saying "Im tired of driving cars...anyone agree"?



Also, Tupac also rapped about hoes, money and killing people. He was about an intellectual giant as a Biggie Smalls. Fuck that guy. I have no love for his fiery brand of shit rap. I prefer Dead Prez.

?? As said, his final album and death row work, yes. He fell into that stereotype because it got him a record deal that paid several times what he otherwise was getting.

I suggest you go out and buy the album "me against the world" and 2pacalypse now.



And I know who 50 Cent is and I wasn't trying to say that the get rich or die trying was somehow Tupac's song.

Ok, if thats not what you meant, fair enough. But thats what you said.


But this is what I am talking about. You just brought up a perfect example. Tupac rapped about political things, he was a product of the "ghetto", he rose up, but he was also involved in illicit and violent things. Do you want me to forget that simply because I can understand his material conditions growing up in that environment?

?? If you grow up in the ghetto, odds are you are witness to, nearby or involved in violence and illicit things throughout your life. We cannot all sit back from our comfortable suburban homes and dream the comfortable dream of what an egalitarian socialist society would be like. Some people, usually those who witness first hand WHY social equity and socialism can be a positive force, are exposed to the dregs of modern neo-capitalist or corpoate-fascism/Cultural Imperialism does to people.

What kind of life do you think Marx (later), Biko, Fanon, Bukharin (also later), Debs, and various other "from the ground up" social-protestants had for them to see the flaws in society?



I was at least trying to look at the situation the way Malcolm X saw it. Understanding it, but not finding any room to excuse it or condone it simply because it's prevalent in lower income society. We do not do the same with racist behavior in lower income white neighborhoods.

I understand, but you worded your OP as if you were trying to legitimize HATING it. Very different than understanding it.



I am trying to show a disfavor to the misery and state of mind that has a lot of inner city minorities trapped in the ghetto. Not to attribute it as something that is inherently their culture. It is not their culture but a condition that can be seen in all lower income neighborhoods. Sometimes I feel that some leftists rather embrace it and almost indirectly defend it.

Like Dementio stated, I used to romanticize the poor. I am breaking away from that.

Leftists, IMO, do not DEFEND IT in and of itself, they defend those who adapt to the mentality out of understanding how the flawed fascist/imperialist/neo-capitolist systems have forced those people into that mind set.

I dont think its romanticizing anything. I think by seeing it through the "I hate your culture that you have been forced into" mentality is a HUGE FLAW to the socialist movement, and its not old either.

Marx spoke of it when he mentioned the lumpenproletariat. And he was wrong (those very lumpenproletariat are the same people that revolted to form the USSR and Red China). To castigate the poor for something they cannot help is nothing different than what the capito-fascist do.

[RadioRaheem84]

The Tupac thing we should drop because it is also a matter of taste and I have no real deep respect for the guy. He died because of a retaliation to a fight he started. The man was a thug to me. A confused but sometimes brilliant thug. It's just my opinion. I have never found anything romantic about the twisted life of thuggish hip hop intertwined with brief moments of social consciousness. So Biggie and Pac rapped about the socio political realities of the ghetto even though they also rapped about the usual *****es and hoes routine. Big deal, I hardly saw Chuck D fall into the same pattern and cycle of sociopathic violence.




Leftists, IMO, do not DEFEND IT in and of itself, they defend those who adapt to the mentality out of understanding how the flawed fascist/imperialist/neo-capitolist systems have forced those people into that mind set.

I dont think its romanticizing anything. I think by seeing it through the "I hate your culture that you have been forced into" mentality is a HUGE FLAW to the socialist movement, and its not old either.

Marx spoke of it when he mentioned the lumpenproletariat. And he was wrong (those very lumpenproletariat are the same people that revolted to form the USSR and Red China). To castigate the poor for something they cannot help is nothing different than what the capito-fascist do.
But the thing is that I do not see the behavior they're forced into as their culture. Being black or hispanic in the inner city does not mean being uneducated, a petty thug or cheat. These are things that people adapt to because of their circumstances and the low incentive they're given to better themselves. The life just become easier than trying to break out of it. But it's not something they should internalize and make it their own.

This is the thing that I am breaking loose of; of romanticizing those aspects that make up the ""ghetto culture". I use it in an abstract form, as if it's something outside of them. A particular set of circumstances that are usually found in all low income communities but with different variations due to racial hierarchy.

When I mean ghetto culture, I do not mean black, hispanic or poor white ethnic culture, but the particular social beliefs and customs associated with living life under harsh material conditions. They're just as deeply reactionary as any setting that lacks a leftist presence.

How come this much understanding isn't given to the poor white kid who falls into fascist and Neo Nazi gang? He turns his anger into a status of supremacy and feeds off the "inferiority" of other races to hide his own insecurity and avoid seeing his social condition.

He goes into a musical outlet but uses it to vent racist junk. Yet, this is seen as more of a threat than extreme gangster rap which fosters some of the worst elements of racism, homophobia, sexism, etc. Even when the African American community speaks out against it too.

[hemlock]

But the thing is that I do not see the behavior they're forced into as their culture. Being black or hispanic in the inner city does not mean being uneducated, a petty thug or cheat. These are things that people adapt to because of their circumstances and the low incentive they're given to better themselves. The life just become easier than trying to break out of it. But it's not something they should internalize and make it their own.


1. Who says all that live in the ghetto are uneducated, petty thugs and cheats?

Again, as a person who grew up in a ghetto, as well as one who has worked in several, I must say either your personal experience is very different than the standard, or you are basing your opinion on falsities.

Yes, there are uneducated and thugs and cheats, but they are by far a tiny minority in most ghettos. Most people in the ghetto = just poor people of color. Thats all it takes for a place to be labeled "ghetto" by mainstream america. It sounds like you have fallen for the white right's stereotype of blacks.


When I mean ghetto culture, I do not mean black, hispanic or poor white ethnic culture, but the particular social beliefs and customs associated with living life under harsh material conditions. They're just as deeply reactionary as any setting that lacks a leftist presence.


You are way off base here. Even in the ghetto, the poor are overwhelmingly progressive/democrat supporting, pro social services, pro safety net, dont give a shit about taxes but very much care about things that taxes pay for like mass transit, healthcare subsidization and childcare.

What ghetto are you referring to? Have you ever actually been to one, and spoken to people from there?


He goes into a musical outlet but uses it to vent racist junk. Yet, this is seen as more of a threat than extreme gangster rap which fosters some of the worst elements of racism, homophobia, sexism, etc. Even when the African American community speaks out against it too.

?? "gangster rap" died out over 10 years ago. Claiming that as a pretextual standard would be like claiming "disco funk" is a cause for disfunction in society. Again, you use terms and generalizations that are not only outdated, but are outright false to formulate your opinion.

In gangster rap, there is no message to "kill whites" (in 99% of it). In nazi punk rock, 99% of it is a message to "kill jews and blacks and muslims and gays and socialist".

If anything, gangster rap partially advocated a near-anarchist left state of things. It attacked cops for their racist practices, it attacks the rich for their social apathy, and it attacked the system by which the people in the ghetto are forced to live.

I do not think you have a firm grasp of the "ghetto culture" you are judging, because most of what you have stated as standard to which you disagree with are either stereotypes (very similar to white right wing racist ones) or outdated falsities.

Take it from a person who has lived and worked in a ghetto...perhaps you should stick to making judgement on societies and social groups you are familiar with.

[RadioRaheem84]

The ghetto I am referring to is the subculture that exists on top of the one that you described. The one that deals with violence, sexism, homophobia and a get rich or die trying mentality. It exists and for you to deny or marginalize it simply because it's a minority is disingenuous.

I make no apologies for what I said. The situation is real and I lived through it myself when my parents raised us in a largely hispanic poor urban area. It was rough and I disliked a lot of the culture wrapped around the ethnic culture due to economic conditions. It's a fact of life.

It's not being racist. It's not stereotyping. This had nothing to do with generalizing or avoiding the positive elements that are found in the ghetto. This is about eliminating the exact same mentality that you're exhibiting now; that just because it exists in juxtaposition to a positive environment that criticizing it is racist. It is not. It is fundamental to continue upholding the positive elements while uprooting the negative ones caused by the economic conditions.

It's that simple. There should be no romanticizing the plight of the people that fall into the traps of the ghetto and get out of it through violence anymore than romanticizing the poor white kid who joins the Klan for social solidarity. Yet, somehow there is more understanding for the Bloods and Crips among leftists than that of Neo Nazi indoctrination for white rural kids.

How come there is always a third force when discussing the negatives of rural white communities but always a more collaborative and understanding of gangs in the ghetto? The point is that I am through apologizing for the aspects of gang culture that not only inhibit a deeper understanding of social conditions in the ghetto but exploit it by issuing their own social pathological movements of violence.

This includes the music. Gangster Rap is not dead. It is also alive and well in many aspects of Southern Rap culture which I am very familiar with.


If anything, gangster rap partially advocated a near-anarchist left state of things. It attacked cops for their racist practices, it attacks the rich for their social apathy, and it attacked the system by which the people in the ghetto are forced to live.

The whole point is that despite the brief moments in social conscious that can be apparent to anyone (even religious zealots in the Middle East) that still doesn't excuse their bent on violence and other forms of anti-social behavior which they, to this day, revel in.

Seriously, you are sort of the exact person I wanted to talk to about this and I am glad that you came in with your arguments because this is exactly the type of challenge I needed. Comrade, the situation is not about misunderstanding the ghetto but trying to look past the romantic "survival" aspects of it that we sometimes do not attribute to other cultures. I doubt Mao cared to give that much understanding to Triad-ism of rural China and the culture surrounding "surviving" the Chinese ghettos.



1. Who says all that live in the ghetto are uneducated, petty thugs and cheats?


No one is generalizing. I am talking aspects of it that exist in lower income societies especially in the inner city.

[RadioRaheem84]

Thats all it takes for a place to be labeled "ghetto" by mainstream america. It sounds like you have fallen for the white right's stereotype of blacks.

No comrade, the rights argument is more in line with the idea that it's natural that people in the ghetto are like that because of some internal disposition to be like that. It's natural for them to be that way because of cultural, ethnic or racial inferiority.

I attribute he negative aspects to economic, social and material conditions. I never once indicated that black = ghetto. I indicated the opposite. That we should stop thinking that to attack the negative aspects of the ghetto is racist because that is not their culture or sub-culture, it is a symptom of class oppression and we should start discussing it not being collaborative and apologizing for it or defending it or worse act like it's racist to denounce it.

[Devrim]

Marx spoke of it when he mentioned the lumpenproletariat. And he was wrong (those very lumpenproletariat are the same people that revolted to form the USSR and Red China). To castigate the poor for something they cannot help is nothing different than what the capito-fascist do.

This is just wrong. In Russia it was the working class and in China the peasantry.


I've seen the same problem in inner cities... the culture there (young people mostly) is a macho attitude of "I'd kill if that's what it takes to get rich". They believe in everything I hate as a communist. Youngsters there think that being rich exploiting others is an achievement, they are utterly racist, anti-socialist, and most people I've met think women should be regarded as sex slaves. They don't believe in a society that provides for all, their fight for rights is for the right to be a part of the capitalist system, by whatever means. This is the result of decades of capitalist repression and propaganda, which has shown these people that they are forgotten and that the opposite of being poor is not "not being poor", but being filthy rich. Problem is, when you try to reach young people from inner cities and try to talk to them about the capitalist system and about their role as a part of a community, when you try to make these people aware, and give them a chance to work for a commol goal for the whole community, you will invariably have the opposition of some "left" do-gooders who think you are somehow being racist because, it seems, for them, black people in the ghettoes killing each other over drugs, hookers or money, is a "revolutionary" thing, and part of their culture.

But then I am sure that there are lots of ordinary working class people just getting by, probably the majority of them. It's just that youth culture tends to be more visible and louder, than people quietly going about their lives.

Devrim

[hemlock]

This is just wrong. In Russia it was the working class and in China the peasantry.

?? And what do you think the people of the ghettos are? They are essentially working class 'peasants'. A structured underclass. The lumpenproletariat.



But then I am sure that there are lots of ordinary working class people just getting by, probably the majority of them. It's just that youth culture tends to be more visible and louder, than people quietly going about their lives.

Devrim

Youth culture?


The ghetto I am referring to is the subculture that exists on top of the one that you described. The one that deals with violence, sexism, homophobia and a get rich or die trying mentality. It exists and for you to deny or marginalize it simply because it's a minority is disingenuous.


As disingenuous as to imply that 'subculture' is the standard for the people of the ghetto, which is what your initial 3 posts kept implying, then disclaiming it by claiming to speak for the trend, not the specifics.


It's not being racist. It's not stereotyping. This had nothing to do with generalizing or avoiding the positive elements that are found in the ghetto. This is about eliminating the exact same mentality that you're exhibiting now; that just because it exists in juxtaposition to a positive environment that criticizing it is racist. It is not. It is fundamental to continue upholding the positive elements while uprooting the negative ones caused by the economic conditions.


No one called you racist. I have to admit, its usually a guilty mind to go that route before the R card is pulled. Im sorry, but since we are calling them as we see them, thats very much the truth.The 'negative elements' you keep referring to, at least in the way you mention them, are such a minority in 'ghetto culture' that its pretty silly to attack it as a systemic problem.

Where there is poverty, there is strife. Where there is lack of resources, there is conflict. Marx, Hegel, Lenin, Fanon, Bukharin, Rosseau, hell even Mills were aware of this simplicity of the human condition. The manner by which you attack it, you imply that such a standard should not exist or does not normally exist in all culture or in all cases of poverty.


It's that simple. There should be no romanticizing the plight of the people that fall into the traps of the ghetto and get out of it through violence anymore than romanticizing the poor white kid who joins the Klan for social solidarity. Yet, somehow there is more understanding for the Bloods and Crips among leftists than that of Neo Nazi indoctrination for white rural kids.


You keep mentioning this, but there is no one 'romanticizing' anything about the ghetto.

If you are implying that 'romanticizing' things from the ghetto is equivalent to 'kids not in the ghetto listening to ghetto music and wearing styles developed in the ghetto', youll have a hard time routing that out unless you are a country music fan, becase all mainstream music forums sans country and folk originate in the ghetto. Jazz, blues, rock and roll, disco, pop, funk, hip hop, and each spinoff thereof. The same goes for clothing. Whether its skinhead ska mod, zoot suits from the 20s, jeans and tees from the 50s, or the baggy clothes from the 90s/2000's. Each originated as 'black ghetto' styles that others emulated and modified.

Its not romanticizing, its absorbing and developing. Unless you are going to argue for racial or cultural homogeneity, another thing right wingers cling to.


This includes the music. Gangster Rap is not dead. It is also alive and well in many aspects of Southern Rap culture which I am very familiar with.


Now I know you arent aware of what you speak on rap. I am from the south (texas). Tell a southern rap fan they are listening to 'gangster rapping' and see what kind of look you get.

Gangster rap = gang related/emulated rap developed in the west coast. Snoop dog, NWA, Dr Dre...thats gangsta rap. Southern rap (outkast, UGK, 36 mafia, chamillionaire, slim thug, etc) is Southern Rap. Its own thing. No gang hyping. Drugs, women, yes. Not gangs.


The whole point is that despite the brief moments in social conscious that can be apparent to anyone (even religious zealots in the Middle East) that still doesn't excuse their bent on violence and other forms of anti-social behavior which they, to this day, revel in.



?? Antisocial? Are you a right winger? Most righties say left wing concepts like "socialism/anarchism/syndicalism" are antisocial. What makes 'ghetto music' different?

By 'antisocial', if you mean 'not conforming to mainstream white cultural norms', then yes absolutely it is antisocial. If you mean 'opposing the social norms of its surroundings' you are absolutely incorrect. Rap, in each of its subdivisions, is by definition a reflection of the community from which is sprang. Positives and negatives all get poured into it. Its an art, and therefore in the eye of the beholder.

If you dont particularly 'get it', thats understandable. But a person from the 'ghetto' would see 'toby keith' or 'tool' or 'skrewdriver' or 'linkin park' as something as antisocial as you, an outsider, sees rap.

[RadioRaheem84]

Hemlock, you're getting no where by continuing to think that somehow the subculture of violence, sexism, homophobia is an ingrained aspect of lower income society.


No one called you racist. I have to admit, its usually a guilty mind to go that route before the R card is pulled. Im sorry, but since we are calling them as we see them, thats very much the truth.The 'negative elements' you keep referring to, at least in the way you mention them, are such a minority in 'ghetto culture' that its pretty silly to attack it as a systemic problem.

Get off it. It is not some marginalized minority as if it doesn't affect anyone in the lower income urban areas. There is a serious threat of gang culture and violence in these neighborhoods, illiteracy is high, as is extreme drug use and other stuff. Stop acting as though it's something that should be discussed simply because it's not the majority. It's a rather significant problem, especially in areas in inner city Houston.


Where there is poverty, there is strife. Where there is lack of resources, there is conflict. Marx, Hegel, Lenin, Fanon, Bukharin, Rosseau, hell even Mills were aware of this simplicity of the human condition. The manner by which you attack it, you imply that such a standard should not exist or does not normally exist in all culture or in all cases of poverty.

It does but the point is that there are aspects we should always help to root out. Trying to eliminate some of the social ills of Cuban Society didn't mean that it was an attack on the Cuban character by the Cuban revolutionaries.


You keep mentioning this, but there is no one 'romanticizing' anything about the ghetto.

If you are implying that 'romanticizing' things from the ghetto is equivalent to 'kids not in the ghetto listening to ghetto music and wearing styles developed in the ghetto', youll have a hard time routing that out unless you are a country music fan, becase all mainstream music forums sans country and folk originate in the ghetto. Jazz, blues, rock and roll, disco, pop, funk, hip hop, and each spinoff thereof. The same goes for clothing. Whether its skinhead ska mod, zoot suits from the 20s, jeans and tees from the 50s, or the baggy clothes from the 90s/2000's. Each originated as 'black ghetto' styles that others emulated and modified.

Its not romanticizing, its absorbing and developing. Unless you are going to argue for racial or cultural homogeneity, another thing right wingers cling to.

Way to totally miss the point! Seriously, I really think that you're too stuck on the thing that I was trying to avoid in the first place; placing the social ills in the ghetto onto the entire culture as if it's a staple.

I said NOTHING of clothing, styles, or even musical taste. I am talking about the racist, homophobic, anti-intellectual, get rich or die trying mentality that pervades the inner city thought in some people. A wretched set of beliefs and norms that would be the first thing to go if revolutionaries were to reach the inner cities.

Again, debating with you is becoming pointless if you keep straw-manning like this.

Just because it exists in rural, suburban and other communities doesn't matter. I am specifically talking about the inner city.



Now I know you arent aware of what you speak on rap. I am from the south (texas). Tell a southern rap fan they are listening to 'gangster rapping' and see what kind of look you get.

Gangster rap = gang related/emulated rap developed in the west coast. Snoop dog, NWA, Dr Dre...thats gangsta rap. Southern rap (outkast, UGK, 36 mafia, chamillionaire, slim thug, etc) is Southern Rap. Its own thing. No gang hyping. Drugs, women, yes. Not gangs.
Dude, I am from Houston. I used to listen to everything from Swishahouse, Paul Wall and Chamilionaire, etc. I know about Southern, especially Texas rap. Everything from that disgusting pig South Park Mexican to witnessing the dissolution of Swishahouse Records. A lot of it peddles the worst excesses of crass materialism, homophobia and sexism. Do not get me wrong, some of that stuff is real catchy, but the majority even ticks off the Northeast rappers in terms of quality. It's known for being almost mindless.

That is beside the point though. Again, it's about taste and I find most hip hop to be crass BS, except for notable exceptions like Dead Prez and the Wu.

I used to think, wow, Wyclef Jean had a social conscious like no other. His work with the Fugees and his album The Carnival were amazing, but it turned out the man is a free enterprise loving con man accused by Sean Penn for living it up lavishly on the torn island of Haiti. So this is why I tend to not look to much into the "social messages" of rappers that survived the ghetto and lived to tell about it.

Politicians talk all day about their humble upbringings but end up serving other masters in the end.

Seriously, hemlock there is nothing special about the rappers. There is nothing special about the plight of the ghetto without addressing the social conditions that affect them. Nothing at least that distinguishes it from the rest of the world, yet there is a theme by leftists to almost collaborate with elements that spur the social ills even worse (gangs, rappers, etc.) Instead of doing stuff like that, a real third force ala Black Panthers, etc. should emerge.

Look comrade, I used to take a liberal approach to the ills of the inner city, but now while working there, I have taken up a more militant approach reading a lot of Malcolm X, Huey Newton, Maya Angelou and adopting a less tolerant view of collaborative aspects with elements that continue to foster social ills in the ghetto by keeping the youth away from realizing their social conditions. Not just understanding it because a rapper rapped about it.

[Obzervi]

Working in an inner city neighborhood is not only tough and exhausting but it tests every facet of your core beliefs.

How can Marxists still maintain a thorough understanding of the material conditions of people in lower income neighborhoods without diving into being prejudice? What I mean by that is how can one criticize aspects of "ghetto" culture without sounding racist?

What I mean by ghetto culture, I mean the outright total hatred of any authority, the anti-intellectual atmosphere, the racism against other cultures, etc.?

Is it wrong as to not feel sympathy anymore with the "rapper's" plight about breaking out of the ghetto through violence, hustling or pimping?

Tupac's songs have no significance to me anymore. All I think about is the get rich or die trying mentality regardless of how many songs he wrote which had a modicum of decent political lyrics.

Is it racist to be against these things or can I look at it as something that should be changed when attacking the capitalist system? I mean, I just think back to how Mao and the Communists saw that several provinces in China were filled with opium addicts and that children as young as nine were murdering people for money.

Should I view the "ghetto" as something similar, albeit less severe, or is that too racist of a thought?

Please, I am just asking. I hope I did not offend anyone?

Think of it this way. Black people in the US are living in a white supremacist culture which holds them back at every turn. Due to their impoverished conditions, they in a state of survival mode. If you were basically starving and just trying to live day to day, would you really be interested in intellectual stuff? The core of the problem is racism.

[RadioRaheem84]

Think of it this way. Black people in the US are living in a white supremacist culture which holds them back at every turn. Due to their impoverished conditions, they in a state of survival mode. If you were basically starving and just trying to live day to day, would you really be interested in intellectual stuff? The core of the problem is racism.

That's a given. But even white people in the rural areas have a mode of surviving that harsh economic realities; social solidarity in Churches or racist right wing groups.

Then again, the Black Panthers found a way to transcend all that and really help the neighborhoods. That's the mentality I am adopting now. They really reached out and helped liberate inner cities with a social message that offered more hope than anything capitalist society (positive or negative) could give them.

Before I used to just really defend the negative elements (mostly indirectly) and think that denouncing them was being racist. But then I thought it was racist to assume that these aspects are some how integral to their culture simply because of their material and social conditions.

Hating on the antisemitism that can be found in some elements of the Palestinian communities is not being anti-Arab because they're being oppressed by the Israelis. I can understand why they adopt these things but I won't sit there and think I am attacking a staple of Palestinian culture or something.

Maybe I am just not making myself clear enough.

[Obzervi]

By the way people of color can not be racist because racism equates power and wealth. Sure they may be a little resentful of the dominant culture, but that is justified by their plight. The true racist is you for being unable to consider all the factors which are contributing to social problems within poor areas. It is obvious by your postings that you have allowed White Supremacist ideas to infiltrate your mind.

By the way poor right wingers do not stand for social justice, so your comparison is mute. In fact they stand for the opposite.

[anticap]

The true racist is you.... It is obvious by your postings that you have allowed White Supremacist ideas to infiltrate your mind.

This is just completely uncalled for. RadioRaheem84 is clearly not a fucking racist. Sheesh.

[RadioRaheem84]

By the way people of color can not be racist because racism equates power and wealth. Sure they may be a little resentful of the dominant culture, but that is justified by their plight. The true racist is you for being unable to consider all the factors which are contributing to social problems within poor areas. It is obvious by your postings that you have allowed White Supremacist ideas to infiltrate your mind.

Wow. That was fucked up, man. No seriously. I spent the entire time explaining in this thread that the negative aspects prevalent in the inner cities are not due to some internal disposition on the part of the minorities there, but because of material conditions.

So only the rich and powerful can be racist?

The point was that I was considering all the problems of the ghetto and that these problems need more than a collaborative element to help the social ills. It needs an entire new third force like a Black Panthers or leftist groups to really get in there.

Nothing of what I said can be remotely traced back to white supremacy. Especially since I am not white.

[Reznov]

Working in an inner city neighborhood is not only tough and exhausting but it tests every facet of your core beliefs.

How can Marxists still maintain a thorough understanding of the material conditions of people in lower income neighborhoods without diving into being prejudice? What I mean by that is how can one criticize aspects of "ghetto" culture without sounding racist?

What I mean by ghetto culture, I mean the outright total hatred of any authority, the anti-intellectual atmosphere, the racism against other cultures, etc.?

Is it wrong as to not feel sympathy anymore with the "rapper's" plight about breaking out of the ghetto through violence, hustling or pimping?

Tupac's songs have no significance to me anymore. All I think about is the get rich or die trying mentality regardless of how many songs he wrote which had a modicum of decent political lyrics.

Is it racist to be against these things or can I look at it as something that should be changed when attacking the capitalist system? I mean, I just think back to how Mao and the Communists saw that several provinces in China were filled with opium addicts and that children as young as nine were murdering people for money.

Should I view the "ghetto" as something similar, albeit less severe, or is that too racist of a thought?

Please, I am just asking. I hope I did not offend anyone?

I know what your going through.

In my school all the kids talk about is J's, rappers or girls. If you mention politics, I dont get ignored but more of "I dont care that much as long as I get my own" mentality.

And I still haven't seen anyone suggest a course of action (One that is sensible and could actually work that is) that we should be trying to take to fix this problem.

[Devrim]

?? And what do you think the people of the ghettos are? They are essentially working class 'peasants'. A structured underclass. The lumpenproletariat.

I would imagine that the 'people of the Ghetto' are composed of different classes, the working class, the lumpen proletariat, and the petit-bourgeoisie, as well as a strata that we could call the 'lumpen petit-bourgeoisie'.

The idea of 'working class peasants' is absurd. The working class is defined by wage labour, whereas the peasantry is defined by ownership of property. They are different relationships to the means of production.

Neither the Russian or Chinese revolutions contrary to what you asserted was made by the lumpen proletariat.

I no very little about what life is like in the 'ghettos' of the US though I think that the very term itself is a little absurd. I have lived in the inner city in England, what are termed the 'Catholic ghettos' of Northern Ireland, South Beirut, and Istanbul 'gecekondu'. As for material conditions, I would presume that England and Ireland are a little better, and Beiruit and Istanbul considerably worse.

However, that ignores the levels of social decomposition that are present in the States, and the States and the particularly negative effects of 'lumpenisation' and gang culture.


Youth culture?

Yes, this thread is obsessed by youth culture, a youth culture that essentially romanticises street gangs and gangsterism, which once you have cleared away all of the nonsense surrounding it is a completely anti-working class phenomenon. However both the youth culture and gangsterism itself are essentially 'noisy'. People getting blown away tends to make the news whilst people going about their daily lives doesn't. I would imagine though that at least a large proportion of people who live in the 'Ghetto' are actually working class.

Devrim

[Devrim]

By the way people of color can not be racist because racism equates power and wealth. Sure they may be a little resentful of the dominant culture, but that is justified by their plight. The true racist is you for being unable to consider all the factors which are contributing to social problems within poor areas. It is obvious by your postings that you have allowed White Supremacist ideas to infiltrate your mind.

Accusing people of being 'racists' seems to be an essential part of the America political discourse.

Devrim

[RadioRaheem84]

Thank you Warsaw. I used to just take a rather liberal collaborative appraoch. Ya, know point others to a socially conscious message by a rapper who in the next song was just then rapping about getting his and slapping women. From now on I'll just point them to Dead Prez. I really love to get the Hispanic youth to listen to more Victor Jara and telling them about ezln. It's really about just trying to make leftist ideals seem liberating and cool I guess, instead of trying to use the mainstream stuff to find social messages.

[L.A.P.]

[QUOTE]The whole point is that despite the brief moments in social conscious that can be apparent to anyone (even religious zealots in the Middle East) that still doesn't excuse their bent on violence and other forms of anti-social behavior which they, to this day, revel in.[QUOTE]

The problem that I'm having with you is that your acting like a right-wing self-righteous "moral" conservative on your opinions on Gangsta Rap. Art is supposed to look at things from every perspective including the perspective of a violent gang banger. Yes these gangsta rappers like 2Pac and N.W.A. did rap about violence but that was the whole point, it was looking through a certain point of view and you can't say all art has to look through a positive point of view it can also look through a negative one but that doesn't mean the particular artist wants someone do go out and do these things are promotes it. Jimi Hendrix's song "Hey Joe" was about a man who killed his girlfriend because she cheated on him, does that mean Jimi Hendrix is telling men that they should kill their cheating girlfriends? Of course not, only an idiot would think that and only an idiot would think that those rappers actually want kids to do those things it's just looking through a certain point-of-view and the harsh reality is that you can't just try to hide it or sugarcoat it. If you actually think violence in media and art is causing violence in reality then I suggest you should rethink your political views and join some right-wing forum.

[RadioRaheem84]

[QUOTE]The whole point is that despite the brief moments in social conscious that can be apparent to anyone (even religious zealots in the Middle East) that still doesn't excuse their bent on violence and other forms of anti-social behavior which they, to this day, revel in.[QUOTE]

The problem that I'm having with you is that your acting like a right-wing self-righteous "moral" conservative on your opinions on Gangsta Rap. Art is supposed to look at things from every perspective including the perspective of a violent gang banger. Yes these gangsta rappers like 2Pac and N.W.A. did rap about violence but that was the whole point, it was looking through a certain point of view and you can't say all art has to look through a positive point of view it can also look through a negative one but that doesn't mean the particular artist wants someone do go out and do these things are promotes it. Jimi Hendrix's song "Hey Joe" was about a man who killed his girlfriend because she cheated on him, does that mean Jimi Hendrix is telling men that they should kill their cheating girlfriends? Of course not, only an idiot would think that and only an idiot would think that those rappers actually want kids to do those things it's just looking through a certain point-of-view and the harsh reality is that you can't just try to hide it or sugarcoat it. If you actually think violence in media and art is causing violence in reality then I suggest you should rethink your political views and join some right-wing forum.

You're getting no where. There is a difference between rapping about violence and literally advocating it, which is what some rap songs do.

Get over it. There is nothing self righteous in my critique of some forms of rap. One doesn't have to be a right winger to dislike some forms of rap.

[Obzervi]

Please define "ghetto", because that term is used by racist right wingers as a proxy for impoverished African Americans.

[RadioRaheem84]

Please define "ghetto", because that term is used by racist right wingers as a proxy for impoverished African Americans.


Lower inner city income neighborhoods. I tend to use it in quotation marks so as not to use the term to reflect anything negative by it.

I don't get it though. Is there something wrong with pointing out that some inner city neighborhoods are populated with minorities. It's not like I see this as a detriment.

[Obzervi]

Lower inner city income neighborhoods. I tend to use it in quotation marks so as not to use the term to reflect anything negative by it.

I don't get it though. Is there something wrong with pointing out that some inner city neighborhoods are populated with minorities. It's not like I see this as a detriment.

Of course not, but it would be wise to mention the poor whites as well rather than just focus on minorities. The behavior you speak of is a result of poverty, not innate differences between "races".

[FreeFocus]

Well, I'm from the ghetto. I've definitely found that since becoming a leftist, I have a lens through which I can understand conditions, people's behavior, and what life in the ghetto means. Yeah, there's negative aspects, but with the perspective that leftism has given me, I can even appreciate it to a certain extent (not the "get rich or die trying" attitude, but the raw anger, the potential, the struggle of living and people surviving against it).

[RadioRaheem84]

Well, I'm from the ghetto. I've definitely found that since becoming a leftist, I have a lens through which I can understand conditions, people's behavior, and what life in the ghetto means. Yeah, there's negative aspects, but with the perspective that leftism has given me, I can even appreciate it to a certain extent (not the "get rich or die trying" attitude, but the raw anger, the potential, the struggle of living and people surviving against it).

No one is denying this.

[synthesis]

Yes, this thread is obsessed by youth culture, a youth culture that essentially romanticises street gangs and gangsterism, which once you have cleared away all of the nonsense surrounding it is a completely anti-working class phenomenon.

I would not agree that "gangsterism" is an anti-working class phenomenon. It is a phenomenon that arises in the absence of work within working-class communities. When the jobs pack up and leave, the social fabric unravels and people look for "family" and "employment" elsewhere. The youth see their grandparents working at fast-food restaurants and they seek financial opportunities - and dignity - elsewhere. (Of course, neither exist in prison.)


Working in an inner city neighborhood is not only tough and exhausting but it tests every facet of your core beliefs.

That's the problem. You have a job. They don't.

[727Goon]

Oh cmon dude dont try to give lip service to the Black Panthers in your post, you know if you were alive back in the 60's you'd be denouncing them just the same as your denouncing "ghetto culture".

[727Goon]

I take a bit of offense when a well off white person comes in acting all culturally superior just because he spent a little bit of time in the hood. Seriously dude times is tough and people gotta do what they gotta do to put food on the table. Would I kill someone to feed my daughter? If it came to that, yeah I would. Maybe before you go ahead and judge other people like that you should take a look in the mirror.

[RadioRaheem84]

Oh cmon dude dont try to give lip service to the Black Panthers in your post, you know if you were alive back in the 60's you'd be denouncing them just the same as your denouncing "ghetto culture".

Black Panthers are exactly the type of force I would love to help spurn in inner cities.

So c'mon, dude, quit paying lip service to white stereotypes thinking that I would've been a Mr. Rodgers type denouncing anything "ethnic".

[RadioRaheem84]

I take a bit of offense when a well off white person comes in acting all culturally superior just because he spent a little bit of time in the hood. Seriously dude times is tough and people gotta do what they gotta do to put food on the table. Would I kill someone to feed my daughter? If it came to that, yeah I would. Maybe before you go ahead and judge other people like that you should take a look in the mirror.

I take a bit offence when you come in here automatically thinking that I am a well off white person acting culturally superior.

It tells more about you than the person you're denouncing.

I am a hispanic working class young man. I work in the bookstore at a community college in a low income part of town. I've never seen the middle class much less ever been well off.

Secondly, the notion of being "culturally" superior is spurious. The entire premise of my thread was to point out that there is nothing inherently cultural about the negative aspects in the ghetto. So get off your high horse because you have NO argument to speak of.

I understand the material conditions that affect low income people (of all stripes) and the point is to shift social solidarity away from gangs and other things.

But again, thank you Goon for displaying exactly what I wanted someone like you to display: a total misunderstanding of what I was trying to say.

[RadioRaheem84]

I would not agree that "gangsterism" is an anti-working class phenomenon. It is a phenomenon that arises in the absence of work within working-class communities. When the jobs pack up and leave, the social fabric unravels and people look for "family" and "employment" elsewhere. The youth see their grandparents working at fast-food restaurants and they seek financial opportunities - and dignity - elsewhere. (Of course, neither exist in prison.)

Again, this simply describes the problem. This is a given and I was hoping we could move pass this. The point was to try to spurn a social movement ala the Black Panthers that actually offer dignity and a better social outlet. Lately, much of the left has been simply collaborative and almost indirectly in defense of negative social networks like gangs and the like.

I mean is this making any sense? I am trying to raise a similar complaint many comrades have with other comrades who are in support of radical groups like Hamas in the Gaza Strip because of the conditions of the Palestinians and the lack of leftist groups. I would be more of a PFLP supporter.

Sort of the same thing I am trying to do here.

That's the problem. You have a job. They don't.

You act as though that is my saving grace.

[synthesis]

Again, this simply describes the problem. This is a given and I was hoping we could move pass this.

I would say that description and explanation are two different things. I wouldn't say that it is a given - to say that "street culture" is "anti-working class" misses the point entirely, in my opinion.


The point was to try to spurn a social movement ala the Black Panthers that actually offer dignity and a better social outlet.

Whose fault is that? In my opinion, if an activist can't make their message relevant, they shouldn't blame the people who they're trying to reach. Or am I missing your point?


Lately, much of the left has been simply collaborative and almost indirectly in defense of negative social networks like gangs and the like.

What good does it do to promote blanket condemnations of the people you're trying to reach? I don't think it's enough to have "sympathy" for the "plight of the ghetto." Empathy is more productive.



I mean is this making any sense? I am trying to raise a similar complaint many comrades have with other comrades who are in support of radical groups like Hamas in the Gaza Strip because of the conditions of the Palestinians and the lack of leftist groups. I would be more of a PFLP supporter.

Sure, it makes sense. Again, I would fall into the first category.


You act as though that is my saving grace.

What do you mean by "saving grace"? I'm simply saying that it won't do us any good to engage in strict so-called "Marxist class analysis" here. People don't have as much control over their class position as many people seem to think.

[727Goon]

I take a bit offence when you come in here automatically thinking that I am a well off white person acting culturally superior.

It tells more about you than the person you're denouncing.

I am a hispanic working class young man. I work in the bookstore at a community college in a low income part of town. I've never seen the middle class much less ever been well off.

Secondly, the notion of being "culturally" superior is spurious. The entire premise of my thread was to point out that there is nothing inherently cultural about the negative aspects in the ghetto. So get off your high horse because you have NO argument to speak of.

I understand the material conditions that affect low income people (of all stripes) and the point is to shift social solidarity away from gangs and other things.

But again, thank you Goon for displaying exactly what I wanted someone like you to display: a total misunderstanding of what I was trying to say.

Hey man not my fault that you sound white as fuck. Seriously dude, your arguments reek of a hipster who moved to the hood and realized that we arent exactly the noble savages he imagined. And it seemed to me that you were addressing ghetto culture, or at least the elements of it that you dont approve of. Gangsterism? Shit more like just survivalism, I aint never heard of someone turning a gang into a political ideology, although maybe revolutionaries should look at how gangs organize and emulate that, as gangs are heavy in the street and yall relationship to the working class is laughable at best.

[RadioRaheem84]

I would say that description and explanation are two different things. I wouldn't say that it is a given - to say that "street culture" is "anti-working class" misses the point entirely, in my opinion.

Baggy jeans, hip hop, etc. is not anti-working class. Violence, sexism, racism and homophobia are and they are mostly spurned by the realities of economic conditions that face inner cities. These are two different things.

Seriously, I know you guys are smarter than this and can see that I am not criticizing aspects of "street" culture that are obviously not anti-working class. So what gives? Did I hit a nerve in which shows that there are two distinct outlooks for inner city US and the rest of the world that also suffers which I find inconsistent.



Whose fault is that? In my opinion, if an activist can't make their message relevant, they shouldn't blame the people who they're trying to reach. Or am I missing your point?


Was there some sort of profound wisdom people in the 60s and 70s had that somehow the new youth do not posses? What do you mean by relevant too? I am certain that the youth are more in need of class conscious today more than ever and third force is more needed just as before.


What good does it do to promote blanket condemnations of the people you're trying to reach? I don't think it's enough to have "sympathy" for the "plight of the ghetto." Empathy is more productive.

Why are they blanket condemnations? These issues exist in the inner city as much as they do in Gaza Strip, as much as they did in rural China circa 1950, Cuba '58, etc. Having an understanding and an empathy for people in those material conditions is a must, I agree but I am losing tolerance and sympathy for the aspects that simply tout survival over effective change. There is almost a sense of nihilism in the former element that I simply do not wish to collaborate with anymore.


What do you mean by "saving grace"? I'm simply saying that it won't do us any good to engage in strict so-called "Marxist class analysis" here. People don't have as much control over their class position as many people seem to think.
And here we get to the crux of the matter. Something I raised up earlier and which deals with the entire premise of my thread. I tend to be a bit more militant in insisting that we can and should take more control over these problems. The Black Panthers showed us we could before they were beaten, destroyed and de-moralized by COINTELPRO. These elements can exist in the ghetto of today as much as they can exist in the Gaza Strip or anywhere else in the world.
What makes this situation so different, comrade?

[Agnapostate]

RadioRaheem, I've assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that you're African-American? I don't know your upbringing or situation, but it can be difficult for those coming into urban culture from the outside to understand the seemingly incompatible coexistence of egalitarian attitudes as a response to material poverty, anti-authoritarian attitudes as a response to perceptions of racism from social institutions and law enforcement, and misogynistic sexism, racism against other ethnic minorities, and greed that translates into fetishism for luxuries. For people on the inside that have come to adopt leftist ways of thought, it can be upsetting to realize that the forms of expression and behavior seen and heard on a day-to-day basis are apparently so contradictory to leftist ideals.

I know the barrio a lot more than the black ghetto (though I still probably know the latter better than some suburbanite in Maine, I guess), and a facet of dealing with attitudes such as these are to depict them as instilled by cultural oppressors. A lot of barrio youth that formerly thought of themselves as Hispanic/Latino that have been converted to an understanding of themselves as "Chicanos" or even Aztecan or something along those lines came to adopt anti-Hispanic cultural attitudes and work to eliminate sexist attitudes of "machismo" and such from their personal lives. But personally, I still use what would be considered misogynistic language in day-to-day conversation, though I don't think it's reflected behaviorally.

[Barry Lyndon]

I am white but I live on the South Side of Chicago and my mother works as a librarian in a inner-city public school, which is virtually all-black student body.
I help her out from time to time when the students at her school are working on history projects(I am a history major in college and I am studying to be a teacher), and also borrow books from the library there because it has an excellent collection on African-American history.
Reading about inspiring black radicals like Paul Robeson, Malcolm X and the Black Panthers, and then looking up at the reality around me makes me feel this low, sick feeling in my gut of utter hopelessness- in the gangs, the crumbling houses and schools, the corporatized rap culture, I see a defeated community. I see a community that 40 years ago had a historic chance to not only liberate itself from institutionalized racism but to be a vanguard of revolutionary change. But the capable revolutionary leaders that were just beginning to awake that community have long since been murdered or left to rot in jail. Now the children of the black ghetto seem to go largely in two directions- the senseless path of drug gang warfare and an early death, or a path to delusional religious piety and 'self help', often in cycles.
Now, even the underfunded public schools are being privatized into inefficient and non-unionized 'charter schools', rolling back one of the last public services that give black youth a chance to escape the ghetto.
It makes me sick, all of it.

[RadioRaheem84]

Hey man not my fault that you sound white as fuck.

This is awful. Are you implying that being critical is being white? Or being white = being bigoted or whatever else? Just what the hell did you mean I sounded "white as fuck"?


Seriously dude, your arguments reek of a hipster who moved to the hood and realized that we arent exactly the noble savages he imagined.

No, they reek of a guy who jumped up and realized that something new needs to arise in the lower income areas of the inner city. Liberal, collaborative, activism isn't working in my opinion.


And it seemed to me that you were addressing ghetto culture, or at least the elements of it that you dont approve of. Gangsterism?

Well this is where you and I differ. Yes, I hate gangsterism. So what? Growing up, and yes it was in the hood, I never thought gangsterism = survivalism or something that should've been looked as cool or even the remotest thing honorable. It was always something I could understand people getting into considering the conditions, but it was always something I thought needed to be opposed.


I aint never heard of someone turning a gang into a political ideology, although maybe revolutionaries should look at how gangs organize and emulate that, as gangs are heavy in the street and yall relationship to the working class is laughable at best.

I've heard leftists apologize for the Latin Kings because they mixed in there illegal activities with charity. I've heard leftists get upset when I even brought up the racism, sexism and homophobia in the inner cities. I mean the list goes on. I mean even the working class understands those elements exist in their society but they don't want them or condone them. How come it doesn't upset you when they speak out?

[Barry Lyndon]

Well this is where you and I differ. Yes, I hate gangsterism. So what? Growing up, and yes it was in the hood, I never thought gangsterism = survivalism or something that should've been looked as cool or even the remotest thing honorable. It was always something I could understand people getting into considering the conditions, but it was always something I thought needed to be opposed.

Yes. The drug gangs are the fucking enemy of any positive revolutionary change. They work hand in glove(figuratively, sometimes literally), with the police and, historically, the CIA to flood the inner city with drugs that will profit themselves while tearing the black and Hispanic communities apart with gang warfare and fucking the young men and women's minds up so much that they not only will not be able to carry out a revolution against the capitalist power structure, they wont be able to even think about it.

[RadioRaheem84]

Yes. The drug gangs are the fucking enemy of any positive revolutionary change. They work hand in glove(figuratively, sometimes literally), with the police and, historically, the CIA to flood the inner city with drugs that will profit themselves while tearing the black and Hispanic communities apart with gang warfare and fucking the young men and women's minds up so much that they not only will not be able to carry out a revolution against the capitalist power structure, they wont be able to even think about it.

I forgot about how much of a history they've had with the CIA, especially in the matter of drug trafficking.

[synthesis]

Baggy jeans, hip hop, etc. is not anti-working class. Violence, sexism, racism and homophobia are and they are mostly spurned by the realities of economic conditions that face inner cities. These are two different things.

First off, it seems like you're saying that working class people are never violent, sexist, racist, or homophobic. I don't think you are, but I do think this deserves clarification.

Side note: Not trying to be a dick, but "spurred" and "spurned" are different. "To spurn" means "to reject." Again, easy mistake to make, but I think I misunderstood you earlier. You said "the point was to spurn a movement like the Black Panthers," and I thought you were talking about how or why people would reject it, which is why I responded how I did.


Was there some sort of profound wisdom people in the 60s and 70s had that somehow the new youth do not posses? What do you mean by relevant too? I am certain that the youth are more in need of class conscious today more than ever and third force is more needed just as before.

I do think people overestimate the influence that radical 60's organizations had, even in their prime. For the record, the Black Panthers lost a lot of influence to the Nation of Islam, in large part because the latter was much more accommodating to the lumpenproletarians who were often excluded by the former's Marxist class consciousness. This is nothing new.


Why are they blanket condemnations? These issues exist in the inner city as much as they do in Gaza Strip, as much as they did in rural China circa 1950, Cuba '58, etc. Having an understanding and an empathy for people in those material conditions is a must, I agree but I am losing tolerance and sympathy for the aspects that simply tout survival over effective change. There is almost a sense of nihilism in the latter element that I simply do not wish to collaborate with anymore.

Perhaps there have been others before you who have also taken this position, and perhaps that is why the people about whom you are speaking don't want to collaborate with you.


And here we get to the crux of the matter. Something I raised up earlier and which deals with the entire premise of my thread. I tend to be a bit more militant in insisting that we can and should take more control over these problems. The Black Panthers showed us we could before they were beaten, destroyed and de-moralized by COINTELPRO. These elements can exist in the ghetto of today as much as they can exist in the Gaza Strip or anywhere else in the world.
What makes this situation so different, comrade?

So what do you propose we actually do about it? Like, tomorrow? Maybe I missed that part.

FWIW, I think there would be a great deal to be gained from a movement to "proletarianize the ghetto." The "converts" might be especially receptive to the socialist agenda, since they would be most subjected to the abjectness of capitalist conditions.

[RadioRaheem84]

I do not see how you do not find it condescending to think that there is no hope for the ghetto, synthesis. As if a "strict" Marxist Class analysis doesn't apply here but it does nearly everywhere else in the world. What makes the inner city ghetto of the US so radically different? You guys treat it as if it's a place which is beyond criticism.

[synthesis]

I do not see how you do not find it condescending to think that there is no hope for the ghetto, synthesis.

It seems to me that your assertion - that my perspective implies "there is no hope for [a] ghetto" - is condescending. I am saying that you cannot expect people to jump on board for an agenda that favors proletarians when those people are not proletarian - in turn, because there are no jobs, in turn because of the processes of capitalism, about which people need to be educated. If your perspective doesn't reflect a sense of condescension, it certainly reflects one of laziness, or perhaps myopia. No offense.


As if a "strict" Marxist Class analysis doesn't apply here but it does nearly everywhere else in the world.

I think that the Marxist system of class analysis applies everywhere, more or less. I also think that it is not being used properly here.


You guys treat it as if it's a place which is beyond criticism.What good does it do to criticize the people at the bottom of the totem pole? What good does it do to lose sympathy for them? What good does it do to condemn uneducated people for their ignorance?

[apawllo]

The only reason why there would be no hope for the ghetto is because the system holds back any progress. The racist education system, the war on drugs, the prison-industrial complex, red-lining, the list goes on.

It's probably easier to blame the people though...

[RadioRaheem84]

The only reason why there would be no hope for the ghetto is because the system holds back any progress. The racist education system, the war on drugs, the prison-industrial complex, red-lining, the list goes on.

It's probably easier to blame the people though...

yeah so we should just assume that they can hope to do no better. I do not think it's an issue of blaming the people though. The point is about finding solutions and other outlets.

[RadioRaheem84]

Synthesis, I forgot to touch up on something you said earlier. Did you say you were somewhat critical of the rather militant nature of the Black Panthers and their strict adherence to Marxist class consciousness? Just because they were a bit intolerant of the negative aspects surrounding the inner cities it doesn't mean they weren't empathetic.

[apawllo]

yeah so we should just assume that they can hope to do no better. I do not think it's an issue of blaming the people though. The point is about finding solutions and other outlets.

I'm sure some people could do significantly better, given the opportunities. It's not as though they're saying "I could take this job with Goldman Sachs, but I don't want to be making 6 figures and be a sell-out so fuck that."

In actuality, one issue feeds into the next, systematically. There's not really a solution that will solve the problems short of ending racism and classism, which as we know, isn't near.

At the very least the prison-industrial complex needs to end to see any type of progress whatsoever.

[synthesis]

Synthesis, I forgot to touch up on something you said earlier. Did you say you were somewhat critical of the rather militant nature of the Black Panthers and their strict adherence to Marxist class consciousness? Just because they were a bit intolerant of the negative aspects surrounding the inner cities it doesn't mean they weren't empathetic.

I wouldn't make a blanket statement that they "strictly adhered to Marxist class consciousness" - Bunchy Carter, for example.

I would say that, among the black lumpenproletariat, they lost a lot of influence to the Nation of Islam, owing partially to the inclusiveness of the latter.

I also don't know where you would get the impression that I'm "critical of their rather militant nature." Anything but.


yeah so we should just assume that they can hope to do no better. I do not think it's an issue of blaming the people though. The point is about finding solutions and other outlets.

Solutions to what, exactly? The "get rich or die trying" mentality? Violence, homophobia and sexism? The problem is that you think these things are exclusive to "the ghetto." They're not.

"The ghetto" is not "the ghetto" because people have a "ghetto mentality," as it seems you suggested. Condemning that mentality is counter-productive. People aren't going to abandon the mindset they use to cope with their material conditions just because some guy in the bookstore at the local community college thinks it's reactionary.

[RadioRaheem84]

Solutions to what, exactly? The "get rich or die trying" mentality? Violence, homophobia and sexism? The problem is that you think these things are exclusive to "the ghetto." They're not.

"The ghetto" is not "the ghetto" because people have a "ghetto mentality," as it seems you suggested. Condemning that mentality is counter-productive. People aren't going to abandon the mindset they use to cope with their material conditions just because some guy in the bookstore at the local community college thinks it's reactionary.

A.) I spent half the time insisting that these things are not exclusive to the ghetto and that they aren't things that inherently cultural. These are, as you've said, adaptations to the material conditions. Actually you've just made my point for me and illustrated that these ills are simply coping mechanisms that I find need to be denounced. Understanding it as a coping method is one thing, but making it seem as if it's needed to survive is another. It's not counter-productive to criticize it.

B.)Sorry but now you're just being a dick with the little guy in a bookstore quip. It's clear as day that you not only misread or didn't bother to read what I wrote or simply just do not get it. In fact I am most certain that you don't considering that you completely missed my point where I specifically said that these things were not exclusively a product of "ghetto culture".

Is the ghetto some sort of pet project that needs to be coddled and told that it can do no better to people like you? Is it in some realm where it can avoid scrutiny simply because it suffers from economic degradation? I find it utterly condescending that you think of it in terms as "either one should accept that it is how it is, or go join stormfront because any criticism will be deemed as racist".

I find that to be very social conscious is to not only be critical out the outer systemic structure that caused the economic conditions in the ghetto but how it also affects the inner communities.

Did I hit a personal nerve, synthesis? Because you're clearly not getting any message across.

[synthesis]

For what it's worth, I'd like to share an anecdote.

I have a close friend who had a pretty fucked up childhood, even for a lumpenproletarian. His father left when he was five; his mother spiraled into crack addiction. At thirteen, he began selling to pay rent, assisted by his uncle, who was a pimp. The usual sad story, but there's a point, and there's hope.

At seventeen, he decided that he was going to focus on music full-time, and began taking graveyard shifts anywhere he could in order to get by on a day-by-day basis.

Before he decided to focus on music - hence, when he was lumpenproletarian - he would often take right-wing positions in our political discussions, such as defending the owners of diamond mines in Africa: "They're just doing what they do to make their money."

Seven years later, he's still focused on his music, but objectively he's still a proletarian. One of his lyrics from a recent song goes: "as strange as it seems, the American Dream ain't nothin' but another calculated scheme..." and so on.

The point? People in "the ghetto" are class conscious - they just aren't "the right class." Like everyone else, lumpenproletarians act in their class interests. We can't expect people to support a proletarian agenda when they're not proletarian. That's what I meant when I said:


FWIW, I think there would be a great deal to be gained from a movement to "proletarianize the ghetto." The "converts" might be especially receptive to the socialist agenda, since they would be most subjected to the abjectness of capitalist conditions.

And also when I said:


I think that the Marxist system of class analysis applies everywhere, more or less. I also think that it is not being used properly here.

Lumpenproletarians who become proletarian usually take the worst of proletarian jobs - that's part of the reason there is a lumpenproletariat in the first place.

By the way, my friend's music is really, really good. I'll post some of it when the album is done.

[synthesis]

A.) I spent half the time insisting that these things are not exclusive to the ghetto and that they aren't things that inherently cultural. These are, as you've said, adaptations to the material conditions. Actually you've just made my point for me and illustrated that these ills are simply coping mechanisms that I find need to be denounced. Understanding it as a coping method is one thing, but making it seem as if it's needed to survive is another. It's not counter-productive to criticize it.

B.)Sorry but now you're just being a dick with the little guy in a bookstore quip. It's clear as day that you not only misread or didn't bother to read what I wrote or simply just do not get it. In fact I am most certain that you don't considering that you completely missed my point where I specifically said that these things were not exclusively a product of "ghetto culture".

Is the ghetto some sort of pet project that needs to be coddled and told that it can do no better to people like you? Is it in some realm where it can avoid scrutiny simply because it suffers from economic degradation? I find it utterly condescending that you think of it in terms as "either one should accept that it is how it is, or go join stormfront because any criticism will be deemed as racist".

I find that to be very social conscious is to not only be critical out the outer systemic structure that caused the economic conditions in the ghetto but how it also affects the inner communities.

Did I hit a personal nerve, synthesis? Because you're clearly not getting any message across.

I just don't think you can criticize it from an outsider's perspective, which is what I'm getting from your posts. I don't think it's racist, I don't think you should "go join StormFront," but I do think your criticisms are ineffectual and, in practice, counter-productive.

Inasmuch as "condescension" is defined as a "patronizingly superior attitude," which it is, I think it applies more to your perspective than to mine.

And yes, I did come across as a dick there. Sorry. The point of that was that your class position matters. Finally, I did indeed skim most of this thread.

[RadioRaheem84]

Synthesis, I appologize for snapping like that.

I understand where you're coming from.

I guess I just never looked at it from the perspective of the lumpen. In that context it makes sense. I just never thought of the number being so large when considering the lumpen in working class areas. But yes, they will act in their own interest and impede the social conscious of the proletariat.

[RadioRaheem84]

I just don't think you can criticize it from an outsider's perspective, which is what I'm getting from your posts. I don't think it's racist, I don't think you should "go join StormFront," but I do think your criticisms are ineffectual and, in practice, counter-productive.

Inasmuch as "condescension" is defined as a "patronizingly superior attitude," which it is, I think it applies more to your perspective than to mine.

And yes, I did come across as a dick there. Sorry. The point of that was that your class position matters. Finally, I did indeed skim most of this thread.


But why is it an outsider's perspective? I grew up in an inner city barrio, left for the burbs when I was 13, and returned now at 25. Did I somehow lose a lot of insider cred from that 12 year gap?

As an outsider, do you mean to say that unless one is born and raised most of their life in the inner city then that is the only real perspective? It's OK if you say yes, I could understand why. But how would any total picture of the situation look like without an outsider's perspective? All outsider perspectives aren't necessarily wrong because of the lack of experience. Although I do understand that there is the reactionary first impression many people get when analyzing the ghetto from a non-leftist perspective. It's repulsive and should be denounced as erroneous.

I guess what I was trying to do was say that maybe there needs to be a new third force movement ala the Black Panthers or something new that takes a near intolerant yet empathetic look at the social ills of the inner city. The Nation of Islam (which isn't really a group I would recommend) took a similar approach of being self critical while understanding the systemic oppression they face. I always saw it as two punch blow.

[Devrim]

I would not agree that "gangsterism" is an anti-working class phenomenon. It is a phenomenon that arises in the absence of work within working-class communities. When the jobs pack up and leave, the social fabric unravels and people look for "family" and "employment" elsewhere. The youth see their grandparents working at fast-food restaurants and they seek financial opportunities - and dignity - elsewhere. (Of course, neither exist in prison.)

I would say that it is an anti-working class phenomenon in that it preys on the working class and destroys class solidarity. Of course you are right in that it is connected to a lack of work or decent work.

Devrim

[Devrim]

Hey man not my fault that you sound white as fuck.

The continued obsession of US posters with race continues.


Gangsterism? Shit more like just survivalism,

Yet many people manage to survive without preying on their own class.


I aint never heard of someone turning a gang into a political ideology,

Look up the 'Young Lords'.


although maybe revolutionaries should look at how gangs organize and emulate that, as gangs are heavy in the street and yall relationship to the working class is laughable at best.

Yes, because capitalist forms of organisation are exactly what the working class should emulate.

Devrim

[synthesis]

Synthesis, I appologize for snapping like that.

It's all good. I figured you were also implicitly responding to people like "727Goon," who, for the record, I have a very hard time believing is not an impostor. To my knowledge, RAAN isn't exactly deeply rooted in the urban lumpenproletariat.



But why is it an outsider's perspective? I grew up in an inner city barrio, left for the burbs when I was 13, and returned now at 25. Did I somehow lose a lot of insider cred from that 12 year gap?

I don't think it's about "insider cred." Growing up in a ghetto doesn't necessarily mean you've experienced the worst it has to offer. You said it yourself:



I guess I just never looked at it from the perspective of the lumpen. In that context it makes sense.

On a related note...


As an outsider, do you mean to say that unless one is born and raised most of their life in the inner city then that is the only real perspective?

In regard to your first question, what was your life like growing up? Personally, I had a mother and a father who encouraged me to do well in school and stay out of trouble. Because of that, I wouldn't venture to condemn people like my friend, because I don't know what it's like to go through that kind of shit growing up.

I like to think that my perspective is based on nuanced class analysis. I think anything else means that you will indeed "lose sympathy with the plight of the ghetto."


I guess what I was trying to do was say that maybe there needs to be a new third force movement ala the Black Panthers or something new that takes a near intolerant yet empathetic look at the social ills of the inner city.

I don't think a movement will be effectual if it simply focuses on condemning the "social ills" of the "inner city." I don't think that mentality is racist so much as it is puritan. You can't condemn alcoholism if you don't understand why people would want to be fucked up all the time.

I mean, you said:


Actually you've just made my point for me and illustrated that these ills are simply coping mechanisms that I find need to be denounced. Understanding it as a coping method is one thing, but making it seem as if it's needed to survive is another.

What people do to cope isn't as important to me as what they're coping with.

And sometimes it is needed to survive. You said you couldn't identify with Tupac anymore, because his engagement in "social ills" overrides his political consciousness. But they're not necessarily separable. "They wonder why we're suicidal, runnin' 'round strapped..."

[synthesis]

I would say that it is an anti-working class phenomenon in that it preys on the working class and destroys class solidarity. Of course you are right in that it is connected to a lack of work or decent work.

Devrim
I partially agree with you here. I would say instead that it is an anti-working class phenomenon when it preys on the working class and when it destroys class solidarity, not that these behaviors are intrinsic to gangsterism.

As an aside, I genuinely believe that when gangsters prey on the working class, they are directly or indirectly emulating the behavior of the bourgeoisie, which has a few 'gangsterist' qualities of its own.

In my personal experience, however, gangsters mostly prey on each other. That's nowhere near universal, obviously.

To me, the primary role of the lumpenproletariat in capitalism is to lead proletarians to believe that they are 'privileged' to be proletarian. Meaning, an ex-lumpenproletarian is just glad to not be in jail; and someone who is proletarian, but grew up in a primarily lumpenproletarian environment, is going to consider themselves "middle class" and therefore side with the status quo.

[synthesis]

One more thing...


The continued obsession of US posters with race continues.

The U.S., as a whole, is obsessed with race. Why do you think this is? Hint: there's some class analysis involved :)

[727Goon]

The continued obsession of US posters with race continues.

Hey and maybe if the left addressed the very real issues of racial oppression rather than just class struggle and stopped thinking that racism is something that will go away with capitalism they wouldnt be ridiculously white. Sorry but class isnt the only basis of oppression in the world.


Look up the 'Young Lords'.About as much of a gang as the Black Panthers were, which is to say, not very much of a gang at all.

[727Goon]

It's all good. I figured you were also implicitly responding to people like "727Goon," who, for the record, I have a very hard time believing is not an impostor. To my knowledge, RAAN isn't exactly deeply rooted in the urban lumpenproletariat.


I'm not a member of the urban lumpenproletariat but I suspect that this is a clever euphemism because you dont want to say "HEY I DONT THINK THERE ARE MANY NEGROES IN RAAN". I mean its all good man, I doubt there any many "urban lumpenproletariats" in whatever communist party either your a member of so I guess its hard for you to believe that not every leftist fits the nerdy college white boy stereotype, so I guess I se where your coming from.

[Dimentio]

This is just wrong. In Russia it was the working class and in China the peasantry.


Some of the leaders could be defined as what marxists are calling lumpens, but overally you are right.

[synthesis]

I'm not a member of the urban lumpenproletariat but I suspect that this is a clever euphemism because you dont want to say "HEY I DONT THINK THERE ARE MANY NEGROES IN RAAN". I mean its all good man, I doubt there any many "urban lumpenproletariats" in whatever communist party either your a member of so I guess its hard for you to believe that not every leftist fits the nerdy college white boy stereotype, so I guess I se where your coming from.

It wasn't a euphemism. I was saying that I don't believe you are who you say you are. I still don't. I don't believe you have a daughter; I don't believe you're "from the hood." I could be wrong, but if I'm right, it would explain why you're trying to prove something to people you've never met. If you want to continue this discussion, you can start a thread in Chit-Chat. :)

[Devrim]

Hey and maybe if the left addressed the very real issues of racial oppression rather than just class struggle and stopped thinking that racism is something that will go away with capitalism they wouldnt be ridiculously white. Sorry but class isnt the only basis of oppression in the world.

The American left obsesses about race, and continually tries to address it. İn my opinion they have a responsibility for at least some of the confusion within the working class on these questions and that the whole approach of the American left has a tendency to divide the working class.


About as much of a gang as the Black Panthers were, which is to say, not very much of a gang at all.

The Young Lords started as a street gang, and turned it into a political ideology, which was what you said you had never heard of. This is as you say unlike the Black Panthers who were just another reactionary black nationalist organisation.

Devrim

[727Goon]

It wasn't a euphemism. I was saying that I don't believe you are who you say you are. I still don't. I don't believe you have a daughter; I don't believe you're "from the hood." I could be wrong, but if I'm right, it would explain why you're trying to prove something to people you've never met. If you want to continue this discussion, you can start a thread in Chit-Chat. :)

I dont have shit to prove, I'm just an ordinary dude.

[727Goon]

The American left obsesses about race, and continually tries to address it. İn my opinion they have a responsibility for at least some of the confusion within the working class on these questions and that the whole approach of the American left has a tendency to divide the working class.
Devrim

I dont think the American left obsesses with race very much except for self serving purpuses like trying to get more non white members for their party. I think the American left obsesses with class too much, as if thats the only real oppression out there.


The yYung Lords started as a street gang, and turned it into a political ideology, which was what you said you had never heard of. This is as you say unlike the Black Panthers who were just another reactionary black nationalist organisation.


I meant forming a gang based on political reasons rather than becoming political once your already in the lifestyle. And how do you think the Black Panthers were reactionary, they were one of the most proggressive leftist groups US history.

[synthesis]

I dont have shit to prove, I'm just an ordinary dude.

Fair enough :)

[Devrim]

I partially agree with you here. I would say instead that it is an anti-working class phenomenon when it preys on the working class and when it destroys class solidarity, not that these behaviors are intrinsic to gangsterism.

As an aside, I genuinely believe that when gangsters prey on the working class, they are directly or indirectly emulating the behavior of the bourgeoisie, which has a few 'gangsterist' qualities of its own.

In my personal experience, however, gangsters mostly prey on each other. That's nowhere near universal, obviously.

Gangsters obviously do prey on each other and allows prey on the petit-bourgeoisie, protection rackets etc.

I think things like selling crack and heroin in inner city areas primarily preys on the working class though.

Devrim

[Devrim]

I dont think the American left obsesses with race very much except for self serving purpuses like trying to get more non white members for their party.

In my opinion the US left, and US society in general obsesses about it.


I think the American left obsesses with class too much, as if thats the only real oppression out there.

They are two completely different things. Workers are not 'oppressed' as workers, bot exploited. This exploitation is what unifies the working class condition, and makes it a universal class. Ethnic minorities may be 'oppressed', and those who are workers will still be exploited, but it is not something around which unity can be built. Instead the division into separate interest groups has the opposite effect.


I meant forming a gang based on political reasons rather than becoming political once your already in the lifestyle.

You said:


I aint never heard of someone turning a gang into a political ideology,

It seemed to me like you were asking for a gang turning into a politial ideology. Maybe I misread it.


And how do you think the Black Panthers were reactionary, they were one of the most proggressive leftist groups US history.

Though not responsible for them groups like this only serve to reinforce divisions that already exist within the working class.

Devrim

[727Goon]

In my opinion the US left, and US society in general obsesses about it.

Thats your opinion I guess.


They are two completely different things. Workers are not 'oppressed' as workers, bot exploited. This exploitation is what unifies the working class condition, and makes it a universal class. Ethnic minorities may be 'oppressed', and those who are workers will still be exploited, but it is not something around which unity can be built. Instead the division into separate interest groups has the opposite effect.I think the exploitation of workers is oppression. And while the struggles may be different I think racism is intertwined with capitalism and both struggles are equally important.


You said:



It seemed to me like you were asking for a gang turning into a politial ideology. Maybe I misread it.
What I mean was that I had never heard of someone turning being a gang member in itself into a political ideology.


Though not responsible for them groups like this only serve to reinforce divisions that already exist within the working class.

Devrim
How?

[Devrim]

Thats your opinion I guess.

Yes, it is. I presume you haven't travelled outside of the US. America is the most racial divided and racist country that I have ever been to (with the possible exception of Israel). The first time I went there I was really shocked by the racial divisions and segregation in society. I think that it is to be expected that the issue of race is given importance there, but the obsession that the left has is something else.


How?

It is a bit off topic, but basically by organising along racial lines, they reinforce the racial divide that all ready exists within society. Things are not presented as class issues, which can unite people, but as race issues, which only serve to perpetuate those divisions. Though I guess from what you say about class and race above, you don't really see a problem about that.

Devrim

[Hiero]

To the original poster, check out the works of Philippe Bourgois (pronounced BorgWah). http://philippebourgois.net/

And I would recomend In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in El Barrio.

Bourgois is an Anthropologist who did field work in a New York Ghetto and his main focus was the crack industry. It does not have your answers, but it might open up your inquiry on how to approach the ghetto. Anthropology especially where it is progressive as is the case of Bourgois, opens up cultures that were otherwise mystified.

[727Goon]

Yes, it is. I presume you haven't travelled outside of the US. America is the most racial divided and racist country that I have ever been to (with the possible exception of Israel). The first time I went there I was really shocked by the racial divisions and segregation in society. I think that it is to be expected that the issue of race is given importance there, but the obsession that the left has is something else.

I've never been outside the US your right, but I've heard that in europe its even harder for Africans in terms of racial oppression. I mean we dont have popular openly racist groups like they do over there and you dont see white sports fans chanting racial slurs at sports games like you do over there. In South America theres a ridiculous amount of racial oppression and in Africa you still see a lot of colonialist actions by white people down there. So I dont know how many countries you've been to but racism is a huge problem all over the world, not just in America.


It is a bit off topic, but basically by organising along racial lines, they reinforce the racial divide that all ready exists within society. Things are not presented as class issues, which can unite people, but as race issues, which only serve to perpetuate those divisions. Though I guess from what you say about class and race above, you don't really see a problem about that.

Devrim

If oppression is on racial lines, why not organize on racial lines, just like you would on class lines when it comes to oppression based on class. The Panthers realized that our oppressors are upper class white people and racists and not regular working class white people, so I think it was a class strugglist group and didnt undermine class struggle at all. Are you opposed to gay rights groups as well?

[La Comédie Noire]

I think as the trend of shrinking public resources leads to higher unemployment we'll need to reevaluate the lumpen-proletariat.

Also, race is a huge problem in the United States and this doesn't change amongst the left either. There's a lot of mistrust and racism going both ways.

I've also noticed white leftists aren't taken seriously. I think while the capitalist media does its best to present the leftist as a spoiled, inexperienced college kid there's also an element of truth to it. They could, if need be, give up leftism at any time and have a better chance of living comfortably than a black. It's an implicit attitude that comes from everywhere "if you aren't compelled to rebel against the system, then it must be a purely egotistical act."

I've actually known whites who have gone to college in Boston, toyed around with leftism for a few years, got a tattoo, and then promptly gave it up as soon as they graduated.



What I mean by ghetto culture, I mean the outright total hatred of any authority, the anti-intellectual atmosphere, the racism against other cultures, etc.?

It's a lot of stuff to combat, but I'd say approach them how you would any person and try to cast doubt on some of their reactionary beliefs. I say cast doubt because trying to change someone's opinion, no matter what their race, always leads to a defensive attitude.

Wish I had more, but it isn't like anyone was expecting this problem to get solved on an internet message board.

[synthesis]

Yes, it is. I presume you haven't travelled outside of the US. America is the most racial divided and racist country that I have ever been to (with the possible exception of Israel). The first time I went there I was really shocked by the racial divisions and segregation in society. I think that it is to be expected that the issue of race is given importance there, but the obsession that the left has is something else.

South Africa is much worse, in my opinion, both in terms of divisions/segregation and with the obsession with race.

[Devrim]

I've never been outside the US your right, but I've heard that in europe its even harder for Africans in terms of racial oppression. I mean we dont have popular openly racist groups like they do over there and you dont see white sports fans chanting racial slurs at sports games like you do over there. In South America theres a ridiculous amount of racial oppression and in Africa you still see a lot of colonialist actions by white people down there. So I dont know how many countries you've been to but racism is a huge problem all over the world, not just in America.

I don't think that the racism is much worse in Europe. If we take an example like England which I know well, you would certainly not see the segregation that you see in US cities. When you say that you don't have 'popular openly racist groups like they do over there', you seem to be forgetting organisations like the Klu Klux Klan, which is far more openly racist. Although you occasionally hear about racism at football games in the press, it is not exactly an everyday thing. I have been going to the football for nearly 40 years, and have never seen one incident.

For me my limited experience of America somewhat shocked me. Getting off the metro and seeing all the black faces going one way and all of the white ones the other was an extremely shocking think that I can't imagine seeing in a European city. This isn't to say that there is no racism in Europe. There obviously is, but to me it seems much more evident in the US.


South Africa is much worse, in my opinion, both in terms of divisions/segregation and with the obsession with race.

Good point. I have actually been there as well, but it was back in the 1980s.


If oppression is on racial lines, why not organize on racial lines, just like you would on class lines when it comes to oppression based on class. The Panthers realized that our oppressors are upper class white people and racists and not regular working class white people, so I think it was a class strugglist group and didnt undermine class struggle at all.

The whole point is that people are not oppressed as workers. They are exploited, and also united by the common position. Marxists and most anarchists believe that the only way to change society is for the working class to end that exploitation, and that in doing so it can liberate humanity as a whole.

Now if you don't view things in that way, and see class as just another oppressed group, what you are saying seems perfectly logical, but if you take the view that capitalism can only be overthrown by a united working class, it is possible to see the logic (and I don't say agree with because many people who hold that view would also disagree with me) in the idea that organising separately can act in a way that divides the class.


Are you opposed to gay rights groups as well?

I'm not 'opposed' to them, but I don't think that organising in these sort of groups has anything to offer the working class.

Devrim

[727Goon]

I don't think that the racism is much worse in Europe. If we take an example like England which I know well, you would certainly not see the segregation that you see in US cities. When you say that you don't have 'popular openly racist groups like they do over there', you seem to be forgetting organisations like the Klu Klux Klan, which is far more openly racist. Although you occasionally hear about racism at football games in the press, it is not exactly an everyday thing. I have been going to the football for nearly 40 years, and have never seen one incident.

For me my limited experience of America somewhat shocked me. Getting off the metro and seeing all the black faces going one way and all of the white ones the other was an extremely shocking think that I can't imagine seeing in a European city. This isn't to say that there is no racism in Europe. There obviously is, but to me it seems much more evident in the US.


I guess man, I've never been outside the US so I cant say, maybe it's not as bad in Europe but it's definitely worse as far as racist groups go today, I mean nowadays the KKK has like all of 12 members while you guys have the BNP and shit with huge ass rallies.


The whole point is that people are not oppressed as workers. They are exploited, and also united by the common position. Marxists and most anarchists believe that the only way to change society is for the working class to end that exploitation, and that in doing so it can liberate humanity as a whole.

Now if you don't view things in that way, and see class as just another oppressed group, what you are saying seems perfectly logical, but if you take the view that capitalism can only be overthrown by a united working class, it is possible to see the logic (and I don't say agree with because many people who hold that view would also disagree with me) in the idea that organising separately can act in a way that divides the class.

How do you differentiate being oppressed and being exploited? Isn't being exploited for your labor pretty much oppression? I agree that capitalism needs to be overthrown by a united working class, but the white power structure is just as bad and needs to be overthrown as well, and I dont see how doing that divides the working class.

[Os Cangaceiros]

"Empathy requires understanding."

[Devrim]

I guess man, I've never been outside the US so I cant say, maybe it's not as bad in Europe but it's definitely worse as far as racist groups go today, I mean nowadays the KKK has like all of 12 members while you guys have the BNP and shit with huge ass rallies.

The BNP does not have huge rallies. It is a fringe party, which has never got more than 1.9% of the vote, and has never had an MP elected to parliament

The EDL (English Defence League) does hold rallies, but I don't think that the word huge really describes them at a recent national mobilisation they gıt 2,000, which by the standards of English demonstrations can in no way be described as huge.

Both of these groups by the way, particularly the EDL claim not to be racists although obviously they are.

Though to read about the amount that some people on RevLeft go on about them, you could easily be forgiven looking from the States in thinking they are about to take over the country.

Devrim

[Devrim]

How do you differentiate being oppressed and being exploited? Isn't being exploited for your labor pretty much oppression? I agree that capitalism needs to be overthrown by a united working class, but the white power structure is just as bad and needs to be overthrown as well, and I dont see how doing that divides the working class.

But the question is whether the 'white power structure' can be overthrown independently of capitalism, and weather it can be overthrown by organising along lines which divide the working class into seperate groups.

Devrim

[Amphictyonis]

I'll assume most people posting here haven't endured abject poverty, racism and discrimination for 10, 15....20 years? Hell, 200 years. I read an interesting theory in college by Edwin Lemert. Read his work surrounding secondary deviance and think what the effects of 200 years of racism will have on a people.


"When a person begins to employ his deviant behavior as a role based upon it as a means of defense, attack, or adjustment to the overt and covert problems created by the consequent social reaction to him, hisdeviation is secondary [at p. 200] . . . . Most frequently there is a progressive reciprocal relationship between the deviation of the individual and the societal reaction . . . At this point a stigmatizing of the deviant occurs in the form of name calling, labeling, or stereotyping. [at p. 201]"
Edwin Lemert.

[Aesop]

I mean we dont have popular openly racist groups like they do over there and you dont see white sports fans chanting racial slurs at sports games like you do over there.

You have to remember that europe is a continet and not a country so it is unfair to make sweeping generalisations. In regards to this, where i live in england at football matchs racial slurs by the fans against the football players is non-existent.
Most western and northern european football teams and stadiums do not have a racist atomsphere, although for eastern and southern europe that may be of a diffrent case, seeing as terms of immigration and development they are a generation or two behind.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

I guess man, I've never been outside the US so I cant say, maybe it's not as bad in Europe but it's definitely worse as far as racist groups go today, I mean nowadays the KKK has like all of 12 members while you guys have the BNP and shit with huge ass rallies.


How do you differentiate being oppressed and being exploited? Isn't being exploited for your labor pretty much oppression? I agree that capitalism needs to be overthrown by a united working class, but the white power structure is just as bad and needs to be overthrown as well, and I dont see how doing that divides the working class.

Both the US and Europe have experienced and still experience intense racism. I don't know where its worse, one might have to be on the receiving end to say. Racist dynamics play out much differently though. The US can be regarded as a "herrenvolk state", that is class struggle in the US has been played out in the context of a social contract of sorts between the white working class and ruling class. This has been the aim of the US ruling class for much of the country's history although it hasn't always been successful. Racist dynamics though are part of the reason why the US, unlike Europe, has not developed a mass based social democratic party.This would explain the dynamics of the Tea Party movement.

Black struggles have been the leading edge for other struggles since the Second World War. The BPP made some series mistakes but overall I would say they have seen the most successful and the most important revolutionary organization in US history.

Trotsky, as I understand felt the black struggle in the US would be the key to overall worker's struggle against capitalism. Interestingly he seemed to advocate an initial separate struggle for blacks, which is different from most orthodox Trotskyists..

I don't know how things will develop in the coming period. Perhaps struggles will be initially led by Hispanics.

I know people from Europe who were surprised at the blatant racial segregation in the US. From what I understand its not as severe in Europe but still exists. In France North African and African descended people are concentrated in the suburban ban-lieus, in the US inner cities play the same role.

[RadioRaheem84]

The US has had a history of racism and division that mirrors South Africa's historical development than Western Europe. I am surprised that the US does not even remotely see itself as akin to South Africa but more often than not tries to portray itself as akin to Western Europe, which despite the racism there was never as severe as the horrible repression felt by people of color in the US.

(Racist) White people in the US tend to look at themselves as part of the ruling class social order due of the compromise between the ruling class and the working class in the early half of the 20th century. This has severely obstructed the view that poor whites are just as much oppressed by the ruling class as their non-white counterparts. There is this persistent belief among a lot of older and even younger right minded white working and middle class people in the US that the social ills affecting people of color do not effect their community. The problems are different. Black people are lazy so that is their problem. White people are hard working and when they feel the brunt of poverty it's because of liberalism, corruption and a betrayal of their national heritage. This all expressed even when they throw the personal responsibility canard at the lower income minority communities. So racism and class are intertwined in America in ways that Europeans cannot even begin to fathom. You will see white people with a criminal rap sheet longer than anyone in the "hood", working minimum wage and barely getting by blaming themselves for their situation or the political situation being too corrupt due to liberalism and turning away from their roots. When you ask them about the situation of people of color and if they too suffer because of the same social situation, they will tell you, no, they suffer from a lack of assimilation, personal responsibility and other right wing canards that stray from a proper class analysis.

Surprisingly, I found that racial segregation was even bigger in the Northeastern States than even in the South upon my many visits to the North. Racism is taboo in the North but there is an underlying feature evident in how segregated their communities are.

[Palingenisis]

But the question is whether the 'white power structure' can be overthrown independently of capitalism, and weather it can be overthrown by organising along lines which divide the working class into seperate groups.

Devrim

But we arent just dealing with racial but also national oppression which is disguised as a race issue. The early Comintern was quite clear about this.

[Barry Lyndon]

Western Europe has historically been perhaps the most savagely racist part of the world, arguably even more then the United States. The difference is this: much of Europe's racism was overtly imposed outside the European continent via colonialism and slavery-the non-white victims of colonial plunder were far removed from the "mother country". But when the racist ideology that justified the enslavement and domination of much of the world was applied to other Europeans, the result was the bloodbath of the Holocaust.

Since the end of World War II, the reason that Western Europe has appeared to be so racially harmonious for so long is that until fairly recently Britain, France, Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, etc have been quite racially homogeneous(almost entirely white). But as soon as large numbers of immigrants from the former colonies started to flow into Western Europe, the rise of racial tensions, violence, xenophobia, fascist parties has been notable. Strict asylum laws have been put into place to ensure that the beneficiaries of the European welfare state(beloved of liberals) remains largely lily-white.

The United States is a very different case. Like South Africa-it is a 'settler state', a nation founded by white settlers who decided to break away from the mother country. Therefore, the earliest victims of the racist power structure were internally colonized- both the Native Americans and Mexicans whose land was taken by the expansionist settler state and the captive African nations enslaved and exploited on the North American continent. Racism are more apparent in the United States because of these historical circumstances.

[Koba the Other Mugabe]

Working in an inner city neighborhood is not only tough and exhausting but it tests every facet of your core beliefs.

How can Marxists still maintain a thorough understanding of the material conditions of people in lower income neighborhoods without diving into being prejudice? What I mean by that is how can one criticize aspects of "ghetto" culture without sounding racist?

What I mean by ghetto culture, I mean the outright total hatred of any authority, the anti-intellectual atmosphere, the racism against other cultures, etc.?

Is it wrong as to not feel sympathy anymore with the "rapper's" plight about breaking out of the ghetto through violence, hustling or pimping?

Tupac's songs have no significance to me anymore. All I think about is the get rich or die trying mentality regardless of how many songs he wrote which had a modicum of decent political lyrics.

Is it racist to be against these things or can I look at it as something that should be changed when attacking the capitalist system? I mean, I just think back to how Mao and the Communists saw that several provinces in China were filled with opium addicts and that children as young as nine were murdering people for money.

Should I view the "ghetto" as something similar, albeit less severe, or is that too racist of a thought?

Please, I am just asking. I hope I did not offend anyone?

Put the ones who won't abandon their petty bourgeois drug dealing anarchist ways in the gulag. Simple enough, comrade.

[Devrim]

I know people from Europe who were surprised at the blatant racial segregation in the US. From what I understand its not as severe in Europe but still exists. In France North African and African descended people are concentrated in the suburban ban-lieus, in the US inner cities play the same role.

I don't know the statistics from France, but my impression is that it is quite similar to the UK, and I know Paris reasonably well. If this is the case then the comparison comes across as quite wrong. The inner cities of the UK have higher concentrations of non-whites, but are not segregated in the same way as the US inner city is. Indeed only one borough in the UK, Tower Hamlets, has a non-white majority. Areas, which used to be termed as 'black areas' in the UK, are generally areas with white majorities, but which if you are a right wing middle aged hack journalist on the Daily Mail, certainly look 'Blacker' than the virtually all white suburb where you live.

My impression of the suburbs around Paris is the same. You may be right when you say that ' North African and African descended people are concentrated in the suburban ban-lieus', but lots of white French people live there too and it is analogous to the segregation in US cities.

Devrim

[Devrim]

Since the end of World War II, the reason that Western Europe has appeared to be so racially harmonious for so long is that until fairly recently Britain, France, Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, etc have been quite racially homogeneous(almost entirely white). But as soon as large numbers of immigrants from the former colonies started to flow into Western Europe, the rise of racial tensions, violence, xenophobia, fascist parties has been notable. Strict asylum laws have been put into place to ensure that the beneficiaries of the European welfare state(beloved of liberals) remains largely lily-white.

Mass immigration to Europe started in the 1960s. I think that it is important to note that compared to America, ethnic minorities are still much smaller. US census data puts the percentage of whites at 75%, whereas in the countries you mention Britain (92%), France (91%), and Italy (96.5%)*. This means that the number of people from an ethnic minority in the US is approximately three times larger that the UK or France.

Devrim

*The data for France is from a survey not the census as it is illegal to collect ethnic data in a survey in France. Information for Germany and the Netherlands is more difficult to interpret (given the amount of effort I am willing to put into it), but suggests similar figures to Britain and France. I have included white European immigrants, for example the Irish in the UK, as white.

[Jimmie Higgins]

The American left obsesses about race, and continually tries to address it. İn my opinion they have a responsibility for at least some of the confusion within the working class on these questions and that the whole approach of the American left has a tendency to divide the working class.
You are looking at this issue from a completely a-historical and non-materialist way comrade.

Gee, why would the American Left obsess over the thing in society which historically has been the main tool of the ruling class in: preventing solidarity, preventing unionization (it's no coincidence that the South has a history of the strongest overt racism and is now the part of the country that is the least unionized), and creating a section of reactionary white workers and petty-bourgeois who identify with the ruling class more than with workers.

I really don't know of any prominent radical left group in the US who currently organize only along racial lines and reject building a multi-racial working class movement.

In the 1960s-70s, yes. Identity politics groups, yes. But not the radical left now.

As for the Black Panthers and Young Lords - again you are looking at this with no context. First, there was a great example of multi-racial organizing in history at the time the Panthers formed - the US CP. They did some fantastic work and even a young pre-Islam Malcolm X went to some meetings and social functions in Harlem and later said that the Communists were the only whites he had met that did not treat blacks either as inferiors or token novelties, but as regular people. But the CP was also a negative example because they abandoned their anti-racist work in favor of not alienating the Democratic Party that they were trying to cozy up to during and after WWII.

That betrayal left a footprint on the anti-racist organizing that followed in the 50s 60s and 70s. For one thing, the civil rights movement - though picking up from where the radicals had left off (the famous MLK rally in Washington was an idea that communist had come up with years before that the CR movement adopted). So that meant that the civil rights movement developed without any class understanding and was run by liberal politics for the first 10 years of the movement. Hitting the limits of liberalism and Democratic allies, the movement became more polarized and so many people were attracted to Malcolm X who was pointing out the limitations of the Democrats and American Liberalism in very powerful ways.

Many of the young radicals in the movement began to see white liberals as suspect or the reason that the movement was stalling and so there was a lot of organizing being done along a racial basis - these civil rights activists were more radical than MLK initially and rejected the Democrats and so on, but they were still largely under the leadership of middle-class blacks and the politics reflected this.

It's this situation in the movement that the Black Panthers came out of and I think empirically they have to be seen as a progressive step in that movement compared to some of the other elements of the movement who considered "black power" to be black politicians being elected or black business owners. The Panthers realized that a minority in society could not change the society and so they actively sought alliances and support of and from radicals of other racial groups.

So IMO, their trajectory was not a socialist group deciding to organize along racial lines, but a section of a movement which had divided along racial lines coming at the movement and bringing more of a class based understanding of racism in society and so on. Because of the Black Panthers, the predominately white student radical movement could actually build solidarity with the black power movement and so this was actually a step towards building a multi-racial fight.

But the Panthers were smashed by the government with force and so as the movements of the 1960s lost momentum, there was a decline of the anti-oppression struggles and a turn towards what later became identity politics (the feminist movement is probably the clearest example of this).

Right now I think even identity politics are largely on the way out - luckilly/unluckilly, the ruling class attacks have made solidarity a much more concrete idea for many non-radicals. It's much easier to see how anti-Islam bigotry is also used to then crack down on Latinos, how racism against blacks/latinos and native Americans is used to justify cops and a prison system that is actually taking money out of school budgets.

Racism is a class issue - you can not separate the two in the US, so to be "obsessed" with racism is to be "obsessed" with one of the main ways that workers are attacked int he US.

[Devrim]

You are looking at this issue from a completely a-historical and non-materialist way comrade.

Gee, why would the American Left obsess over the thing in society which historically has been the main tool of the ruling class in: preventing solidarity, preventing unionization (it's no coincidence that the South has a history of the strongest overt racism and is now the part of the country that is the least unionized), and creating a section of reactionary white workers and petty-bourgeois who identify with the ruling class more than with workers.

My point is not about understanding the historical effects that racism has had on the working class in the US. That of course is an important thing to do.

My point is about how people obsess about it. I don't think I am exaggerating. The vast majority of serious threads on here include a moment where someone at list implies that someone they disagree with is a racist if not actually accuses someone of being one.

Take a look at recent threads about Islam and Mosques in the US. Now there are many workers who consider themselves to be socialists who are being drawn along by some of the rhetoric of the anti-Islam campaign. That doesn't mean that they are racists, but you wouldn't even begin to suspect this from the amount the word racist has been banded around.

Devrim

[Jimmie Higgins]

My point is not about understanding the historical effects that racism has had on the working class in the US. That of course is an important thing to do.

My point is about how people obsess about it. I don't think I am exaggerating. The vast majority of serious threads on here include a moment where someone at list implies that someone they disagree with is a racist if not actually accuses someone of being one.

Take a look at recent threads about Islam and Mosques in the US. Now there are many workers who consider themselves to be socialists who are being drawn along by some of the rhetoric of the anti-Islam campaign. That doesn't mean that they are racists, but you wouldn't even begin to suspect this from the amount the word racist has been banded around.

DevrimOk, well calling people racist, I agree, can be done too loosely just as people tend to call anything right-wing "fascism". Among leftists, throwing this term around at other leftists is needlessly polarizing. But, in the US, you have to understand that in mainstream politics and the media racism is said to have been "overcome". So unless something like the Katrina disaster happens, racism is ignored while ridiculous myths and bizarre stories of "reverse-racism" are covered much more. So it's natural that US comrades would be sensitive on this issue. What about the argument going on about Abortion - there is someone who said he was socialist but also anti-abortion and people said he was sexist. Again, this is an area where the left has lost a lot of ground and so defensiveness is understandable.

I think a better way to put it than "you're a racist/sexist" is to say "this argument bolsters racism/sexism because of X, Y, and Z" but other than that I think that "obsessiveness" about fighting racism is the correct thing to do and, in the US, it is essential if we are going to be able to build a radical working class movement here.

[RadioRaheem84]

Put the ones who won't abandon their petty bourgeois drug dealing anarchist ways in the gulag. Simple enough, comrade.


Anarchist. :rolleyes: Yeah, sure, buddy, if you want to look at it that way. Way to make them seem like they're closer to the class struggle.

[fionntan]

I would have to say this is the best thread ive ever read on this site. Thanks for it very informitive. Apart from the rap stuff which i know nothing about. But i think the comrade that started it did so with good intencions to further his own knowedge and was abused for it which i thought was wrong.

[Obzervi]

The racism and White Privilege expressed in this thread is disturbing.

[Devrim]

Ok, well calling people racist, I agree, can be done too loosely just as people tend to call anything right-wing "fascism". Among leftists, throwing this term around at other leftists is needlessly polarizing.

And it happens so often that we had to wait a whole three posts for somebody to do it:


The racism and White Privilege expressed in this thread is disturbing.


So it's natural that US comrades would be sensitive on this issue.

No, it is not at all natural. It is a method used with the intention to quash any discussion on an issue. and some of the ideas that have come out of the US left on the issue such as 'white privilege' are blatant absurd.


but other than that I think that "obsessiveness" about fighting racism is the correct thing to do and, in the US, it is essential if we are going to be able to build a radical working class movement here.

I didn't imply that there was an obsessiveness with fighting racism. I don't think that there is. I said that was an obsessiveness with the race.

Devrim

[FreeFocus]

No, it is not at all natural. It is a method used with the intention to quash any discussion on an issue. and some of the ideas that have come out of the US left on the issue such as 'white privilege' are blatant absurd.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_gbV7B6quyNY/TH0EncmJePI/AAAAAAAABLI/KfYAWrsOulY/s1600/Glenn+Beck.jpg

Funny, our good friend Glenn Beck concurs that white privilege and other such truths about structural racism in the United States are "blatant[ly] absurd," Devrim.

[RadioRaheem84]

There is structural racism and a sense of privelge in being white in the US. That should be obvious to anyone living in the States. But I can also see how comrades are sensitive to the issue of race since the right wing tries to dominate the issue by denying race plays any part

[Devrim]

Funny, our good friend Glenn Beck concurs that white privilege and other such truths about structural racism in the United States are "blatant[ly] absurd," Devrim.

I don't know who your friend in the picture is, but I presume that he is some sort of right-winger and that you are trying to imply that I am some sort of racist. That seems to be the high point of political discussion amongst some sectors of the American left.


There is structural racism and a sense of privelge in being white in the US. That should be obvious to anyone living in the States.

I obviously don't live in the States so please explain to me how you consider white workers to be privileged.


But I can also see how comrades are sensitive to the issue of race since the right wing tries to dominate the issue by denying race plays any part

What is all this nonsense about being 'sensitive' as well? It sounds like you are some delicate sort of flower.

Devrim

[RadioRaheem84]

I obviously don't live in the States so please explain to me how you consider white workers to be privileged.

The US tends to look at race just as much, if not more than class. Some white workers feel connected to the ruling class through a racial bond. Many feel the problems that affect them are real and of concern but ones that affect people of color are because of culture. They connect very much to the ideals of the working class and will argue with you as if they're also a part of that class; i.e. argue in favor of ruling interests.



What is all this nonsense about being 'sensitive' as well? It sounds like you are some delicate sort of flower.


I meant to say that I knew this topic was going to be very sensitive, due to the very nature of the US being such a race-centered country. So I knew that any attempts to critique the social ills of the inner city were going to be deemed racist. I never meant to be like that but at the same time I did want to see just how much these two are inter-related in people's minds.

[synthesis]

No, it is not at all natural. It is a method used with the intention to quash any discussion on an issue. and some of the ideas that have come out of the US left on the issue such as 'white privilege' are blatant absurd.

Which aspects of the concept of white privilege do you find to be blatantly absurd?

[GreenCommunism]

i don't think i have posted so far, but i would say that i can understand OP. i have lived in a village with 40% of native americans living in poverty and for some reason, even as a socialist, i cannot feel their plight, no matter how close to it, having bad experience with their population as a whole means that i am not emotionally linked to their plight. i absolutly defend their rights, they have been fucked over on so many level, however. i feel more sympathy to the plight of the blacks in america. simply because i have never seen them having behavior i disapprove of resulting from their oppression. but on the intellectual level, i care about all oppressed groups of society, and perhaps natives even more since i know just how bad colonisation has been with them, i know more about their plight than the black americans plight, so of course i intellectually care more, but emotionally, i care more about the black americans.

[Devrim]

please explain to me how you consider white workers to be privileged. The US tends to look at race just as much, if not more than class. Some white workers feel connected to the ruling class through a racial bond. Many feel the problems that affect them are real and of concern but ones that affect people of color are because of culture. They connect very much to the ideals of the working class and will argue with you as if they're also a part of that class; i.e. argue in favor of ruling interests.

This doesn't answer the question at all. How do you think that white workers are privileged?

Devrim

[Devrim]

Which aspects of the concept of white privilege do you find to be blatantly absurd?

Mostly the fact that anybody who considers themselves to be a communist could angry with such liberal sociological nonsense.

Devrim

[GreenCommunism]

white workers are priviledged for those reasons

1. they live in the first world
2. their ancestors were not slave
3. racism makes people think that other races are not as hardworking as whites, so this means whites are employed before blacks.

there is a shitload many more reason, i mean, you must be blind or something.

[Devrim]

1. they live in the first world

This is a discussion about race within America, so your point is not very relevant really. Both white and Black American workers live in the first world.


2. their ancestors were not slave

Latinos are also considered to be non-white in the US, and make up a bigger proportion of the population than blacks, some of whom also are the descendants of more recent immigrants, and not slaves. Therefore the majority of the non-white population of the US isn't actually descended from slaves. ...And your point is?


3. racism makes people think that other races are not as hardworking as whites, so this means whites are employed before blacks.

Is this so in working class jobs? If we take the data from the Post Office (the first job I looked at as I used to be a postman we see that in 2007 the NALC, which represents 90% of urban letter carriers had a membership of 62% white, 18% black, 11% hispanic, and 8% asian. This would compare with the national split of 12.4% black with blacks being the fastest growing group with the union.

Devrim

[bricolage]

This doesn't answer the question at all. How do you think that white workers are privileged?
Higher wages?

[Devrim]

Higher wages?

Do white workers in the same job get higher wages? For example would a white postman be paid more than a black postman. Somehow I doubt it very much, and I expect it would certainly be illegal.

Devrim

[Devrim]

Also the thing about these examples is that they are missing the point, which is that a sociological theory of divide people by race is not a communist way of approaching the question, an analysis of class is.

Devrim

[synthesis]

a sociological theory of divide people by race is not a communist way of approaching the question

People are already divided by race. In the U.S., at least, and South Africa, too. I don't see how a communist could approach the question without acknowledging that basic fact.

[Devrim]

People are already divided by race. In the U.S., at least, and South Africa, too. I don't see how a communist could approach the question without acknowledging that basic fact.

Yes, but that doesn't mean that we should adopt a race analysis as opposed to a class one, and it doesn't mean that adopting sociological theories offers anything at all towards bridging those divisions.

Is America a racist society? Of course it is.

Are blacks discriminated, and other minorities descriminated against? Of course they are.

Does that mean that white workers are privileged? No, I don't think so.

Devrim

[synthesis]

Does that mean that white workers are privileged? No, I don't think so.

Even the tip of the iceberg (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/09/29/national/main575685.shtml) is still formidable. More importantly, I think most U.S. communists would agree that "race analysis versus class analysis" is a false dichotomy.

[Devrim]

Even the tip of the iceberg (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/09/29/national/main575685.shtml) is still formidable. More importantly, I think most U.S. communists would agree that "race analysis versus class analysis" is a false dichotomy.

If you read the article it says:


The paper says black names are associated with lower socioeconomic status, but the authors don't believe it's the names that create an economic burden.

Using Social Security numbers, they track the changes in circumstances of women born in the early 1970s who then show up in the data in 1980s and '90s as mothers themselves. The data also show whether those second-generation mothers have health insurance and in which Zip Codes they reside - admittedly imperfect measurements of economic achievement.

The data do appear to show that a poor woman's daughter is more likely to be poor when she gives birth herself - but no more so because she has a distinctively black name.

To Fryer, that suggests black parents shouldn't be afraid to choose ethnic names. It also, he says, suggests more broadly that for blacks to improve economically, they don't have to change their culture, but should push for greater integration in society.

"It's not really that you're named Kayesha that matters, it's that you live in a community where you're likely to get that name that matters," Fryer said.

What the study suggests is that poor parents tends to have children who grow up poor. That is hardly a surprise.

Devrim

[synthesis]

The article addresses two different studies, the second of which is more relevant here. You're quoting the part about the first study. Regarding the second:



White names got about one callback per 10 resumes; black names got one per 15. Carries and Kristens had call-back rates of more than 13 percent, but Aisha, Keisha and Tamika got 2.2 percent, 3.8 percent and 5.4 percent, respectively. And having a higher quality resume, featuring more skills and experience, made a white-sounding name 30 percent more likely to elicit a callback, but only 9 percent more likely for black-sounding names.

[Devrim]

The article addresses two different studies, the second of which is more relevant here. You're quoting the part about the first study. Regarding the second:

Yes, I don't think that the data reported there is relevant, for two reasons. First we are not told what sort of jobs they are. They could be anything from cleaner to President of the Chase-Manhattan Bank. Was there a class breakdown of the types of jobs in the survey. Basically people from working class origins are unlikely to get 'middle class' jobs whatever their colour, and secondly I would imagine it is true that amongst blacks what are referred to as 'black names' are more common within the working class than the middle class.

The survey itself may well have more detail, but this on its own shows nothing.

Did they do a control with white names that are considered to be lower class compared to ones considered to be more middle class? What results do you think you would get there.

And finally if white workers are slightly more likely to get jobs than black ones does it make them 'privileged'?

Devrim

[apawllo]

Does that mean that white workers are privileged? No, I don't think so.

A black comrade has told me on a number of occasions that he feels that for this reason, the term white privilege is a misnomer. A more accurate term would be "black/latino disprivilege." He explains it as though every person is in a foot race, and while whites begin at the starting line, blacks and latinos begin 20 feet back. You could likely break that down further when discussing class. Race certainly can't be disregarded, however.

[RadioRaheem84]

I am on both sides of this issue. I do agree with the point that whites have a slight advantage in the United States over people of color (that should be obvious to any leftist), but I also agree with Devrim that to put race over class (no matter how much they're connected in the US) is really a liberal sociological thing.

That was kind of the entire point of this thread and I am glad that Devrim did notice what I was talking about. That the inner city has become such a pet project to the liberals in the United States that any criticism of it is seen as racist and a notch for the right wing. Some how you can criticize the anti-semitic elements that appear in the Gaza Strip or the violence in other places, but inner city America is off limits.

[GreenCommunism]

if everyone else is at a disavatange compared to you, i don't see how it's not priviledge.

[Tzadikim]

There is racism and homophobia in minority urban culture. But it can hardly be said to apply just to African-American or 'black' urban culture; the phenomenon of Latino 'gangbangerism' is alive and well, and often worse than that which comes out of the black ghettos. These issues stem from the same issue, but it often seems as if African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans are more committed to fighting amongst themselves for last place than in joining together amongst themselves and with white workers for first.

[Manic Impressive]

white workers are priviledged for those reasons

1. they live in the first world
2. their ancestors were not slave
3. racism makes people think that other races are not as hardworking as whites, so this means whites are employed before blacks.

there is a shitload many more reason, i mean, you must be blind or something.

and what about the people who were kidnapped from rural villages around Scotland and Ireland and taken to the West Indies to work on plantations in the West Indies?

Dwelling on the history of your ancestors does nothing to really progress the current situation. Some people in this thread seem to have a chip the size of a giant redwood on their shoulders.

So fuck it I'll tell you a bit about my ancestors from Ireland 1156 the pope gives Ireland to England oppression begins, skip forward to the late 1960's and a story my aunt told me about coming to England and looking for a flat and having to look around the flat in silence for fear of not showing she had an Irish accent obviously meaning they wouldn't get the flat.

No dogs
No blacks
No Irish

but you know what it doesn't really matter.
(more stories)
Growing up in the 80's in a very poor area of London I had two best friends one from African decent the other from Turkish. The community I come from was and is extremely diverse and has become even more so. I remember the older guys in my neighbourhood going "Paki Bashing" this was not as you may imagine an exclusively white activity and many black youths were heavily involved believe me. So to whoever said only whites can be racist don't make me laugh. Anyway at school we were treated equally (like you may treat shit and manure the same if you stepped in it)
We then went on to work together (me and my black friend) and he got promoted faster than me not that I have a problem with that and in no way was he given a leg up through affirmative action and in fact he always said that if it was offered to him he'd turn it down. The point is from similar circumstances in no way did either of us have an advantage over the other.

So how did the uk achieve this where the US has obviously failed?

I have no clue.

But I know segregation cannot be the answer, the USA seems to me (as an outsider) like an apartide state. I cannot believe that this has not been intended by previous governments for a long time. I see it as really a matter of divide and rule. As stated in a previous post the USA has 3 times more ethnic minorities than we do, for a bourgois state who obviously understands class more than the American prolateriat do. They seem to have spread disunity between the working class. For someone with very little to be able to say "well at least I'm better than that guy" gives them a sense that they are not doing as badly. Just look at my example of black kids in the 80's going "Paki Bashing" with white kids as an example.

So I believe class unity should be the factor that Americans strive for not racial unity or the advancement of one race but the advancement of one class over another.

[GreenCommunism]

why is it so hard for anyone to understand that different races do not have the same amount of oppression or tension resulting from historical circumstances, no matter what you guys say, irish were not slaves or at least in less large a number than blacks.

and yes, i disagree with this only white people can be racist stuff. however those people have a point that being racist against white is hard to figure out between what is racism and what is not, fighting your oppressor sure isn't racism.

[Manic Impressive]

Yes they were slaves but not in as large numbers, but then I also hear so many racial slurs against impoverished whites coming from impoverished blacks Red necks crackers and so on I agree that the black community needs to fight their oppressors but so do the poor white communities surely working together you would be an unstoppable force for change. I really hope that one day Americans can over come racial differences and unite as a class blaming each other does not help.

Like I said it's easier said than done but that should be the goal of leftists imo

[Devrim]

if everyone else is at a disavatange compared to you, i don't see how it's not priviledge.

But everybody else isn't at a disadvantage compared to white workers. Members of the bourgeoisie are at a distinct advantage compared to white workers. Neither does it matter what colour they are. Black members of the bourgeoisie are also at a major advantage compared to white workers.

This may seem very obvious. In fact it is. Everybody knows it. That is the reason why we see studies like the ones cited above about race. Yet nobody pays sociologists to do studies which show that millionaires children are at an advantage when looking for a job when compared to building labourers children.

Nobody here is denying that there is discrimination against non-whites in America, but what is equally important to remember is that the differences between people within the same racial group are infinitely larger than the differences within the working class whichever racial group the individuals come from.

The communist analysis starts from class not from sociological studies.


A black comrade has told me on a number of occasions that he feels that for this reason, the term white privilege is a misnomer. A more accurate term would be "black/latino disprivilege." He explains it as though every person is in a foot race, and while whites begin at the starting line, blacks and latinos begin 20 feet back. You could likely break that down further when discussing class. Race certainly can't be disregarded, however.

To continue on the analogy, we could say that members of the bourgeoisie are standing a yard away from the finish line.

Devrim

[hatzel]

and yes, i disagree with this only white people can be racist stuff. however those people have a point that being racist against white is hard to figure out between what is racism and what is not, fighting your oppressor sure isn't racism.

Of course. And there's always the risk that a black man could consider ALL white men their oppressor. So fighting against an imagined oppressor, based on their race, would of course be racism. I'd say that fighting oppressors has be very carefully aimed at those people who actually are oppressing others. Rather than just aimed at the supposedly oppressive race. Otherwise, accusations of racism will no doubt come thick and fast, and they would probably be somewhat deserved...

[apawllo]

if everyone else is at a disavatange compared to you, i don't see how it's not priviledge.

The implication is that white workers begin where they should, and that black and latino workers should have the same pay, rights, etc. After all, they're not the ones partaking in exploitation.

Probably comes across as somewhat reformist, but it's going to be difficult to achieve broad based worker solidarity before this happens in the U.S. imo.


To continue on the analogy, we could say that members of the bourgeoisie are standing a yard away from the finish line.

Indeed.

[GreenCommunism]

But everybody else isn't at a disadvantage compared to white workers. Members of the bourgeoisie are at a distinct advantage compared to white workers. Neither does it matter what colour they are. Black members of the bourgeoisie are also at a major advantage compared to white workers.

This may seem very obvious. In fact it is. Everybody knows it. That is the reason why we see studies like the ones cited above about race. Yet nobody pays sociologists to do studies which show that millionaires children are at an advantage when looking for a job when compared to building labourers children.

Nobody here is denying that there is discrimination against non-whites in America, but what is equally important to remember is that the differences between people within the same racial group are infinitely larger than the differences within the working class whichever racial group the individuals come from.

The communist analysis starts from class not from sociological studies.


no one is denying this, what we are debating is white priviledge, that white as a whole have a priviledge based on their skin color, and the reason behind that i believe is to buy their loyalty in conflicts and others. they are expected to be more patriotic and loyal to america for example.


Of course. And there's always the risk that a black man could consider ALL white men their oppressor. So fighting against an imagined oppressor, based on their race, would of course be racism. I'd say that fighting oppressors has be very carefully aimed at those people who actually are oppressing others. Rather than just aimed at the supposedly oppressive race. Otherwise, accusations of racism will no doubt come thick and fast, and they would probably be somewhat deserved...

the problem is that racism implies that you think your race is superior, and so the few ways a black can be racist is by claiming that blacks are superior, they have less power but that would be because whites are wicked and wickedness is weak. to be honest, it would be a more justifiable racism, white racism is mostly about other races down and justifying the plunder of other races ressources.

[Devrim]

no one is denying this, what we are debating is white priviledge, that white as a whole have a priviledge based on their skin color, and the reason behind that i believe is to buy their loyalty in conflicts and others. they are expected to be more patriotic and loyal to america for example.

The whole idea of 'whites as a whole' is a rejection of class politics and an adoption of sociological analysis.

Devrim

[gorillafuck]

One of his lyrics from a recent song goes: "as strange as it seems, the American Dream ain't nothin' but another calculated scheme..." and so on.
Isn't this a Tupac lyric from "Panther Power"?:confused:

Efit: Yeah, it definitely is.

[Vanguard1917]

When at their best, the Black Panther Party recognised that black people in America needed to look beyond the black ghetto, to form alliances with progressive forces elsewhere, and look to global struggles for inspiration and sources of solidarity. Of course, today, where such political astuteness is absent, the politics of multiculturalism and identity (including what Huey P. Newton may have called 'pork chop nationalism') are the most prevalent. So whereas once radicals talked of the need to break away from the the ghetto,* nowadays ghettoisation is effectively promoted in all spheres of life through emphases on human differences, diversities, etc.



* E.g. Rosa Luxemburg, on being asked to work in an organisation for Jewish liberation:

"What do you want with this particular suffering of the Jews? The poor victims on the rubber plantations in Putamayo, the Negroes in Africa with whose bodies the Europeans play a game of catch, are just as near to me ... I have no special corner of my heart reserved for the ghetto: I am at home wherever in the world there are clouds, birds and human tears."

[GreenCommunism]

The whole idea of 'whites as a whole' is a rejection of class politics and an adoption of sociological analysis.
this is ridiculous, why are marxist against nationalism ? because it divide workers, same for race. oppressed people should stand together and seek ally within the oppressor race.

[Manic Impressive]

the problem is that racism implies that you think your race is superior, and so the few ways a black can be racist is by claiming that blacks are superior, they have less power but that would be because whites are wicked and wickedness is weak. to be honest, it would be a more justifiable racism, white racism is mostly about other races down and justifying the plunder of other races ressources.

did you just say that white people are wicked and this justifies racism against the Whities? lol

I hope that's not what you meant, I would say that nothing ever justifies racism but it should be forgiven because of peoples ignorance. The bourgeoisie is happy while we hate each other. So it is in their interests to keep us ignorant and hating each other.

actually y'know what my uneducated uneloquent words are probably no good so i'll just quote someone else

"


I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.

Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity.

But one hundred years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. And so we've come here today to dramatize a shameful condition.

In a sense we've come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the "unalienable Rights" of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note, insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked "insufficient funds."

But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. And so, we've come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice.

We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of Now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God's children.

It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. Nineteen sixty-three is not an end, but a beginning. And those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual. And there will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.

But there is something that I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice: In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force.

The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom.

We cannot walk alone.

And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead.

We cannot turn back.

There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, "When will you be satisfied?" We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as the negro's basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their self-hood and robbed of their dignity by signs stating: "For Whites Only." We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until "justice rolls down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream."¹

I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells. And some of you have come from areas where your quest -- quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive. Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed.

Let us not wallow in the valley of despair, I say to you today, my friends.

And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of "interposition" and "nullification" -- one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight; "and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together."2

This is our hope, and this is the faith that I go back to the South with.

With this faith, we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith, we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith, we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

And this will be the day -- this will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with new meaning"

I think the world needs a new MLK

[GreenCommunism]

did you just say that white people are wicked and this justifies racism against the Whities? lol

I hope that's not what you meant, I would say that nothing ever justifies racism but it should be forgiven because of peoples ignorance. The bourgeoisie is happy while we hate each other. So it is in their interests to keep us ignorant and hating each other.

actually y'know what my uneducated uneloquent words are probably no good so i'll just quote someone else

this world does need another MLK, however i was only talking about how blacks could consider white inferior, they must do some skewed logic and consider that whites do not do honourable war for example, or do not deserve to be behind major superpowers.

[black magick hustla]

one of my best friends is this white kid that grew up in saginaw. in college, there was this black professor that told him he had priviliege because he was white. then he asked what priviliege, because if there was a priviliege, he did not know it, because he grew up in a predominantly black ghetto and his family made about 6ks a year. the professor, like all the identity politicos, just replied with the same boring talk like some broken record.

[Devrim]

one of my best friends is this white kid that grew up in saginaw. in college, there was this black professor that told him he had priviliege because he was white. then he asked what priviliege, because if there was a priviliege, he did not know it, because he grew up in a predominantly black ghetto and his family made about 6ks a year. the professor, like all the identity politicos, just replied with the same boring talk like some broken record.

Which one would presume is slightly less than a professor makes.

Devrim

[black magick hustla]

Which one would presume is slightly less than a professor makes.

Devrim

maybe multiple 6k by 12 or 14 and youll realize why my friend was mad

[GreenCommunism]

some people can suck with this kind of discourse. perhaps the priviledge isn't that high , or enough to be considered a priviledge, but yes, a 6k white is better off than a 6k black.

[black magick hustla]

some people can suck with this kind of discourse. perhaps the priviledge isn't that high , or enough to be considered a priviledge, but yes, a 6k white is better off than a 6k black.

yes, but tbh its minimal. i think the issue here is not so much who is better off, but that there are definitely, atleast in proportion, more 6k blacks than whites.

[L.A.P.]

you know what, I think the OP needs the benefit of the doubt and just had a really hard day and got pissed off. We all do that once in a great while.