The revolutionary left's perspective on "liberal-white guilt".

[Black_Rose]

Someone said this about them:



A lot of the New Leftovers have been running on nothing but joints and liberal white guilt for the last 3 decades.

They don't even realize how close to racism their approach actually is.

I used to read a plethora of material from white nationalists, mainly Kevin MacDonald, and he often uses that phrase to describe the phenomenon where mass-affluent liberal whites advocate social policies that against white "ethnic interests", mainly increased immigration and affirmative action, specifically, cosmopolitanism and multiculturalism, in general. He accuses them of acting in complicity (at best) and actively participating (at worst) in promoting elitist agenda (of course, heavily influenced by the Jews) that dispossesses whites in general. MacDonald also points out the hypocrisy of liberals, in so far that they acting "implicitly white" (his terms), by moving into high-income neighborhoods to segregate themselves from minorities.

There's also plenty of HBDers (soi dissant "human biodiversity"), notably Steve Sailer, who preach The Bell Curve as gospel, as opposed to merely believing in a controversial subthesis (as the TBC is a disquisition on IQ variation, even among whites, in the US) that minorities (with the exception of Jews and East Asians) are economically disadvantaged because they are stupid. These people merely do not believe in genetic racial intelligence difference - I am sure there are many liberals and even socialists who believe that, but they do not speak out because they have nothing to gain from it and it is an anathema to mention in public discourse - they use it justify (not merely explain) the inferior socioeconomic position of minorities.

What's your perspective on white guilt?

[Ocean Seal]

Someone said this about them:



I used to read a plethora of material from white nationalists, mainly Kevin MacDonald, and he often uses that phrase to describe the phenomenon where mass-affluent liberal whites advocate social policies that against white "ethnic interests", mainly increased immigration and affirmative action, specifically, cosmopolitanism and multiculturalism, in general. He accuses them of acting in complicity (at best) and actively participating (at worst) in promoting elitist agenda (of course, heavily influenced by the Jews) that dispossesses whites in general. MacDonald also points out the hypocrisy of liberals, in so far that they acting "implicitly white" (his terms), by moving into high-income neighborhoods to segregate themselves from minorities.

There's also plenty of HBDers (soi dissant "human biodiversity"), notably Steve Sailer, who preach The Bell Curve as gospel, as opposed to merely believing in a controversial subthesis (as the TBC is a disquisition on IQ variation, even among whites, in the US) that minorities (with the exception of Jews and East Asians) are economically disadvantaged because they are stupid. These people merely do not believe in genetic racial intelligence difference - I am sure there are many liberals and even socialists who believe that, but they do not speak out because they have nothing to gain from it and it is an anathema to mention in public discourse - they use it justify (not merely explain) the inferior socioeconomic position of minorities.

What's your perspective on white guilt?
White guilt is a made up WN lie so that they can say omgzzz whites are under attack from minorities. Basically you tell them they have white privilege, they say you are encouraging white guilt. So whites shouldn't feel guilty about having privilege, that's the gist of it.

[Black_Rose]

White guilt is a made up WN lie so that they can say omgzzz whites are under attack from minorities. Basically you tell them they have white privilege, they say you are encouraging white guilt. So whites shouldn't feel guilty about having privilege, that's the gist of it.

Actually, if one believes the WN anthropology, minorities do not have the collective mental capacity to dominate white culture and Western political and financial institutions. WN intellectuals see minorities are mere pawns for cosmopolitan race traitors and the joooos. For example (http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/Jews&Blacks.pdf).

[kashkin]

This idea about white guilt is stupid. Yes, recognise and fight the institutional racism in the state, but don't be guilty about it.

[NewSocialist]

*liberal* “antiracism“ is a joke because even tho they support a couple of things like welfare or affirmative action, they still uphold the entire system of global white supremacism: capitalism. the only way to really take down racism is by taking down the system.

however, there are a few revolutionary methods that any left wing group worthy of the name should implement 1. having affirmative action *within* organizations, meaning that groups should seek out minority memebers to fill there ranks and give them first priority for leadership roles (I find it hypocritical beyond belief that so many so called “communist“ parties support aformative action and yet are almost always lead by lily white petty bourgeois) 2. support revolutionary sexual relations (I'm going to write a thread about this soon) basically meaning that we don't live our lives according to the heteronormtive sexist shit we see in society, we don't treat women like commodities. Instead we support interracial and non hetero sexual relations as much as possible.

[Sputnik_1]

If the white guilt was really that strong and overwhelming there definitely would be less discrimination of minorities. And yeah, the whole idea is stupid, sounds like a bunch of conservative racist bastards panicking about the importance of their own "ethnicity".

[tir1944]

There's no such thing as "white ethnic interest" for us (there's the class interest) and "white guilt" is consequently similarly idiotic.Liberal nonsense...

[Lucretia]

The television series Maude, starring Bea Arthur, does a pretty good send-up of the liberal white guilt complex the article writers are talking about. Many episodes are available on youtube. Whether these episodes actually reflect a real phenomenon is another issue entirely.

[Nox]

No worker, regardless of colour, has anything to be guilty about.

[Black_Rose]

No worker, regardless of colour, has anything to be guilty about.

Huh? Many (US) workers are reactionary "nationalists" that support imperialist intervention, inferior status for minority groups, and tend to blame the poor for alleged personal defects instead of the system. The behavior of the workers perpetuate an immoral system, and they should have some guilt about it, although they were instilled with those backward values as children by their parents, media, and popular culture.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Huh? Many (US) workers are reactionary "nationalists" that support imperialist intervention, inferior status for minority groups, and tend to blame the poor for alleged personal defects instead of the system. The behavior of the workers perpetuate an immoral system, and they should have some guilt about it, although they were instilled with those backward values as children by their parents, media, and popular culture.
False consciousness resulting from bourgeois ideology. Only an idealist would blame workers for that.

[Black_Rose]

I was nonplussed when I saw that someone mentioned "liberal white guilt" on RevLeft as I thought that was just a term that white nationalist use. Perhaps, the reference to "liberal white guilt" was meant as sarcasm, not a description of a real sociological phenomenon. In fact, I never observed any manifestations from "liberal white guilt" from whites, but indeed, some are punctilious enough not to utter anything not considered "PC".


False consciousness resulting from bourgeois ideology. Only an idealist would blame workers for that.

Yes, you are indeed correct that. These reactionary views emanate from bourgeois values, and realizing this, I don't blame workers, but I want some of them to be earnestly penitent for harboring reactionary sentiment.

[Franz Fanonipants]

i mean i'm for it.

[Franz Fanonipants]

shame is a revolutionary sentiment

[9]

shame is a revolutionary sentiment

How?

[Franz Fanonipants]

How?

because species being is not affected by shame. in fact shame, over injustice or cruelty spurs people into action.

e: i know you're a white from a part of the US that isn't the southwest, but living in the borderlands of america the only whites worth anything have the decency to understand that they should be ashamed of capital's expansion.

[workersadvocate]

Using that same logic, one could say "the workers should be ashamed for allowing capitalism go on for so long and do so much damage to humanity and the environment." We don't need guilt and shame. We need international proletarian revolution and building socialist society. We need these real solutions, and there is no substitute. As they change the world through their action, they will change themselves, and advanced changes in consciousness will follow.

[Franz Fanonipants]

Using that same logic, one could say "the workers should be ashamed for allowing capitalism go on for so long and do so much damage to humanity and the environment."

lol what?

e: i mean if that isn't a critical part of building revolutionary consciousness then

[9]

because species being is not affected by shame.
I have no idea what this is supposed to mean, to be honest.

in fact shame, over injustice or cruelty spurs people into action.what are you basing this on? Because it seems completely counterintuitive to me. In any case, I think self interest "spurs people into action" more than any of those things.


e: i know you're a white from a part of the US that isn't the southwest, but living in the borderlands of america the only whites worth anything have the decency to understand that they should be ashamed of capital's expansion.if white workers feel "ashamed of capital's expansion", isnt the implication that they are identifying themselves with their own ruling class?

[ComradeOm]

in fact shame, over injustice or cruelty spurs people into actionShame and guilt imply responsibility. You can be bitter about injustice, you can be angry about injustice but to be shamed by it implies that you have somehow played a role in perpetrating said injustice

And anyone who accuses me of somehow contributing to racism, merely by the virtue of having white skin, can go feck off back to America

[sulla]

White guilt is a made up WN lie so that they can say omgzzz whites are under attack from minorities. Basically you tell them they have white privilege, they say you are encouraging white guilt. So whites shouldn't feel guilty about having privilege, that's the gist of it.

They have capitalist upperclass privilege, not white privilege. For historical reasons must rich capitalists happen to be white. A rich black person, or Aisan person has for more privilege than a poor white person. There is no such thing as white privilege. You could say most rich privileged people are white, that would be a more accurate way of putting it.

[Franz Fanonipants]

And anyone who accuses me of somehow contributing to racism, merely by the virtue of having white skin, can go feck off back to America

/internationalism

[Franz Fanonipants]

what are you basing this on? Because it seems completely counterintuitive to me. In any case, I think self interest "spurs people into action" more than any of those things.

cultural differences on display here.

i was raised to feel ashamed if i victimized someone or saw someone victimized and did nothing to stop it. i think it's a difference in upbringing/community.

e: sinverguenza avergonzado etc.

[MustCrushCapitalism]

Huh? Many (US) workers are reactionary "nationalists" that support imperialist intervention, inferior status for minority groups, and tend to blame the poor for alleged personal defects instead of the system. The behavior of the workers perpetuate an immoral system, and they should have some guilt about it, although they were instilled with those backward values as children by their parents, media, and popular culture.
They've been fed propaganda their whole lives, how much can you expect?

[9]

cultural differences on display here.


Actually, I dont think its "cultural" at all; I was raised by social democratic kibbutzniks with plenty of liberal white guilt. I have just come to reject it, because I dont believe there is anything "revolutionary" about it, and I dont think it has anything to offer the working class.

[Franz Fanonipants]

Actually, I dont think its "cultural" at all; I was raised by social democratic kibbutzniks with plenty of liberal white guilt. I have just come to reject it, because I dont believe there is anything "revolutionary" about it, and I dont think it has anything to offer the working class.

well played honky?

idk if you want affirmation or something.

[9]

well played honky?

idk if you want affirmation or something.
wow, youre a good discussion partner. :rolleyes: this has all been very informative.

[Franz Fanonipants]

wow, youre a good discussion partner. :rolleyes: this has all been very informative.

with "I was raised by white liberal guilt parents and *I* am very important so I think that this is obviously wrong and counterrevolutionary" as your fucking counterpoint what did you expect comrade?

fuck your white liberal upbringing. if you can't interpret that guilt as a seed of revolutionary sentiment then obviously it didn't do YOU any good. but don't be a fucking lame and go off on universals. ass.

[9]

with "I was raised by white liberal guilt parents and *I* am very important so I think that this is obviously wrong and counterrevolutionary" as your fucking counterpoint what did you expect comrade?

fuck your white liberal upbringing. if you can't interpret that guilt as a seed of revolutionary sentiment then obviously it didn't do YOU any good. but don't be a fucking lame and go off on universals. ass.

why are you even on here? youre obviously a pompous dick who is incapable of even having a simple discussion about anything beyond parroting some mindless bullshit you learned at whatever university you go to... I honestly have no idea why you even bother posting.. you contribute absolutely nothing to any of these discussions.

[Lee Van Cleef]

Sure, none of us alive today were involved in the slave trade, or the subjugation of colonial peoples. However, it is important for members of the dominant culture of a given society to recognize the struggles minorities face.

Not all of these struggles are economic in nature, and not all of them can be pinned down simply as a matter of class. "White privilege" definitely does exist in America, but it is merely a local expression of the cultural hegemony that exists in every nation on Earth.

First, it is important to recognize that in America, we are enculturated into racism. Those of us who pride ourselves on not being racist spent years convincing ourselves that racism is in fact wrong, and we still must always be mindful of our thoughts, as well as our actions.

As a white American, no matter your class, you have the privilege of being able to live your life according to your cultural norms. This is certainly not the case for minority groups, who are under constant pressure to assimilate if they wish to have a successful career (where success is determined by capitulation and loyalty to capitalist bosses who are also, regardless of color, members of the dominant culture).

The cultural problems faced by Native Americans, Latinos, Asians, and others should be obvious, as they are viewed as quite alien to "mainstream America." However, the cultural problems faced by the black community may be less obvious due to the fact that those of us in the dominant culture do not categorize them as "the other."

The most obvious cultural issue is one of dialect. African-American Vernacular English (AAVE) is first attacked at the lowest levels of the educational system, and kids are taught that they do not "speak right." By the time someone gets to college or the workplace, AAVE is considered wholly unacceptable. Employees are expected to speak standardized English. If they do not, it reflects poorly not only on that individual, but on the company as a whole. There will be a perception that the company tolerates "trashy" employees.

Granted, this can be a problem for certain groups of lower class whites as well, such as those in Appalachia, the Deep South, New York, and South Boston. However, there are other problems faced by the black community, including religious intolerance (most Muslims in America are black) and lack of respect for cultural practices which originated during the slave period.

This is, of course, all on top of the mountain of class-based discrimination. One need only look at Obama as an example of this. Despite being a rich, highly educated member of the ruling class, he came under suspicion simply for having a foreign, Muslim father. The racist rhetoric aimed at Obama came from members of every class, including Donald Trump.

So yes, white privilege does certainly exist. And as such, whites from all classes should be aware of that privilege. I wouldn't call it "white guilt," so much as "white self-awareness." As I said, members of the dominant culture need to be mindful of their own thoughts and actions, even if they consider themselves non-discriminatory. Racism and other forms of discrimination are instilled in us from birth, and it is very difficult to erase something like that from your subconscious.

[Franz Fanonipants]

why are you even on here? youre obviously a pompous dick who is incapable of even having a simple discussion about anything beyond parroting some mindless bullshit you learned at whatever university you go to... I honestly have no idea why you even bother posting.. you contribute absolutely nothing to any of these discussions.

because using icc talking points at every single juncture is intellectually rad or what

[9]

uh...? Incidentally, I am not a member or a sympathizer of the ICC, nor am I a left communist, but whatever dude.. keep talking nonsense.

[Franz Fanonipants]

uh...? Incidentally, I am not a member or a sympathizer of the ICC, nor am I a left communist, but whatever dude.. keep talking nonsense.

anyways sorry that your parents made you hate browns or whatever.

[9]

right.

[ComradeOm]

/internationalismDon't expect me to pay lip service to "ICC talking points". Internationalism is not an excuse for exporting theories about 'liberal white guilt', 'white privilege', etc. Whatever sense these make in the US is completely lost outside of that context. It is entirely a US-centric worldview to expect minority/race relations outside the US to be identical to those that you know and love from whatever state you hail from

Sorry that I actually used sentences instead of a one word/line non sequitur

[Blackscare]

Warning to Franz for flaming.

[Yazman]

right.

This is spam and it isn't cool. Before you post, you should ask yourself the question,"Am I contributing to the subject matter in a substantial way by making informative or worthwhile comments, or asking worthwhile questions?"

If the answer is no, don't post. Consider yourself warned.

[9]

Thank god you guys are around to police our discussions.

[Elysian]

White folks have social and political privileges, not necessarily economic privilege.

[Elysian]

What I mean is, a poor white person may have something in common with nonwhite workers, economically. But politically, he'd still have the privilege of belonging to the ethnic group that has most power and wealth. Socially too, he will command greater respect despite his poverty. Doesn't however mean that white working class has no revolutionary potential but it'll take a lot of struggle.

[black magick hustla]

cultural differences on display here.

i was raised to feel ashamed if i victimized someone or saw someone victimized and did nothing to stop it. i think it's a difference in upbringing/community.

e: sinverguenza avergonzado etc.

"class struggle" is the most selfish and egotistical thing to do

[black magick hustla]

White folks have social and political privileges, not necessarily economic privilege.

:shrugs: so the mentally balanced, good looking people, the non-cripples, etc

i mean this is true and all. its a truth that is more or less accepted by everyone that is more or less conscious about it. including a lot of european leftists that certainly do not suscribe to american priviliege theory. what are you going to do with that fact though? i mean there is a difference acknowledging that that suscribing to some american intersectionality paradigm bullshit or whatever. in europe everyone knows the banlieus are full of brown brothers and black people and are rife with violence and poverty. i don't think railing off about "white supremacy" in the way the american left does is helpful at all. a parisian balnlieu burning or a london riot , or a watts is worth more than the whole american privilege theory millieu combined.

[Jose Gracchus]

We all know where this bullshit leads. To calls for demands for Black or Brown Power, that intrinsically presuppose that dem der colored workers (oh I'm sorry, "people of color" :rolleyes:) do not deserve class autonomy, and should line up with 'their' shopkeepers.

Racism exists, but privilege theory is mechanical and wrong. First of all, there is a lot more that goes into group social hierarchies in the U.S. than skin-tone; there is nativist, religious, and linguistic in-group markers (and obviously economic as well). It is too difficult to pick out people and say, oh their membership of their racial grouping uber alles means they are privileged. First of all it is transhistorical and ignores the "non-whiteness" (in the U.S.) of the Irish until well into the 20th century, just for starters.

[Franz Fanonipants]

"class struggle" is the most selfish and egotistical thing to do

lol so basically you are a marxist objectivist. leftcommunism is hilarious.

[Franz Fanonipants]

We all know where this bullshit leads. To calls for demands for Black or Brown Power, that intrinsically presuppose that dem der colored workers (oh I'm sorry, "people of color" :rolleyes:) do not deserve class autonomy, and should line up with 'their' shopkeepers.

that's goddamn ridiculous.

no one is arguing for capitalist race nationalism here.

[black magick hustla]

lol so basically you are a marxist objectivist. leftcommunism is hilarious.
idk whats that anyway this whole "self shame" talk is the ugly xtian coming from u comrade

[Leftsolidarity]

A racist libertarian in class started shouting at me that I am pushing white guilt. :lol:

I love when assholes show their true colors cuz everyone turned to me and suddenly became on my side cuz they realized the insanity of the other side.

If someone starts saying that you are trying to push white guilt than 90% of the time you can be positive that they are a racist prick.

[Franz Fanonipants]

idk whats that anyway this whole "self shame" talk is the ugly xtian coming from u comrade

its cool dude we all have our reactionary bases, yours is just more unfortunate

[black magick hustla]

its cool dude we all have our reactionary bases, yours is just more unfortunate

neat trick

[Jose Gracchus]

that's goddamn ridiculous.

no one is arguing for capitalist race nationalism here.

I know major members and organizers of ostensibly revolutionary left organizations represented well among the posters here who openly and without hesitation called for black and brown workers (in these words) to side with their own shopkeepers and small businessmen in their ethnic enclaves, and specifically described it as black and brown power. Not only that, but the actual historical of privilege theory and a lot of ethnic nationalism politics has been, in fact and theory, the ideology of the marginalized ethnic petit bourgeoisie. To this day, and true to their origins, you have the Nation of Islam (which organizations like FRSO/PSL/WWP/etc. gleefully and opportunistically line up with) that call for black businessmen and black workers to fight against white oppression. Brave men, don't get me wrong, but one finds that among the CRM an enormous amount of initiative and organization and leadership is directly out of the organizations and institutions of the black petty bourgeoisie, their university graduates, small shopkeepers, local "successful". The real outcome of the Civil Rights Movement has been to remove most social obstacles for the raising of black/brown/etc. academics, black/brown/etc. businessmen, black/brown/etc. lawyers to be able to move to their chairs beside their white counterparts.

My mom's family are Mexican migrant coal miners; people spit on them call them spics, but whereas once they had the union, the mines closed today and everyone's addicted to meth. Go to South Chicago and tell me the CRM materially advanced the black community in historical motion. Go to Queens and find the poor whites in a lower average level than their black neighbors. Everything is rotten, and the questions of particular identities in the endless ghettoes and racial cantons of America's demographic evolution does not hold the key to the exit from class society, deprivation, racism, etc.

Racism matters. Academic anti-racism is not emancipatory politics, racially or class-wise.

As for "white guilt", the question was, is guilt revolutionary? That's plainly absurd

[dodger]

I know major members and organizers of ostensibly revolutionary left organizations represented well among the posters here who openly and without hesitation called for black and brown workers (in these words) to side with their own shopkeepers and small businessmen in their ethnic enclaves, and specifically described it as black and brown power. Not only that, but the actual historical of privilege theory and a lot of ethnic nationalism politics has been, in fact and theory, the ideology of the marginalized ethnic petit bourgeoisie. To this day, and true to their origins, you have the Nation of Islam (which organizations like FRSO/PSL/WWP/etc. gleefully and opportunistically line up with) that call for black businessmen and black workers to fight against white oppression. Brave men, don't get me wrong, but one finds that among the CRM an enormous amount of initiative and organization and leadership is directly out of the organizations and institutions of the black petty bourgeoisie, their university graduates, small shopkeepers, local "successful". The real outcome of the Civil Rights Movement has been to remove most social obstacles for the raising of black/brown/etc. academics, black/brown/etc. businessmen, black/brown/etc. lawyers to be able to move to their chairs beside their white counterparts.

My mom's family are Mexican migrant coal miners; people spit on them call them spics, but whereas once they had the union, the mines closed today and everyone's addicted to meth. Go to South Chicago and tell me the CRM materially advanced the black community in historical motion. Go to Queens and find the poor whites in a lower average level than their black neighbors. Everything is rotten, and the questions of particular identities in the endless ghettoes and racial cantons of America's demographic evolution does not hold the key to the exit from class society, deprivation, racism, etc.

Racism matters. Academic anti-racism is not emancipatory politics, racially or class-wise.

As for "white guilt", the question was, is guilt revolutionary? That's plainly absurd

thank you , Jose...you fight your corner well. I'm sure all that needed to be said. I wont comment beyond saying your take Academic anti-racism, has now become an industry, almost self perpetuating. I do not like it, I trust my first instinct and say it is an industry that needs victims, perpetual victims. Still look on the bright side tomorrow it could be failed capitalists or politicians suffering oppression, who need the academic spotlight thrust on them. That will lighten the burden people carry. Besides...look who globalization is targeting....education....academics better look to their own defence...before they become the next victims.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Not all of these struggles are economic in nature, and not all of them can be pinned down simply as a matter of class. "White privilege" definitely does exist in America, but it is merely a local expression of the cultural hegemony that exists in every nation on Earth.White privilage theory has only been popular in left and academic circles for maybe 10 years or so - before that it was identity politics and before that it was the liberation ideas coming out of the black power and women and gay liberation movements.

Contemporary supporters of privilege theory tend to present the concept as though if you don't buy that specific theory about social inequality and oppression, then you are part of the post-racism post-feminism camp that denies the existence of ongoing racial, sexual, and gender oppression. Maybe that's because these are the two competing strains of thought on racism/sexism in academia, but historically, privilage theory is brand-new to fighting inequality and oppression.

Personally, I don't think this is a radical or liberatory theory at all - it treats people as passive in the face of the ruling class and therefore either victims or dupes, not people capable of fighting back. In fact it doesn't even make attempts at figuring out how to get rid of oppression, it merely suggests that the non-specifically oppressed groups acknowledge their non-oppression. In a lot of ways I think it's a way for white academics to have a discourse on the effects of racism on white people - in other words, the issue to them isn't that black or other people are oppressed, the issue is that white people aren't specifically targeted.


First, it is important to recognize that in America, we are enculturated into racism. Those of us who pride ourselves on not being racist spent years convincing ourselves that racism is in fact wrong, and we still must always be mindful of our thoughts, as well as our actions.Racist ideas are pushed on us everyday - in fact even by Barack Obama. They cause many white people to believe that "driving while black" and racial profiling are imaginary... in fact they cause many BLACK people to believe the same things. Most often what I hear from middle-class black organizations fighting racism is that "too many husbands are absent, black people don't want to change things, etc". If you heard a group of white people saying some of these things, you'd rightfully check the door to make sure you hadn't wandered into a KKK meeting.

The point here isn't to absolve white workers from adopting racist ideas - because far too many do - the point here is that the origin of these ideas is not naturally from white people, it is a concerted effort on the part of the ruling class in order to perpetuate their rule, to blame poverty on "inferior" cultural habits of black people - this wins many people to these ideas both within white communities and black communities where this racism is internalized and people blame each-other for "putting back the race".


As a white American, no matter your class, you have the privilege of being able to live your life according to your cultural norms.This, again, is where this theory breaks down. "Cultural norms" of white people - what are those? The cultural norms of white people in the US was constructed by the ruling class in order to exert ideas that make people more controllable or better workers. Is it a cultural norm to believe that rich people are job-creators? No, this ideas has been pushed on 100 different levels in churches, schools, universities, the media, and politicians - and until the recession, most people wouldn't even argue with this concept. The same goes for ideas about oppression and what's a "cultural norm". Ideas that men are unfeeling and remote with emotions has only existed for 100 years or so... it was constructed along with other ideas about gender during the Victorian era. Along with this idea came the idea that women are naturally nurturing and love children more than men - a tidy ideology for a ruling class that wants women out of the nineteenth century factories and into the home as unpaid labor for child-raising.


This is certainly not the case for minority groups, who are under constant pressure to assimilate if they wish to have a successful career (where success is determined by capitulation and loyalty to capitalist bosses who are also, regardless of color, members of the dominant culture).How are straight men not under pressure to assimilate to ideas of masculinity? How are white workers not under pressure to assimilate to certain ideas about what being a good worker or good citizen are?

All these ideas are to make the working class more malleable and to internallize ideas and attitudes that help the ruling class to maintain it's control over society.


The cultural problems faced by Native Americans, Latinos, Asians, and others should be obvious, as they are viewed as quite alien to "mainstream America." However, the cultural problems faced by the black community may be less obvious due to the fact that those of us in the dominant culture do not categorize them as "the other."Which native americans, the ones who are totally patriotic and join the military and listen to country music? Which Latinos, the ones who run small stores, the ones who are day-laborers, the ones who own farms and go to rodeos?

Culture is fluid and changes all the time but these kinds of special oppressions have been around irregardless of cultural changes, so culture is a surface issue, not the root. The root is the economic order we live in that needs to divide people and scapegoat people and keep people from calling the shots in society. Racism, sexism, and homophobia have all been useful tools in accomplishing this task.


The most obvious cultural issue is one of dialect. African-American Vernacular English (AAVE) is first attacked at the lowest levels of the educational system, and kids are taught that they do not "speak right." By the time someone gets to college or the workplace, AAVE is considered wholly unacceptable. Employees are expected to speak standardized English. If they do not, it reflects poorly not only on that individual, but on the company as a whole. There will be a perception that the company tolerates "trashy" employees.And black people who speak with a New York or California dialect rather than a southern black dialect are still not hired as much as whites.


This is, of course, all on top of the mountain of class-based discrimination. One need only look at Obama as an example of this. Despite being a rich, highly educated member of the ruling class, he came under suspicion simply for having a foreign, Muslim father. The racist rhetoric aimed at Obama came from members of every class, including Donald Trump.Yes, racism does cross class lines and Hilary Clinton or Obama or even Palin can be attacked with racism or sexism.


So yes, white privilege does certainly exist. And as such, whites from all classes should be aware of that privilege. I wouldn't call it "white guilt," so much as "white self-awareness." As I said, members of the dominant culture need to be mindful of their own thoughts and actions, even if they consider themselves non-discriminatory. Racism and other forms of discrimination are instilled in us from birth, and it is very difficult to erase something like that from your subconscious.I think white workers don't need to think about how not-oppressed they are, they need to fight alongside specifically oppressed groups in solidarity not because of guilt or moral considerations, but because it is the only way either white or black, male or female, gay or straight, etc workers will be able to become powerful and challenge the status quo.

The problem is not privilege (which is really a term for having your basic rights that this society is supposed to grant you observed... you know, like the right to walk down the street hand in had with your lover and not expecting someone to attack you or having a cop stop you for what they call a "routine stop") workers have too few rights and privilages in this society. The problem is oppression and privilege theory has it all twisted and can provide no meaningful strategies for ending that oppression.

[workersadvocate]

There are some great posts in this thread, showing that some of the Left is finally reaching beyond "privilege theory", beyond "identity politics", and beyond popular fronts of oppressed minorities class-collaborating with "their own" shopkeepers. Those past approaches in America have merely served the Democrats and those interested in preserving the system status quo.

Our working class has been played again and again, pitting some sections of the proletariat against other sections of the working class, decade after decade, by both reactionaries and "progressives" who sought to essentially preserve the system status quo. I think until very recently that few on the Left would dare to openly challenge those awful supposedly "progressive" outlooks and approaches on questions of oppression, to say that these aren't getting us even one inch closer to the proletarian revolution necessary to overthrow capitalism and abolish all oppression root and branch along with it.

Jimmie Higgins is right, that the point we should be stressing again and again is that we have to unite the working class to mobilize, organize, and exercise enough mass working class power to effectively fightback against and ultimately overthrow and replace this system. We have to politically confront any opposition to doing that...not to act like priests of a new "progressive" religious cult. Our message should always be, "you have a compelling interest in joining with the rest of the working class to overthrow this system and replace it with socialism, so don't let anything stand in our way!" Before I became active in the Left about 20 years ago, when I was still reading the Marxist basics, I thought that was the Left's message about how we'll abolish oppression. When I first got active with the organized Left in the 1990s, sadly it was usually a different message. Confusing, divisive, manipulative, infuriating. I think a lot of the leaderships of far Left fringe sects figured that the identity politics and privilege theory stuff was a good way to recruit, then to shame and abuse their own members, and thus retain them and get "activism" and finances out of them, much like other sorts of cults do it. If we should be ashamed of anything, it is tolerating the cult-like practices of all these groups calling themselves "revolutionaries".

The other reason I think identity politics and privilege theory became so popular even in the far Left, was because some of these sects thought it may be a way out of their fringe isolation and into "legitimate" politics and "real relevant movements". These groups, instead of bending the stick to become hardened fringe cults, rather bent the stick in the direction of political and sometimes organizational dissolution in favor of ---let's be honest---"getting along" and "climbing the ladder" within popular front "movements" ran by Democrats and their various "movement" bureaucrat cronies (some Leftists called this sort of approach and practice "entryism"!). More and more, the Democrats' line on racism, sexism, anti-gay bigotry, immigrants, etc, indistiguishably became the commonly held and expressed positions of these mainstreaming Leftists.

I think that the main reason the Left took these awful directions in the past was its predominate class demographics. The Left has not predominately working class and predominately focused on the proletarian class in America for, what, damn near a century? So it's not at all surprising when workers in America encounter middle class "progressive" brats, hear their shitty politics and practical approaches on questions of special oppression, witness either their fringe-cultist behavior (join our cult or fuck you, you don't matter) or the fact that they come off just like a fucking elitist Democrat (oh, these unwashed uneducated backwards masses will never understand without NPR-fan college-educated pompous middle class benevolent saviors like me)...what a total utter turn-off, and so most look elsewhere for solutions (i.e., fascism is the politics of counterrevolutionary despair) or they give up looking and settle for individualist lifestylist "pursuit of happiness" whenever it's possible.

My hope is that efforts to extend current struggles into a [email protected] movement will begin to change the class dynamics within the Left, and thus change the dominant interests involved. Time to evict these middle class cult predators and status quo protectors (both obey-and-worship-me-because-I'm-oppressed zealots and the "peace police" types), and all their crappy approaches and bullshit dead-end dog-eat-dog theories, from a Left reborn and regenerated in the working class itself. For the proletariat, the principled standard should be 'an injury to one is an injury to all', not this "you need to feel our pain" and guilt and shame nonsense... that crap might work for fringe cults and popular fronts dominated by exploiter classes with no real interest in fundamentally overthrowing this system, but it doesn't get us one inch closer to the needed proletarian revolutions!

[CAleftist]

White workers are not "privileged", nor do they lack class consciousness (in general).

What they are is stressed, angry, bitter about their class position, and pissed off at the bourgeois political system-just like workers in general, regardless of "race". However, because of the lack of an organized Left to articulate this consciousness in political terms, most white workers are utterly resigned to the "system."

I know someone who is white, male, yet he's in a very precarious financial position (lots of debt, can't afford to live in his own place). He's got some reactionary views, but he also has acknowledged that "the rich get richer, the poor get poorer" and that the business world is 'extremely cutthroat," (his words).

The thing is, the ruling class is actually less powerful now than it used to be. This is because of the economic crisis of the 1970s, which has resulted in the adoption of the "neoliberal" programme. However, the American working class is also less powerful-much less powerful than it was in the 1930s, for example. Why? Lack of political organization and deteriorating material conditions.

This is the danger of the current crisis-there's no political organization that can unify the working class in the US at the present moment, even as the ruling class is desperately sucking up capital in order to maintain power. That is why the Left needs to organize, now more than ever.

[CAleftist]

We all know where this bullshit leads. To calls for demands for Black or Brown Power, that intrinsically presuppose that dem der colored workers (oh I'm sorry, "people of color" :rolleyes:) do not deserve class autonomy, and should line up with 'their' shopkeepers.

Racism exists, but privilege theory is mechanical and wrong. First of all, there is a lot more that goes into group social hierarchies in the U.S. than skin-tone; there is nativist, religious, and linguistic in-group markers (and obviously economic as well). It is too difficult to pick out people and say, oh their membership of their racial grouping uber alles means they are privileged. First of all it is transhistorical and ignores the "non-whiteness" (in the U.S.) of the Irish until well into the 20th century, just for starters.

Exactly.

Hey, look over there, America has a "black" President. :rolleyes: (Sounds stupid, right? No more so than the "privileged worker" or any other race-based "cultural" theories that have no material or economic basis.)

[Black_Rose]

I know someone who is white, male, yet he's in a very precarious financial position (lots of debt, can't afford to live in his own place). He's got some reactionary views, but he also has acknowledged that "the rich get richer, the poor get poorer" and that the business world is 'extremely cutthroat," (his words).

...

This is the danger of the current crisis-there's no political organization that can unify the working class in the US at the present moment, even as the ruling class is desperately sucking up capital in order to maintain power. That is why the Left needs to organize, now more than ever.

What are these specific reactionary attitudes?

[Zav]

The only way to end racism is to end race, just like how the only way to destroy Capitalism is to destroy profit. The concept of race is centuries-old bad science, like flat earth theory. It simply doesn't work. As for 'white guilt', people are not responsible for their parents' actions, however they must feel guilty for letting race and its adverse effects continue.

[dodger]

The only way to end racism is to end race, just like how the only way to destroy Capitalism is to destroy profit. The concept of race is centuries-old bad science, like flat earth theory. It simply doesn't work. As for 'white guilt', people are not responsible for their parents' actions, however they must feel guilty for letting race and its adverse effects continue.

Bad science indeed Zav leave guilt to the experts, lighting candles, offertory, burning incense, mumbo jumbo or leaping on the floor 5 times a day is for suckers. We don't need the big "G". Full stop. Are there any races? I WAS TOLD SINCE CHILDHOOD THERE WAS ONLY ONE RACE....THE HUMAN RACE.

Our rulers never labour under the burdens of guilt...I am not ashamed to take my lead from them..........

[NewLeft]

Let me get this straight. Some of you just want to simply forget race? After all the years of institutional racism and a large history of race struggle (yes race, NOT class)?

[Rainsborough]

Let me get this straight. Some of you just want to simply forget race? After all the years of institutional racism and a large history of race struggle (yes race, NOT class)?

Is anyone arguing that?

[Zav]

Is anyone arguing that?
I am. Race is an idea, ergo for it to disappear it must stay in the history books right next to the Crusades and the Inquisition as an unfortunate tragedy a lesser society had caused. I would give a lot for my great-grandchildren to live in that world.

[NewLeft]

Critical race theory being challenge on the ground of it being post-modern?

[Jimmie Higgins]

I am. Race is an idea, ergo for it to disappear it must stay in the history books right next to the Crusades and the Inquisition as an unfortunate tragedy a lesser society had caused. I would give a lot for my great-grandchildren to live in that world.Yes race is a social construct but so is money but both have a real-world impact. I think the other poster was talking about race and racism now, not in the abstract and after capitalism.


Critical race theory being challenge on the ground of it being post-modern?Post-modern or not, in my opinion, the best of privilege theory I doesn't offer any useful or meaningful strategies to end oppression - and the worst of these theories hinder it by focusing on the non-oppressed or offering moralistic answers to oppression.

[Tim Finnegan]

I've been giving this a bit of a ponder, and I think that the language of "privilege theory" is perhaps misleading some (although not all posters) as to its actual content, so they end up making relatively petty criticisms about exactly how you identify and define "privilege", and miss out on more substantial criticisms.

I'm not sure that I've got this entirely ironed out, so bear with me, but I think that privilege theory is basically an attempt to process correct observations through a faulty conception of society. After the Civil Rights Movement it become obvious to those who cared to think about it that racism is not merely a given set of discriminatory laws, personal prejudices, and so on, but something which is part of the structure of society itself, the hegemony of one racial category and the subaltern of others. (Give or take the Gramscian language.) The hegemonic group forms an in-group which monopolises social power, and so the subaltern groups exist in a state of social exclusion. This is supported by an ideological structure in which the hegemonic bloc is constructed as universal and "default", and subaltern groups as specific and "exceptional" (it may extend to explicit supremacism, as it did historically, but this seems to be the more fundamental structure). However, at this point liberal analysis hits a barrier, because the lack of any material class analysis prevents them from making sense of this.

For Marxists, race is a structure which exists within a given mode of production, and so expresses and sustains the social relations of that mode of production. The hegemony of whites is, in reality, the hegemony of the bourgeoisie, and the subalternity of non-whites is the subalternity of the proletariat. (Which isn't to suggest any sort of Third Worldist racialisation of class, but rather that race is an expression of class relations.) The social function of race and so of racism is to perpetuate class society.

For liberals, though, society is conceived of in essentially bourgeois terms, which means that it is the expression of a universal humanity. The hegemonic bloc, then, isn't simply a part of society, it is society, and exclusion from it is exclusion from this universal society. But in this, they accept the basic premise of racist ideology that white society is universal society, merely seeking to expand that society to truly universal breadths.

So why does this oppression exist? Lacking an understanding of racism as part of a greater structure of oppression, it is assumed that the cause must be located between whites and non-whites; whites must gain some collective benefit from this process. This is where "privilege" comes in, a sort of collective tribute which whites levy upon non-whites, and the value of which provides incentive for whites to maintain this exclusion.

This all means that they locate the potential for social change not in the oppressed, but in the dominant group. This group can not be done away with, because it represents the universal human society, to which the subaltern groups of course want access. Whites simply need to overcome the allure of "privilege", to learn to stop excluding the subaltern group and welcome them into the fold of universal humanity. The dissolution of racism, with painful irony, becomes the white man's burden! (There are exceptions to this, to be fair; Tim Wise, for example, quite correctly locating the source of racism in class society, and the divisiveness it causes as being ultimately detrimental to working class whites. Similarly, a lot of contemporary feminists are quite stringent in arguing that patriarchal society is ultimately detrimental to straight men. But the stuntedness of liberal class analysis that stops them going further than this, and so they still ends up resorting to a lot of the same logic and offering no real solutions.)

This is all in stark contrast to the Marxist analysis. For Marxists, the supposed hegemony of white is, as mentioned, in reality the hegemony of the bourgeoisie. And because it is the proletariat, rather than the bourgeoisie, who constitute the universal class, it is impossible to locate universal human society within bourgeois society. White society, then, is not the universal society to which non-whites must strive to be accepted, but the hegemony of an exploiter-class, to be torn down. Emancipation does not consist in the welcoming of non-whites into the in-group, as the Irish and Jews were welcomed before, but the very opposite: of the dissolution of whiteness itself. "Treason to whiteness", as Ignatiev has it, becomes "loyalty to humanity".

(And, funnily enough, there is historic precedent for this: after the Haitian Revolution of 1791, the revolutionary government did a very novel thing. Rather than abolish the racial caste hierarchy of the French colonial system, they inverted it: "black", once the designation of the unfree slave, now became the designation of all citizens, of all colours. No longer a specific, excluded group, defined by their departure from the white hegemony, but universal humanity itself. Perhaps I'm reading too much into that, but at the very least it seems to illustrate the point.)

I hope that all made sense, and didn't get too grandiose towards the end. I'm aware that most of what's here isn't news to a lot of you, and probably rather crude, but half of this is just me trying to get these ideas straightened out. Criticisms are very welcomed!

[NewSocialist]

Guilt changes nothing. Revolutions can change everything. We're expecting to much for heterosexual white males to understand, let alone feel guilty about being the hegemonic group. False consciousness forbids that in most cases.

If capitalism is racist society, then communism is necessarily a non-race society -since it's the negation of all that capitalism is. The economic base under communism will then create the atmosphere where interracial relatons will florish to the point we can literally no longer detect ones “race“ and humanity is finally united as one international people. The most antiracist thing we can then do is to fight to end capitalism.

[Black Lesbian Anarchist]

Black response to critical race theory, here is my take on critical race theory and the concept of white privilege.

Critical race theory is the post-modern reaction to the civil rights movement, created as a synthesis of critical theory and the concept of 'whiteness.' It lacks several key analysis features of Marxism:

1) No regard for the means of production, instead "white supremacy" is central.
2) Does not consider imperialism in any form, not even historically.
3) Views all whites as privileged, while ignoring the reality of racism against whites like anti-Irish racism.
4) Does not recognize the variation within white culture.
5) Promotes alienation of whites by rejecting their culture.

Critical race theory is a perversion of the Frankfurt method and it should not be valued by leftists. It serves the interests of the capitalists by enabling the division of the working class, while creating false consciousness for minorities. The Marxist perspective is not simply class reductionism either, it recognizes the radicalization of visible minorities.