Read on Twitter
I'm not even a class reductionist but "class first leftism" is literally just marxism
To be clear, Noah is saying we should focus on #1 more than #2
Going into this thread I'm already seeing issues. He defines class-first leftism with the definition of class reductionism. The way he's doing this implies, to me, that either
1. He doesn't know what he's talking about
Or
2. He knows what he's talking about and is being dishonest
1. He doesn't know what he's talking about
Or
2. He knows what he's talking about and is being dishonest
I don't think anybody would deny this part - even most class reductionists I know recognize racism as a thing that exists. What they argue is that racial oppression can be escaped via class (how many black billionaires are in prison?) and that class effects more people than race.
Ok, he's really showing his ass here. There is a VERY clear definition of class - the proletariat earn wages working means of production which are owned by the bourgeoisie, who steal the surplus value of their labor. Of course there are complexities... which Marx also describes
There isn't a monetary cap on being proletariat - Prince was, yes. Lumpen is a controversial term, it basically means the unemployable (mentally ill, vagrants, etc.) Note that basically calling Marx (who was poor for most of his life) elitist is the first mention of Marx here
Good question! Somebody should write a book or something about that. On a serious note, this is where I became 100% convinced Noah is acting in bad faith - there's no way a guy who wrote a book with "Class war" in the name is this illiterate when it comes to basic marxism
I'm just going to let this paragraph speak for itsself
He says that antisemetism predates capitalism to show oppression isn't caused by class. Let's look at when it did start, the feudal ages, a time when religion was the main non-class division. Remind me, which feudal institution was famously wealthy while people lived in squalor?
Real mystery, huh?
NOBODY SAYS CLASS WAS THE ORIGINAL OPPRESSION MARX TALKS ABOUT PRIMITIVE COMMUNISM YOU ILLITERATE HACK! On a serious note, patriarchal institutions are withering away as class differences intensify, so the point is moot
This claim is debatable and doesn't disprove the main point. Slaves liberating themselves was as much about race as it was class, and it's hard to empirically measure whether the civil rights movement was more or less important than the fight for the weekend, say.
Opposing oligarchy = voting for Hillary fucking Clinton
He talks a lot about racial organizing being more sucessful than class-based organizing, but I haven't seen a single mention of the labor movement of the 20s-30s. He doesn't mention the fight for an 8 hour work day, the fight for and end to child labor, or anything of the sort.
If class is the main thing, racism would also be kicked out, as it's just another way of dividing people by race. Again, we're also seeing him describe class-first leftism as some insane strawman of class reductionism
1. Nagle is a dumbass most leftists don't take seriously
2. Open borders policies can objectively hurt workers within the country and in fact in other countries (Google "brain drain")
3. Going on Carlson's show doesn't mean you agree with him on race, or anything else
2. Open borders policies can objectively hurt workers within the country and in fact in other countries (Google "brain drain")
3. Going on Carlson's show doesn't mean you agree with him on race, or anything else
"Humans are too complex to divide easily into class" is literally a bad faith conservative argument against Marxism
Liberation of all workers regardless of race, gender, or any other identity is intersectional by definition
That's the article. In conclusion, it's a poorly written piece that shows either extreme illiteracy to basic marxism or an intentionally bad faith argument against putting class first. Either way, it shows @nberlat is a figure who should not be taken seriously by the left.
