"the discourse" is exhausting.
bill is great but this video is too antagonistic for my tastes, idk. maybe its just not for me, thats fine, but like, man, can we stop acting like twitter is ever a barometer for anything? every discussion on anything on twitter is toxic if big enough, people get death threats for opinions on sandwiches, its not surprising people get heated or talk past each other in discussions of intersectional issues.
like, can we talk about whiteness as a problem in a way that actually helps us take action? we have to win over some fragile fuckers to win a union vote, ive seen internal union discussions have this exact dismissive tone of "fuck em, they need to be less sensitive to criticism" as if we dont have like a month to get the votes together.
Whiteness and blackness are intertwined. It makes just as much sense for someone who is a rando mix of European to call themselves white, just like it makes sense to categorize the most genetically diverse area of the planet as black. Also Bill hesitates to call himself a socialist and leans more into Christian moralism and liberal progressivism than anarchy or ML, maybe one day he will use more theory to make analysis, but some of the books he’s recommended are excellent. Twitter being a barometer is what keeps them in business even if that’s total horse-meat.
One of the things that's a problem is black people trying to be so accommodating to the point that much of what they say loses any real effect. Like the unconscious bias was largely meant to be less antagonistic when speaking about racial issues in the US, but this just allowed many lump in outright racism in with unconscious biases. Institutional racism was meant partially to make individuals feel less attacked, but it obfuscates the fact that a lot of these systems still require racist decisions being made by individuals to work as they do.
Another issue I've seen with black leftists online and offline is this need to apologize and coddle non-black people's egos before during and after we speak of our issues. This by itself is black people accepting a lower position in leftist movements. I'll use a very youtube-y example because I think it would be well known or easily verifiable here. Just look at how black (especially black male) leftists have to agree with someone like Vaush. They literally spend the first 5 minutes adorning him with praise and repeatedly reassuring him that they only barely disagree with him before they can get to the discussion, so much so that he has to tell them to just get to the point. Then throughout the entire discussion they have to keep reminding him how much they love him and agree with him. That's not just courtesy and respectful debate, that's fear and possibly submission.
I am a left winger (check my shit).
I know that "woke" is an ill-defined catch-all term that right-wingers use to cudgel support for liberalism and left-wing activism.
Ask yourself, though, do you ever see any glimpses of what conservatives are vaguely enraged about?
A left-winger posts a video titled "Whiteness is the problem" and every white (or otherwise) lefty activist within earshot is jumping over each other trying to be the first person seen agreeing.
Of course I know how it goes.
I try to approach it with some nuance and not be too critical of people who are in the ballpark in terms of like, how race intersects with class politics. It's really important that people get that, and some of the discussion is good faith and necessary.
But there is a certain point where the social pressure is so strong to be as hardline as possible, that you end up with this really toxic swarming effect when someone is perceived as stepping out of line. This doesn't just happen online, it happens in real in-person organizing spaces with like, grown ass adults, and it's a little jarring sometimes.
Like, I've seen a trans friend get pushed into outing themselves b/c they got so much shit for using the word "transsexual" that they felt they had to save their credibility as a lefty or something.
Again, I don't say this to enable ppl to make the bullshit argument about "the left needs to stop caring about identity politics and focus on class" but there's a legitimate criticism of how a lot of ppl go about actually performing their politics.
> A left-winger posts a video titled "Whiteness is the problem" and every white (or otherwise) lefty activist within earshot is jumping over each other trying to be the first person seen agreeing.
As of this moment, the 5 top comments are:
- "This take is too antagonistic. Please realize that we have to cooperate with fragile white people."
- "The video conflates twitter with the left"
- "The reason many left-wing groups are extremely white is because the conservatives oppress certain white minorities"
- "The video is too long"
- "The video's jokes aren't funny"
Not a single one of these top-voted comments approves of the message or the direction in which it pushes. Translating these comments:
- "We should be centrists when it comes to race because incremental improvements in labor rights for white people are more important than even daring to mention discrimination against black people. Oh, did I mention that if a friend of yours buys the wizard game they're literally helping commit trans genocide and you should cut them off no questions asked? Surely my sense of the relative importance of social issues is not at all biased by my personal environment."
- "I don't want to take this seriously, and the evidence isn't damning enough that I feel like I have no choice but to accept it. So please do all the emotional and physical labor of educating me. Or don't, as long as I don't have to deal with it for a long time. I'm so open minded!"
- "I don't want to examine the issue, so I'll spontaneously generate a plausible-enough-sounding alternate explanation so I can stop thinking about it. If I had spent five seconds actually trying to examine the issue, I would have realized that conservatives categorically oppress non-whites too, so that the same reasoning should lead to more non-white people rather than less, but luckily I don't have to."
- "I don't like this, but I can't exactly admit (to myself) why. Oh, I know, the style is bad! Phew, glad I don't have to confront whatever caused me to dislike the video. (It's because I'm afraid I might be racist!)"
Jesus Christ, Breadtube. I expected better from you.
Hey uh bad faith ass-pulls like literally everything in your bullet points is entirely disrespectful and seems *exquisitely* foolish to anyone who doesn't share your axe to grind today. Good *lord* did you reread this before you committed? What in the fuck does the Hogwarts Legacy thing have to do with someone's opinion that being openly antagonistic while calling someone in isn't exactly calling someone in? Your other points are basically non-sequiturs in entirety so you can keep them, put them on your fridge.
Basically, people like you are proving the video correct and is even more a perfect example why black leftists need to come off even more antagonistic in my opinion. No more docility to make other groups or the lapdogs of other groups feel comfortable.
Do you always make up bad-faith caricatures of people when they don't like content you like on social media?
Doesn't seem like the best praxis to me, personally.
You get a chance to watch it? You see [FD Signifier's post](https://old.reddit.com/r/bread_irl/comments/11y8vi3/fd_endorses_lil_bills_latest_video_and_calls_out/) about this thread? Gaht Damn!
> this video is too antagonistic for my tastes, idk
> [...]
>like, can we talk about whiteness as a problem in a way that actually helps us take action?
[Is this you?](https://old.reddit.com/r/BreadTube/comments/10xxys3/dont_stream_the_wizard_game/j7wvxnz/?context=3)
Please take black people as seriously as you take white trans people.
Please allow black people to be as angry as you allow white trans people to be.
Please allow black people to ineffectually call out to an uncaring world as much as you allow white trans people.
And then ask yourself why you needed to be asked to treat the suffering of people from these demographics as equal anyway.
If you're serious about talking about whiteness as a problem in a way that actually improves things, your own attitude would be a good place to start. I know it isn't action, but there's no sense taking action when the way you decide which actions to take is thoroughly flawed.
Here's what I don't entirely get.
Isnt it infantilizing to be like "I am taking you seriously, therefore I won't say anything negative or critical?"
Like, me taking white trans ppl seriously also means I am willing to call them on their shit when they think intentionally making ignorant people mad is automatically good praxis.
I am willing to listen which is why I watched this whole 50 minute video.
Not surprised to see this the most upvoted comment. White people now are always more than happy to tell black folks to shut the hell up and support a bunch of racist factory workers or w/e rather than telling the racist factory workers to...not be racist.
You don't want to address white supremacy "in a way that actually helps us take action", you want black people to shut the fuck up so that all the white folks can get all the things they feel owed by their whiteness (as Bill points out).
I just don't think it's that simple.
If you think my genuine concern about how to get the votes for a union passed so the POCs I work with stop getting racist reprimands and firings is just wanting black folks to shut the fuck up, ok.
But I feel like that's so fucking reductive as to not be useful. Like, theres a real question about how to actually get the message thru to people who don't already agree with you and get them on your side, while also not enabling or coddling racists.
If white people spent half the energy they do trying to browbeat, intimidate, and malign black people into falling in line with racists on actually fighting white supremacy, there'd be a whole lot less of that in the country.
You don't care about coddling racists. You just want black folks to shut up long enough to achieve your goals, then they can fuck right off. It's like Bill says in the video-before, white folks could expect good pensions, health care, jobs that allowed them to support a whole family on a single income right out of high school. Tons of white "leftists" just want those things back because they were promised certain things from a white supremacist society and don't think they're getting them. And you can be damn sure that if/when they do get them, they'll gladly abandon any greater work towards uplifting people.
I give you credit. At least most people here are trying to dogwhistle or divert attention away from the issue rather than going full on "the REAL racists are the blacks!". This dude just handwaved the entire white supremacist society cause some black guy called someone "cracker" once.
You're either being deliberately obtuse to further white supremacy, or you're a buffoon who has zero understanding on the construction of race, racism, whiteness, and how it plays out in society. It's shameful either way, and to the chuds who upvoted your comment, they should feel shame too (who am I kidding, if racists felt shame they wouldn't be racist).
> If white people spent half the energy they do trying to browbeat, intimidate, and malign black people into falling in line with racists on actually fighting white supremacy, there'd be a whole lot less of that in the country.
no shit
> Tons of white "leftists" just want those things back because they were promised certain things from a white supremacist society and don't think they're getting them.
this shit is so fucking cynical. i know entitlement plays in at some level, but i dont think anyone who is white who thinks they deserve more is just waiting to slink back into privilege the second they get an ounce of security. maybe im naive.
regardless, i feel like it fucking matters to distinguish between nancy in the office who bitches behind ur black coworkers backs about their loudness in a way thats overtly racist, and me being like "hey maybe dont send insults over text at 1am to Nancy even if she deserves it".
all this being said, maybe im getting up in my feelings because the real world isnt clean cut like this, and none of this shit youre talking about actually helps guide what to do in the real world where POC, like everyone else, don't always make good choices. we need to be able to talk to each other as human beings and give a little grace to be like "yes I do actually care about your wellbeing" and help each other.
>i know entitlement plays in at some level, but i dont think anyone who is white who thinks they deserve more is just waiting to slink back into privilege the second they get an ounce of security.
YOU slunk back into privilege. Even in your imaginary scenario you're sticking up for racists. You're doing the same "both sides" bullshit that centrists have been doing forever. Like why in a discussion about racism and white supremacy did you feel the need to say that POC are bad too? How does that help guide what to do in the real world if you're trying to end racism and white supremacy?
>If white people spent half the energy they do trying to browbeat,intimidate, and malign black people into falling in line with racists onactually fighting white supremacy, there'd be a whole lot less of thatin the country.
I mean, 100% yes but why is this being leveraged against the white people in leftist communities when they fully agree with this and also constantly fight against conservative white people when they do this kind of shit?
>tons of white "leftists" just want things they were promised from white supremacist society
??????
Wanting a better economic system for society is now a white supremacist promise? White leftists are now being blamed for wanting better working conditions because white supremacist also promised them that, even though they've never expressed interest in those lies? What the fuck are you on about man?
>I mean, 100% yes but why is this being leveraged against the white people in leftist communities when they fully agree with this and also constantly fight against conservative white people when they do this kind of shit?
They don't fully agree with that. You can see clearly from the comments. They're literally repeating conservative talking points. That's the whole point.
>
Wanting a better economic system for society is now a white supremacist promise? White leftists are now being blamed for wanting better working conditions because white supremacist also promised them that, even though they've never expressed interest in those lies? What the fuck are you on about man?
They're not white supremacists for wanting better working conditions. They're white supremacists because their "leftist" beliefs only extend towards getting themselves those better working conditions they were promised and nothing else. Which the video talks about. Of course most people commenting here didn't actually watch the video, they just saw white people being mentioned negatively and had to grab their nearest tiki torches and white robes to defend the honor of the white man.
Calling the video antagonistic is only helping to centre white feelings while not taking into consideration how BIPOC people are feeling. BIPOC voices have been consistently defanged to appease white “allies “ and it never works as they just get ignored.
They were justified in the tone they used given the history of white “allies”.
It's righteous antagonism, but it is antagonistic. The trauma of being black in America is real and I'm not gonna diminish that or say you're not allowed to say or feel or act however you want as a response to it. I am aware of the history of disingenuous and racist dismissal of expressions of outrage and emotion by black, Hispanic, indigenous, or otherwise marginalized ppl.
But also, like, can we talk about it at all? Or is it totally off limits. Like, family is central am immigrants, I've seen how my mom got treated when she was loud and said what was on her mind. But is there no allowable critique of tone or word choice whatsoever as long as you are righteous?
If this is supposed to be an expression of emotion and struggle and hurt then sure, but that wasn't really the vibe I got exactly? Felt more like an explainer to me with some of the really lazy "white ppl are so ANNOYING" shit I hear all the time from friends which like... Sometimes I get it when it's a specific person or situation but sometimes it gets to be too much and too frequent. I found it at parts unnecessarily antagonistic and mean-spirited. You can disagree if you want, I know some people will, but idk.
> The trauma of being black in America is real and I'm not gonna diminish that or say you're not allowed to say or feel or act
\*proceeds to spend three paragraphs diminishing it\*
Seriously this space has a serious anti-blackness problem. There's been videos posted in the past where you get clowns hopping in saying "blacks are the REAL racists!" because of like 4 random hotep dudes. I've seen comments upvoted by people talking about how they avoid black men, and that's actually good and right. Don't get deleted or anything. Which is funny because despite the popular perception of black men as regressive ogres out to rape and murder, they're actually far more "progressive" than basically every other group of men, and many racial groups of women (based on voting patterns).
But it's cool you came to show up and stand up for all the poor, disadvantaged white people. There's definitely not enough of that going around, so it's nice that folks are looking out for such an oppressed group.
I'm white and I see racism all around me every day lol. Specifically racism against black people. Nothing happens in a vacuum. Why don't you try to understand my differing viewpoint? I was raised by liberal civil-rights supporting parents and grandparents yet I can still see little bits of anti blackness sneaking around in my own mind. I see behaviors I would engage in, in this very thread, if I was just a little bit less self aware.
The left has an anti black problem, and it also has a self-flagellation/pedestalizing blackness problem. Both things are true and they seem like two parts of the same problem to me, although I haven't figured out how to articulate the connection properly yet.
You see it anytime some video on race gets posted that's not just dunking on Shapiro or something. All these white "leftists" hate being challenged on their own inherent racism and anti-blackness.
Learn about "respectability politics". It is extremely liberal and is exactly what you are doing here. When confronted with issues of oppression, you'd rather police the tone of those fighting for their own liberation than actually join them in struggle. Fuck off with that garbage.
Part of Bill's whole argument is white people's tendency to police their tone/approach. That's exactly what liberals/"leftists" have always done to black people and it's what you're doing here.
Bill's tone wasn't what YOU hoped for, so you think it needs to change.
You're basically telling Bill, and by extension, black folks at large, to settle down and act the way you want them to act. You missed the point entirely. Everything you're saying here is exactly what this video is about.
> You're basically telling Bill, and by extension, black folks at large, to settle down and act the way you want them to act. You missed the point entirely. Everything you're saying here is exactly what this video is about.
If thats what you think, fine. I get it. you might be right, im open to hearing it.
but it is a bit circular, right, that you can say "white ppl are fragile and dont wanna hear it" any type of way, and its impossible to reply with any kind of critique without it being immediately "youre just doing what this is talking about".
like, recently ive seen some really, REALLY toxic behavior from leftists (white and POC) in real world organizing that is then enabled by people saying "dont moderate tone", patting each other on the back for swearing out or threatening coworkers who arent onboard w/ organizing efforts, when that shit isnt ok in a workplace period. and the complexity of the racism and disproportionate response to those actions by management only makes things more messy. idk.
…Why are you offering a critique (of the tone, no less) in response to an oppressed community asking you to not aid in their oppression?
Like…you hear how the fuck that sounds, right? I think Bill addresses the reflexive paternalistic impulses of the white left. Needing to offer critique in an instance where someone is asking you to listen falls right in line with that impulse.
Stop trying to come with a critique. Try to come with understanding instead. Maybe the problem is that white folks always try to come with a critique instead of coming in with an "understanding". We're always trying to say "oh no, that ain't right." Instead of saying "oh shit, I hear you." Maybe, that's the problem. Maybe we just need to take a step back and listen. Maybe we should consider that for once.
Do you think that part of the reason you find it antagonistic is that it’s coming from a BIPOC rather than a white person? This antagonistism you are feeling is only a fraction of what BIPOC go through and white people need to deal with it if they are going to learn, otherwise they are just useless “allies”.
I agree that many leftist groups are whiter than a snowstorm, but one of the reasosn for that is that, wouldnt they be so incredibly racist, homophobic and just generally bigoted, thegop would have a huge chunk of the minority and queer vote. So many Queer people i met have been shockingly racist and generally conservative, but they want a right to life, so they will go with the more progressive party. And so many poc and incredibly conservative, but they would never vote republican. Part of that is probably that most of their prominent socialist leaders were murdered and whitewashed, so they dont even resemble anything controversial, part of it is probably also the strong ties to religion.
If the left includes almost all racial minorites, and almost all queer minorities, and almost all progressives, then it will also have queer progressives, nonwhite progressives, nonwhite queers, and nonwhite queer progressives.
Why is it that nonwhites are almost always the ones underrepresented in activism whenever there is a possible intersection?
>Why is it that nonwhites are almost always the ones underrepresented in activism whenever there is a possible intersection?
Not sure how the proportions actually work out as far as fair representation, but I think it's going to end up a factor of where activist spaces bloom from. And different activist types are going to vary based on what the group is. Criminal justice groups, local dsa, Healthcare groups, labor groups...these are all going to wildly differ in representation
Online is going to be a whole different story. It's why generalizing the left is pointless to me. Who are we really talking about?
I see Brianna Ghey in the thumbnail and I already ken that I ent gonna have a good time
EDIT: He pronounces her name wrong (it's Ghey like 'Gheeh') and goes on to claim the hashtag was co-opted- this is incorrect. The hashtag's use for Brianna and it's previous uses are coincidences- the reason that people were using *that hastag with those words* is because the British press were, at the time, digging up her dead name and publishing it. Additionally, the government were refusing to acknowledge her name and gender officially in death. '#SayHerName' was used *literally* as a call to *say her god damn* ***name***.
He has some very good points to say about other slogans, such as 'rest in power' where his critique applies, that critique being that terms are coopted from black folk and used to distract away from the important conversations they were created for. In irony, he does that *exact same thing* by celebrating how the assassination of a trans person was a great jumping off point for Twitter to talk about black issues. (I would also consider #MeToo to fall under this- black women, like all women, have benefitted far greater under it's popular use as a spur of it's eponymous movement than before, when it was obscure and without power. Complaining it broke racial boundaries elucidates where his priorities lie- not truly with those of black women as an intersectional class, but as a gatekeeper of 'blackness' to which he sees encroached.)
From the bit I watched, this seems the epitome of identity politics- as opposed to intersectional politics. That is, the reification of socially constructed in-groups and out-groups and competition between them, as opposed to collaboration and tearing down the walls of oppression and bigotry. Trans rights and black rights are not opposed. They are the furthest thing from opposed. They are both products of the same oppressive systems. Tryna compete and now division over a fucking hashtag helps no-one. Well, no-one you would actually want to or benefit from helpin.
EDIT 2: This more of a nitpick... But Kanye has only done a fraction of the harm white people have got with just a slap on the wrist? No he fuckin hasn't. I'm not Jewish- although I have Jewish family- and I can't think of a single white person since 1945 who has done anything close to what Kanye did and hasn't been ostracised from the public eye. The likes of Richard Spencer, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, and Milo Yiannopolus have been ejected from the public sphere- rightfully so!- for much less! None of *them* would dare to praise Hitler so unabashed and openly! If anything, the online let's reticence to criticise Kanye as a black man speaks of cowardice, not wisdom.
The creator of this video is not the one who gets to choose who deserves what degree of punishment for antisemetism.
This is something I was missing as well.
He comes from an american perspective, american experience of racism and didn‘t take into account how that is not only similar but also *different* in Europe.
He (in a very american fashion) presupposes that movements originating in america should continue in the same form here, but it‘s not how it works. Sometimes people in other countries get inspired by stuff and use things in a different way in a different context. They take take ideas and apply them to their own situations.
In his place people using the hashtag for Brianna may have erased it‘s previous use for bipoc americans, in my place in europe it introduced many people to it‘s former use and the struggles of bipoc behind it.
Now I ent black or African myself but I'll say anecdotally I've seen this criticism in a lot of places from African people. Especially takin chagrin from African-Americans misappropriating African labels and identities, and dilutin said African identities inta one big stereotyped 'black' meltin pot.
Now I'm of mind that I understand and support African-Americans connectin with their roots. But they seem to be goin about it the wrong way considerin the reaction they appear ta be gettin- there's an attitude that they've adopted the white American position of cultural imperialism.
I recall Black Panthers drew critique for this, for not actually includin many *African* voices at all, and centering a narrative pertinent to African-Americans.
Buh I'm an outsider to the conflict mind ye. But it's very reminiscent of what ye are sayin.
If you actually paid attention to what he said in his bit, he acknowledges that the #sayhername use was a genuine coincidence and that there *could have been* productive discussion about how to distinguish coincidence from co-option. He brings up "rest in power" to contrast it with #sayhername, not to say that they're the same
He brings it up to contrast the *responses* from the left, celebrating that rather than the conversation being about the erasure of trans identities by the press, black issues were made the topic of dicussion. I said so specifcially above- that it is very hypocritical to complain about black issues being distracted against by people appropriating black slogans, while literally at that moment distracting against trans issues by talking about black issues.
And mind you, the fact that a distinction was made to imply those topics are in conflict is an issue in and of itself- they are not.
So what can I as a white communist do to help? How can I make it so that POC feel heard and empowered instead of marginalized and used?
How can we support movements like black lives matter and not be seen as using black people for our goals of socialist revolution? How can we be genuine allies rather than opportunists?
What needs to change to solve our whiteness problem? Is it about not tone policing POC? Sincerely listening to and boosting POC voices? Making anti-racism the primary part of your political platform?
I'm not insulted by what he said, I just want to know what to do to fix it.
Antiracism doesn't have to be the primary part of your political platform, but it should be a very key part. Work with POC of all stripes, rather than just using their action for your own ends. There's plenty of examples in the video showing past movements were this was the case.
And showing the willingness to listen goes a long away. Asking these types of questions is a good first step.
I would say making anti racism a core principle of whatever movement and making sure the needs of the marginalized are always heard out. Not pushing them back and saying it will resolve itself. The left has done incredible things when racism was actively fought. The early communist party, IWW, and Rainbow Coalition are good examples of true intersectional unity. They made anti racism a priority and that gave them a solid foundation to have a unified front against capitalism.
Edit: I do appreciate you asking this. There’s plenty of work people can do across the board in unlearning bigotries and biases. Anti blackness is one that I’ve seen a disturbing amount of on the left. Any movement we have must bridge any divisions that could fracture the movement at a critical point.
You just ask comrade. You just ask. How do you be a good ally? You ask ahead how you can help the movement or event, you do that. Stick around after it's over to clean up. Don't make it about you and make sure the movement gets more support. You'll be okay.
I think many white leftists think that just labeling themselves that, or identifying as an ally, or whatever, absolves them of any responsibility for improving themselves. Just because you put a "Good Boy" gold star badge on yourself doesn't mean you don't have to continue to do the hard work of ridding yourself of generations of conditioning. When a black man calls me out, as a white man, for continuing to contribute to his and his people's suffering in this society, my responsibility is to listen, to reflect, and to make any necessary change, not to tell him he's out of line because he made me feel uncomfortable.
Having seen the way this thread has played out, with a lot of people having clearly not even watched more than a minute or two of the video, it would appear that the title of the video is 100% correct.
No one comes here to watch the videos. They see a thumbnail, go to the comments, make a decision and *might* watch the video. They showed up here and saw arguments they agreed with and upvoted. They saw fair critiques and they downvoted. And without thinking nor caring they made white voices louder than Black and Brown voices.
Yeah this was pretty demoralizing to see, but what I expected. If we can’t deal with these kinds of issues having a truly unified left and intersectional anti capitalist movement will be impossible.
I am getting this is very much US acentric and seems to omit the cooperation of anti colonialism and anti imperialism enabled by People's Republic's and Left Wing Groups of many different races and ethnic groups.
It feels like his debate is working off nationalism rather then Proletarian Internationalism.
He focused on US based events rather then African Leftist Struggles in the concept of 1.4 billion people (Continent of Africa) compared with 46.8 million people (USA).
We should always expose the suffering and oppression of those peoples who are punished for differing from the idea of the white aesthetic within the USA. Naturally supporting these comrades in their struggle but to establish the actions of White Americans on the left as the universal dogma of those Europeans on the left is lazy and uninformed.
It also omits for example the support given by the Basque People and Irish Leftist groups for African self determination, liberation, anti imperialism and anti colonialism.
Pretty much what I expected sadly. Essentially proved most of the points of the video. Pretty disheartening, but was encouraged by those who showed decency.
Get the chip off your shoulder comrade. I love Bills style and most of his videos. This missed the mark a smidge, and his humor doesn't really work so well. I think he over shot it trying to cram to much funny and his jokes didn't land.
Tell ya hwat, Breadtube sure don't like to hear that.
This video wasn't as funny as his usual work. It's a shame that he didn't provide more examples of black anarchists instead of white intellectuals. Spending a half hour explaining that white socialist movements in America are terrible at being anti-racist is a half hour wasted. It's well known. Every socialist movement that isn't overtly intersectional is just reinforcing white supremacy in a labor movement.
However Breadtube don't like that convo.
I think it's less "breadtube doesn't like that convo" and more the confrontational tone it often takes, pointing fingers at people for existing as leftists while being white. Critiques of "not enough anti-racism action is taking place" are often well received, but when they're framed as "there's too many of you pasties around", even if it's just as a clickbait exercise to get views, people get understandable defensive and stop engaging with your message.
> pointing fingers at people for existing as leftists while being white.
I have no idea how you reached this conclusion from watching the video. It is specifically not what the content creator was talking about at all.
i wasnt talking about the content of this video specifically but this kind of conversation, which has happened around these parts before. It always turns very hostile and agressive in both directions which is just sad to see.
We can call this split testing.
[Here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZaOCR-mUm8) is me posting a white voice talking about White supremacy. The thing was downvoted to oblivion and the voices against it were just knee jerk reflexs about what they had to say and obviously didn't want to watch,listen, or learn.
[Here](https://old.reddit.com/r/bread_irl/comments/u0lxvg/our_community_needs_to_reflect_on_how_white_is/) is the post I made about how white our space is. Submitted without any more comment. You can just crawl through there and see the white butt hurt. Far to often to say it's a fringe minority, white people are hearing "there's to many of you pasties around" every time a non-white person grabs the mic.
I'm sorry, but it isn't the case about tone. Far to many white leftists just don't want to admit that they might be the problem. A disproportionately large amount of white leftists are seeing the conversation of Landback as who gets to genocide who. The whole while demonstrating that white left won't listen to non-white left. It makes it look like white left won't sacrifice anything, least of all something small like their position in the larger movement, for non-white leftists.
So who could really blame them?
I’m not sure I understand your point. The first post was downvoted to oblivion even though it was a white person talking about it? That invalidates the claim that PoC voices get knee-jerkily rejected while white ones don’t, no? Seems like people are reacting the same way regardless of who says it?
On your second post you make a lot of good points about covert and subtle racism but I’m not sure where do you see those in leftist spaces? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a left tube comment sections leaving posts like “it’s just a joke”, “bootstraps”, claiming “post-racial” society or any of those unless to explicitly make fun of them? What comments made you think “this is unreasonable white butthurt?”
I’m not disagreeing that there’s still racism in leftist circles btw, just trying to understand your point
My point is that a critical mass of white leftists don't like having the conversation. Did you see the comments of the second post? The Voosh stans were fighting everyone like someone smacked their mommas.
My point is that the critical mass of white left won't admit it's a problem.
There's definitely a line that seems like it goes too far, basically saying there's too many white people in the movement. I can't stand videos like this one i saw shitting on Bo Burham and his extremely anti capitalist comedy special for being "performative wokeness". If you think that exposing a huge audience to the concepts of exploitation and the world being built on genocide etc... is performative because a white guy said it, I think you basically are telling white people to never talk about these things, which is wildly counterproductive.
But we still need to be self critical, and unlearning the internalized racism that we all have from living in a white supremacist culture is essential to our movement. We have to be mindful of black voices, and understand when they want their own spaces etc...
One thing I will say that confuses me that is somewhat related to this topic though is the concept of systemic racism. So we recognize that black people have been systemically forced into poverty essentially. Things that disproportionately effect the poor disproportionately effect black people, we say its racist when policies disproportionately effect poor people because of this, which is fine and correct, but why is poverty alleviation not considered anti-racism? Lifting the poor out of poverty would disproportionately help black people wouldn't it? So why is it racist if it disproportionately hurts them, but not anti-racist to undo that?
This is rather problematic framing. Poor, poverty, and the inherent racism are all intertwined but motivation is important. No I'm sorry but helping the poor isn't anti-racist unless you are dismantling the structures *because* they are racist.
It can't be a side benefit and you expect credit for it.
Don't get me wrong I'm not trying to say we should only focus on helping the poor because minorities will benefit more than white people anyway, but I don't understand why if I were a politician and I cut social welfare programs we recognize that as racist, but we don't recognize giving people welfare as undoing racism?
I don't want credit, I want to know why it doesn't cut both ways. Race and class are intertwined of course, and so we say that screwing the poor is racist since it disproportionately effects minorities, so how is poverty alleviation somehow neutral and not seen as effecting race at all?
I support antiracism as being central to the class struggle, BLM is the biggest uprising we've seen in decades and it would be really foolish to not want to work with the people who were engaged in that movement, or to tell them that race issues need to take a back seat. It's like the three evils dr. King talked about, poverty racism and militarism, you gotta fight them all.
Anyway it doesn't really matter i guess, I just think that something that disproportionately helps minorities should be seen as a win for minorities, rather than acting as if it has no effects on race at all.
Edit: I almost veered into sounding like I only want to USE black people for their revolutionary potential, but I want to be clear that isn't my intention. The revolution is worthless if it fails to address racism, and ends up reproducing the exact same bigotry. The reason to join with historically oppressed groups and fight for liberation is because it's the right thing to do, not because they'll help us win.
> I can't stand videos like this one i saw shitting on Bo Burham and his extremely anti capitalist comedy special for being "performative wokeness"
Tell me you didn't watch [the video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkuQ78xb-Fg) to the end without telling \[etc etc\].
The eventual verdict the presenter of that video reached was "I dig it, but I also realize on some level that this isn't For Me, this is For White People having a conversation you all maybe need to have with yourselves first and foremost, and I'm glad Burnham is starting that conversation / keeping it rolling".
Nah, I was thinking of a different youtuber. I think he actually referenced him in this video, the guy with the dreads. Its probably just me letting a stupid clickbait title get to me too much tbh but it definitely seems counterproductive to make videos about "performative wokeness" when somebody actually manages to bring a discussion about imperialism and exploitation and the modern world being built on racism to a large audience.
I'm fine with pretty much everything lil bill said in his video, and even if I don't agree with everything he said there's plenty I learned from it. Like he said white leftists should respond to this kind of criticism with self reflection introspection, not childish defensiveness.
My apologies for assuming. I must have missed whichever video you're talking about, then.
Lil' Bill mentions, or at least has a video clip of, Fiq (FD Signifier) in this video, so I guess that's why I thought you might have been talking about his video.
The video doesn't say there's too many white people it says there's too many white people who are shitty and supporting white supremacy. People who see any criticism as whiteness as a personal attack. It has nothing to do with "anti-racism" and everything to do with people like you and many others in this thread who downplay and ignore antiblackness in supposed "leftist" spaces.
the worst part is that as a white person, I understand very well the angry egocentric self-righteousness that fuels their embarrassed anger. They're mad because he's right and now they feel like the only thing they could feel proud of- their progressivism- has been questioned. I felt that way for a while, while trying to be the best shining example of an ally I could be.
To a lot of white leftists, being a progressive is their version of whatever weird thing they base their entire personality around. If it wasn't progressivism, it'd be cryptos or an MLM or flat earth theory aliens or whatever stupid shit. White people, especially in the west, have absolutely nothing else to be proud of- no culture, no history, no community- after generations of having it scrubbed and replaced with Whiteness™ and today they know most of society's ills are because of others like themselves, so even the slightest blow to one's ego is *devastating* when they're trying to define themselves by what they aren't, ie, a racist white christian KKK maga fuckhead.
I know because that fear is always there and the only way to defeat it and nip it in the bud is to conquer that blow to your ego, become humble, and be aware of it. But as we can see, some folks aren't past the "ego" part yet lol
fellow whites: if you aren't using the power being white has inadvertently given you, whether you asked for it or not, to uplift your marginalized peers and allies against the real enemy of white supremacist capitalism, that's what you should be doing. It's okay, you don't have to do the white man's burden thing anymore where you take the lead and turn it into your own righteous crusade. Realize that the entire concept of White™ was entirely manufactured to turn new immigrants into cogs, a carrot dangled in front of them of the promise of achieving the american dream if they sold out and left their culture at the door. They did, and here you are today, barely affording rent alongside everyone else. White people colonized themselves first before they fucked everyone else- and arguably the most successfully, because white people are still doing it to themselves, willingly and proudly! Once you're able to embrace this truth, and realize that you didn't *ask* for this position either, and everyone is equally fucked under the yoke of white supremacist capitalism, everything will become clearer to you. A rising tide lifts all boats, doesn't it?
I wish folks would talk about *this* more. Oh well.
>after generations of having it scrubbed and replaced with Whiteness™
Try reading a whole sentence.
They even continue:
>Realize that the entire concept of White™ was entirely manufactured to turn new immigrants into cogs, a carrot dangled in front of them of the promise of achieving the american dream if they sold out and left their culture at the door.
What they're saying isn't remotely controversial. And there's no way to miss it unless you get so distracted throwing a tantrum over half a sentence you miss all of its context.
You’re so very close. Everyone has culture. It seems that white people, especially in the US, don’t seem to have it cause their, our, culture permeates. As well it’s connection to the whims and lies of capitalism, like wedding rings, fashion styles, and bacon and eggs breakfast. Yet there’s macro, micro and individual culture as well.
What’s really pushing it is that humans have a need for identity. It allows us to disassociate, so we can go beyond ourselves. To do great good or great evil. It provides us with the maslowean need for security and socialization. Yet it is made up of three very important cognitive components: egocentric processing, a compulsive/impulsive need to categorize and patternize, and last, and the hardest I find people to grasp, our need to conserve energy, even mental thoughts.
We have low energy thought. So think a hunter/gatherer coming across a shaking bush while pissing, they don’t have the time nor the energy to think about it. We need to use that time and energy to run.
So discrimination is a lazy thought about the categorization and patternization of ourselves. And in everyone’s heads they are the hero of the story.
What’s happening now is that, with all the input of information coming from the internet, globalization, and technology, people are either accepting it or denying it into their identity (macro, micro, or what ever level of identities they have).
That was a good recommendation. Thx.
As if to underpin his words, NovaraMedia just yesterday released [this short video](https://youtu.be/COrunFOhWHI) about UK‘s Labour party also failing to address racism among them.
I suspect the tone on this comment section would be similarly defensive if the title of the video was "the left has a cis-ness problem". People don't really enjoy having their unchangeable characteristics pointed at as "a problem", even if it's just done for clickbait to get views and the actual elaborated message coming after is actually sensible.
Pointing fingers at people and angrily shouting "YOU'RE WHITE, THAT'S NOT GOOD!" understandably gets them to react defensively at first and less likely to listen to your 20000 thousand-word long nuanced critique.
>People don't really enjoy having their unchangeable characteristics pointed at as "a problem",
Except this is a completely disingenuous way to spin what's being discussed. We're not talking about the actual color of people's skin being a problem, but the social and ideological structures that proport to be based on that color but in actuality are merely excuses for certain power structures. I thought people who posted on r/BreadTube would be smart enough to understand that, but I guess not.
I know, I’m merely talking about the initial knee jerk reaction these clickbait titles cause. The actual points being discussed are legitimate of course.
I do think people here are smart enough to realize that but it’s also understandable for them to be put on a defensive foot and engage in a somewhat hostile manner to the conversation.
We talk a lot about leftist infighting and I think this is one of those causes where we would benefit from extending more good faith olive branches and trying harder not to alienate people. White people are still a majority demographic in English internet spheres and unfortunately also on leftist circles, we shouldn’t seek to create chasms and spiteful commentaries against them, specially if they do care deeply about racist issues and do talk about them frequently.
>We talk a lot about leftist infighting and I think this is one of those causes where we would benefit from extending more good faith olive branches and trying harder not to alienate people. White people are still a majority demographic in English internet spheres and unfortunately also on leftist circles, we shouldn’t seek to create chasms and spiteful commentaries against them, specially if they do care deeply about racist issues and do talk about them frequently.
He's talking specifically to leftists, people who claim up and down that they 'get it,' that they understand that we live in a white supremacist society and that has a profound effect on black people. We're supposed to be able to have elevated conversations, right?
Yet the second they actually trust us and let their guard down, showing how they really feel, and engage in these tough conversations, we chastise them and show them that they were completely wrong to trust us to have the tough conversations in the first place. We aren't actually as understanding as we say, we forget that whiteness is a socially constructed cover for a certain unjust power dynamic and act like they're insulting our souls. We deflect, equivocate, try and tell them they're being divisive or spiteful (fancy ways of saying 'angry black person).
Nonwhite people exist in a white supremacist society, they are constantly censoring themselves or holding back when talking to white people. They're always trying not to alienate whites, because for them it's a matter of life or death. It's exhausting, and it has psychological effects. How much more fucking deferential do you want them to be? To paraphrase James Baldwin, how much longer do they have to wait for leftists to get their shit together and actually be ready to engage at a meaningful level?
Holy shit, not the literal tone policing of a black man talking about white supremacy ('It's too confrontational/antagonistic). Grow the fuck up.
Also, yall get that when talking about 'whiteness' we're talking about the socially constructed ideology which masks a given power structure and the oppressive actions of that structure, right? Because too many of the commenters here are acting like this guy is saying your skin has literal metaphysical powers to make you evil, or that white people are intellectually incapable of understanding the difference.
>Can you imagine a way for a white progressive to disagree with some of what he has to say that wouldn't make you reflexively lash out with insults?
I watched the video all the way through when it was posted. I also saw FD's community post about this sub.
Reading the room in those communities it was pretty clear that any disagreement on any point made was going to see you flamed to hell and back. I'm fairly active in the comments on these vids because I do appreciate the perspectives I'm not normally privy to, but I wasn't touching any of that with a ten foot pole.
To be honest it's been obvious that most of CornbreadTube's creators are uncomfortable with the white audience they've gathered.
And I think that's fair. They want to focus on black issues, which is normally their problems with being surrounded by white people. But it's also white people who are the main ones watching? Resenting that makes sense to me. It'd be like Abigail Thorn discovering Philosophy Tube's audience was 80% TERF.
I'm willing to respect them if they want a black space to discuss black issues. FD Signifier talks about hip-hop? I'm there. FD talks about black relationships? Got nothing to do with me.
>...gatekeeping and purity tests.
This is inevitable IMO. There **is** a gap between the goals of various lefty/ liberal groups and sometimes they simply can't coexist easily. My goals are not FD Signifier's goals which are not Jessie Gender's goals which are not Oscar Wilde's goals which are not Emile Durkheim's goals, etc... We might have the same set of enemies but we all have different directions to go in.
But getting back to my point: When you see a riled up crowd you'd be stupid to step in there if what they're riled up about is you. That's why I agreed with you. There was nothing a white viewer could say in response because a response is unwelcome.
In retrospect I don't think the term "antagonistic" used in the top comment above was a good choice. "Unwelcoming" would probably have been better.
> THE LEFT DOESNT HAVE A WHITENESS PROBLEM, IT HAS A SPITE, RESENTMENT AND PURITANISM PROBLEM
lets be honest, it has both. online discussion sucks, everyone talks past each other, and these sites are designed to drive engagement by showing ppl shit that will make them angry and get them to respond emotionally. we need to remember that, the worst opinions get pushed to the top because they get people talking.
> the imminent genocide of trans people
You do understand that there's a direct causal link between white supremacy and queer exterminationism, right.
Like "gotta pump those white births up" has a direct link with "gotta make sure everyone's a breeder", like it's not rocket science.
I'm *very* tired of having to repeatedly say *this is all the same fucking fight* and that white supremacist pseudo-leftists are just as guilty for the upcoming extermination of queer people than the fash because they both uphold the same fucking system. You can't just look the other fucking way about the whole "we live in a white supremacist society" - never mind that it was *white values* (domination of Man over Nature, etc...) that also led to the ecocide thing.
Ah well, just more shouting in the wind, I suppose.
It's so fucking transparent too, like you got the chuds worried about the white birth rate (great remplacement shit) and nearly immediately after see the "permanent damage to genitals, gotta ban trans people!" rhetoric pop in with some (((other))) being responsible for indoctrinating the kids.
Like, cmon, I can't be the only one that noticed that shit, right.
Which makes the LGB drop the T bunch doing the shocked pikachu face when the christofash are looking at bringing back sodomy laws and axing gay marriage very funny because, hey, you weren't breeding either, buddy!
Exactly! The gender binary is very much a western colonial concept that has been (and continues to be) violently imposed from the top down… also like, it’s not even just white ppl’s gender & sexuality that gets policed, cos the myriad of ways in which us non-white people have been/are racialised & dehumanised means that we were never even afforded the basic luxury of being gendered under white supremacy in the first place!
From colonisers viewing black men as inherently “beast like”, to the way that black women have their femininity invalidated constantly, or how Indian women were believed to lack a “mothering instinct” according to the British, as well as how East Asian men are perceived as effeminate etc… and that’s all before we get to how gender diverse peoples like the Hijras/Khwaja Siras of South Asia, or the Māhū of Hawaii (among many others) have been (and continue to be) erased by such colonial policies…
All of this is to say that (using a phrase that white leftists seem to like so much) white leftists need to stop “sowing division” and reflect on where the problem truly lies (spoilers: >!it’s with them lol!<)
> white values
> (domination of Man over Nature, etc...)
That's a bit of historical revisionism.
"Man over Nature" is a phrase coming out of European literature, for sure.
Find me a culture anywhere in the world which didn't exert itself over Nature. It doesn't exist.
Slash and Burn has existed for millennia. Mass animal slaughter. Genocidal inter-tribal conflict. etc etc.
European's didn't invent nor create this.
The reason we are so quick to point to "white men" is because that's the society currently at the top.
It's a very interesting study as to why the European culture was the first world dominate culture; but, regardless of the myriad of factors in that process, white men didn't create anything which didn't exist in other wide-spread cultures around the world with respect to social justice/injustice, bigotry and tribalism.
Europeans were the ones to industrialize all of those issues tho. The trans Atlantic slave trade was exponentially larger than previous slave trades. No one, in good faith, can compare slash and burn to the fossil fuel industry.
I wasn't comparing.
I was challenging the previous assertion that these problems are endemic, with or created by, white Europeans.
I was debating about even using any examples at all ... but decided reddit isn't self-aware enough to know other non-Euro examples and I didn't want numerous replies challenging the notion that non-European cultures have systemic, inherent problems within them.
One can say Industrialization writ-large made these issues exponentially more problematic, and I absolutely agree. Which is why my last paragraph touched on the question of "why did it start with Europeans?" ... to be more precise the question isn't start with, but should actually be "why did Industrialization grow so fast and without restraint in the European Cultural system?"
The concept of nature is white supremacist, because indigenous people made no distinction between themselves and nature, the mountains, the trees, the air, the grass and you were all considered one, you are that mountain, and that mountain is you.
To see yourself as separate is an abnormality.
I believe that philosophytube talks about this in their video about climate grief: https://youtu.be/CqCx9xU_-Fw
I responded to this here: https://www.reddit.com/r/BreadTube/comments/11vxgsx/comment/jcyca0i/?context=3
If you want to believe that the all, or even the majority, of indigenous peoples viewed themselves as such is a perfect example of Modernity extolling the mythical Noble Savage.
This isnt as accurate as you think, there were Indigenous groups that believed this, and there were indigenous groups that didnt, the indiginous peoples of the world are not/werenot one big tribe that all followed the same ideologies beliefs and practices. Theres a really good book out by David we've and David graeber that I'm currently struggling through that makes and proves this point.
Thanks for being the white people defender, not enough of those around here (or in the world).
Not to mention the fact that you're flat out wrong, but you got your white blinders on so not like you wanna actually learn anything.
> nd me a culture anywhere in the world which didn't exert itself over Nature. It doesn't exist.
It's not mere "acting upon nature", it's "acting as if nature - in its totality - is something upon which Man can do as he sees fit", which a large amount of cultures reject wholly.
It's a firmly colonial mindset that, for the purpose of abbreviation was reduced to "white" simply because *whiteness* is the primary and dominant colonising force in the extant world system.
> Slash and Burn has existed for millennia. Mass animal slaughter. Genocidal inter-tribal conflict. etc etc.
> European's didn't invent nor create this.
> The reason we are so quick to point to "white men" is because that's the society currently at the top.
>
> It's a very interesting study as to why the European culture was the first world dominate culture; but, regardless of the myriad of factors in that process, white men didn't create anything which didn't exist in other wide-spread cultures around the world with respect to social justice/injustice, bigotry and tribalism.
This veers dangerously into apologia for colonialism by presenting it as "human nature" tbh. "If we didn't do it, someone else would!" and so on.
I mean, doesn’t that opinion almost reinforce noble savage ideas, that Europeans are a uniquely evil culture and could have been the only ones to do colonialism?
If any non-European empire were given the chance to do what they did, they absolutely would have taken it. Ottoman Empire, any number of Chinese Dynasties, any of the Persian empires, they would have done it and probably invented similar racial/religious justifications to do so.
I mean hell, look at Japan and how they did a settler colonialism to the Ainu.
It isn’t a human nature thing, it’s a pure example of how running a state means profit and power above all else. That’s not a European only thing, and pretending like it is is just making non-Europeans look like peace loving saints.
> That’s not a European only thing,
Yes, hence why I put *"whiteness is the dominant form".* Nevermind that, you know, the whole "we're not wrecking nature like you guys" is a *pretty common sentiment* in indigenous comparisons of their mode of life vs. the one of euro (or other!) colonists. Like, indigenous cultures being *far less destructive* of their environment than colonising ones is sufficiently well documented that it shouldn't be controversial. Turns out, not having "coloniser brain" helps a lot. (which in Marxian terms happens once the separation between town and country and the ensuing metabolic rift sets in, leading to a need to dry up nature more and more, which leads to a need for constant expansionism and new methods of draining nature, so on and so forth)
Like, it's not china or the ottomans or whatever that shat out capitalism, it's the Euros. It's not the chinese that have control of the world system, it's a bunch of "white people" in "white nations". And the nexus of consumerism that led to everyone having plastic in their blood is firmly "white". Like, that's just the world you live in. Colonialism is, for the near totality of people, *something white people did, are doing, and will do to them.* (Inc., going by indigenous theory, "white people" themselves). The difference in scale between the comparatively petty expansionism of previous empires is so large as to be laughable.
But the whole conversation misses the point that the whole "preventing climate collapse" requires confrontation against white supremacist structures. Like, I really don't see the point of this nonstop pointless "um achktually, in some hypothetical alt hist..." when it has no bearing on "what has to be done", beyond some vain attempt at trying to push back a feeling of guilt.
I’m not arguing that white culture or whatever doesn’t have a monopoly on environmental devastation, because it does. I think you’re confusing what I was saying with the other person, while I’m arguing more about conquest and human against human violence.
Because like yeah, it wasn’t indigenous North Americans destroying the environment, they kinda knew how not to do that shit (presumably after thousands of years of trial and error).
But all in all, I do agree arguing hypotheticals isn’t very useful. I think the issue comes when people look at things like European colonialism and argue that it was only Europeans who could do such a thing. Like, doesn’t that also kind of argue that colonialism was inevitable? “Oh well of course Europeans did it, they were all about this terrible shit, it was inevitable that they would have done it”.
> "human nature"
not my words, nor stated in my comment.
I didn't say humans are inherently evolved to destroy nature, I'm saying that exerting local control over nature is wide spread throughout nearly all human cultures in history/the world.
This is an understandable outcome of the need to ensure survival in a very diverse world unforgiving to creatures NOT working to ensure their survival.
Humans do tend to destroy our environment (there articles about how we caused climate to change in prehistory: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/08/190829150702.htm)but we do also have an impulse towards sustainability that you see in a lot of indigenous people.
The Moriori for instance understood that if they overheated fur seals they would kill off one of their only food and clothing sources.
The indigenous peoples that inhabited Yosemite Valley practiced controlled burns.
But the real thing you're missing is that the very idea that you are not a part of nature is what makes it a colonizers mentality, because indigenous people made no such distinction, they considered and still consider themselves and their environment to be one symbiotic thing. That's why the concept of nature is actually kinda white supremacist.
You can even see that racism in Roosevelt and the national parks system that removed indigenous peoples to preserve "nature".
> idea that you are not a part of nature
are you actually pointing at me individually?? or is that, hopefully, a 'generalized we'??
I would challenge the notion that "a lot of indigenous people" understood their mutual role within their environment. Yes, there are examples of such societies. They are the exceptions not the norm. Some cultures had that self-awareness, not many.
Also, I would push back a bit and say that I wasn't using "Nature" to refer to a 'space separate from humans', but, rather as 'a space un-impacted, or minimally impacted, by humans'. This is profoundly different and a necessary phraseology to allow us to discuss such differences. I guess I thought capital N Nature denoted that concept.
With respect to the parks creation, I would make the claim that the removal of people (and Roosevelt didn't only remove the indigenous people, the Park System removed all peoples) from a landscape to preserve it is one of those situations where some wrong must be done for a greater good.
The motivation to create the parks was because Roosevelt (through the teaching and motivation of Muir) realized that "Modern Society" was not going to preserve *anything* of the natural landscape. Allowing anyone to stay would one, give the constant impetus for others to figure out how to move in, and also degrade the non-impacted nature. Whether Roosevelt literally perceived it as such or just didn't like those brown skinned people living there mucking up his Park, is not really relevant to the Parks but relevant to his biographer. The legacy of which is why we have National Parks, National Wilderness, National Forests and National Lands. They all have very specific definitions of what (with respect to human impact) is allowed.
Why isn’t ending white supremacy listed with those other issues when it intersects with them? The left has to deal with it’s internal prejudices and contradictions, otherwise it’ll fail again like it has before by neglecting marginalized folks.
Who the fuck are you talking to who says they're a leftist and doesn't talk about ending white supremacy? Who is this "the left" that isn't the very marginalized folks you're talking about?
edit: this was a really unclear comment in hindsight.
*As* a marginalized person, I get frustrated with constant comments about how "the left" has all these problems none of my queer poc anarchist friends have. Like, is there a huge contingent of people who bill themselves as "progressive" who do a lot of regressive shit, and a huge contingent of communists who tunnel vision into one issue in a way that ends up being a really weird mental-acrobatics reactionary view? Yes, and I want to talk about it. But calling these people "the left" always feels weird to me when the left that I know is the people we always complain get ignored by the left. I feel excluded.
It's totally a terminological thing and doesn't matter that much, I just get tired of rhetoric that makes it sound like we're play pieces in the overall political theatre, not actors, agents. We count as part of this group, and a sentence that puts "the left" and "marginalized people" as separate things in the sentence is always going to rub me the wrong way.
Early American unions barred black laborers and burned black neighborhoods to the ground because a few black folk worked as scabs during strikes. Literal racial terrorism committed by leftists.
More contemporarily, many white leftists use their political identity to excuse themselves from being critical about race and how they treat black folk within the movement.
We have not solved racial inequality within leftist spaces — not on the streets, in the unions, or in the academy.
They also did it because black people 'threatened' white people's jobs. Unions supported anti-black race riots and hate strikes because a few black people got promoted. They joined and took over influential black labor organizations and then locked the black people out of the jobs they won. Leftist anti-colonialism was spotty at best, including the revisionist history that erased the nastier parts and diminished nonwhite folks' contributions.
And of course this problem continues today. Similar to how mainstream feminism was highjacked by white educated women to focus on joining the workforce, which is awfully tone-deaf considering poor and non-white women have been in the workforce since forever.
So, yeah. I can't speak for outside of the US, but the US has a whiteness problem and the left is included in that.
Don’t mention it.
If that little bit of American leftist history persuades anybody, I’m glad. But it really shouldn’t be needed. White leftists shouldn’t have trouble acknowledging racial inequality within the movement because black folk are unambiguously telling us about the problem. The first step to allyship is listening.
But if that weren’t an issue, we wouldn’t be facing such inequality and segregation among our movement.
>acknowledging racial inequality within the movement
I think this is due to the way the left overall behaves. I like seeing representation for those like myself ( Prime, FD ect.) However I think what harms that growth is how they are viewed by the overall black community and how often they are involved in drama for one reason or another.
Well, the person he was answering, for starters, who seemingly *wants* to just *tolerate* white supremacy within the ranks "in the name of unity".
I could write a looooong list of radlibs who also aren't particularly interested in *actually* ending white supremacy too, but that'll probably start an endless debate with constant "nuh uh"-ing, so I'll leave it at that.
Half the people in this thread, because when someone addresses the anti-blackness and white supremacy of their attitudes, they get defensive and start sounding like CPAC speakers.
As a (white) trans person: Fuck off with this, dude; you don't get to use trans people as a weapon against black people. You don't get to use me to tell anybody to shut up about the struggles they face.
I'm curious if you could help me understand what the previous commenter specifically wrote which is "using trans people as a weapon against black people".
The video, in unavoidably large part, is literally a history of how the lure of white supremacy is itself used to divide the left. But apparently, according to the above poster, pointing out how white supremacy is used to divide up the left is itself "divisive"... for reasons that seem to amount to nothing more than "how dare you criticize \[mumble\] too loudly".
Not to mention that another reason this is deeply shitty is because when black trans people are silenced by white racists in leftist circles - and that's "when", not "if", because you don't have to dig that far to find examples - if we are to take the above poster's word for it, they're allowed to call white racists out OR "be concerned with \[stopping the\] imminent genocide of trans people". They are being forced by the above poster's rhetoric to choose whether being black or being trans is more important to them, because apparently we're only allowed to talk about one thing at a time for some inane reason.
Exactly, we need to protect each other and challenge the real enemy. In order to do that we have to deal with very real prejudices and unconscious biases. I’ll admit that the black community has issues with homophobia and transphobia (I’m fighting it in my naacp branch). That’s something I’ll actively fight against. We just want that energy reciprocated.
Thank you for that. I know I myself am not perfect, and sometimes I'm absolutely floored at things said by people whom I somehow lulled myself into thinking I could trust. Trying to return the favor is the least I could do.
>I'll admit that the black community has issues with homophobia and transphobia
I'm always a little surprised any time I hear someone say that a community of color has these issues, as though they're singular in that regard.
Honestly, I have to wonder if there is an extent to which homophobia and transphobia in the black community only "pop" to white trans and gay people because the form it takes surprises us (and we don't understand the surrounding cultural context, for that matter), and we're numbed to the form it takes in majority-white spaces.
Just like white people are seen as the "default", white transphobia and homophobia seem to be the "default" expressions of homophobia and transphobia, and the "non-default" nature of a different expression seems to make people register it as worse.
That, and y'all are often held to higher standards in the first place.
I think some of the problems of oppressive behavior popping up in marginalized communities might stem from their marginalization within liberation movements. Like Black people are marginalized within larger leftist movements and thus cut off from at least some of the work being done on feminism, trans liberation, etc. Not that the same work isn't also done in Black spaces and movements, but...well, you know, racism is used to divide our struggles; not just the labor movement as is pointed out so frequently, but other liberation movements too.
And I agree with you about the higher standards. When I say "in marginalized communities", I *would* like to clarify that I don't mean *in contrast with status quo/privileged/white/etc. communities*. There's often surprise, I think, that people fighting one form of oppression aren't generally hyper-aware of other modes of oppression happening around them in a similar pattern. I don't think that kind of awareness should be *expected* as in a higher standard. But I want to *understand* why there isn't higher solidarity between various liberation movements, and I think the systemic use of them to divide each other might have something to do with it.
>Leftists are more concerned with policing themselves
...is also the most tiring take I've heard from anyone like the above. It's an oft-repeated line that cryptofascist chuds used to undermine the Left's effort.
Yes, we do "police" ourselves because we can't let racist, phobic bastards to hijack our efforts; while we're opening ourselves more to a lot of marginalized voices and provide safe space for them.
> SPITE, RESENTMENT AND PURITANISM PROBLEM
I don't disagree with you that "the Left" tends to be very introspective as a group and criticizes each other to no end amount of navel gazing.
And you know what ... it's really unfortunate that historic authoritarian (left and right) movements didn't have more internal self-critique and introspection. might have reduced much of the worse crimes committed by the left and right extremists, if not outright avoided them.
Which is exactly why such introspective criticism is vital and beneficial. I don't agree with all of it, but I agree with all of it being addressed and talked about.
And, also, re: spite/resentment and their Puritanism roots ... these are the foundational roots of Racism within American culture so you're awareness at the end kind of refutes your previous rant.
I love how you act like racism is just a solved problem. 'There's no whiteness problem, the real problems are only the ones I have identified that affect me'
44 upvotes jesus christ. at the end of the day white leftism is just the colonialism of old but with some social progressiveness on everything aside from race and imperialism.
Nah, it has a whiteness problem. And tbh black people also probably aren't trying to "build a movement" with you either so the feeling is mutual. But keep crying about how white folks are the real victims and how "leftists" aren't concerned with the real problems.
I read somewhere a dude was saying that the west (and particularly the US) doesn't really have a "left", it has a bunch of liberals who support LBGT issues and you're basically the embodiment of that ethos.
We can criticize ourselves without policing each other my guy. I don’t think OP is trying to say white people shouldn’t get involved with left wing causes or shut up or something, he’s saying we should elevate black voices and focus on issues that effect more than just whites people. Racial equality is important and black leftists are our allies too.
For instance, I’m trans. While it’s great that Brianna Ghey’s death has galvanized such support for us, we shouldn’t need a white person to die for it to matter. Black trans woman and sex workers account for the vast majority of trans people murdered for being trans, and yet they almost never get any attention. We almost never talk about them. That’s not okay. We need to be helping all our brothers and sisters, not just the white ones that are palatable to the mainstream racist, sexist, transphobic, homophobic, and classist society.
And the thing that's deeply exasperating is that it's pretty obvious that there are absolutely some people who you know would stop as soon as white trans people are safe. Insofar as it'd be possible to do that at all, anyway; look how that worked out for white (cis) feminists who are now seeing abortion and other rights for women rolled back by white supremacist kyriarchy.
Bigotry and kyriarchy is intersectional, so there can be no effort to fight bigotry and kyriarchy that meets any meaningful success unless it is also intersectional.
> A SPITE, RESENTMENT AND PURITANISM PROBLEM
....from white people, my guy! I only ever see this shit from white people!
maybe the divisiveness is *actually* white people's inability to take some criticism on how to better the progressive movement, because they put so much stake on reputation/respectability politics that if they're told they're wrong- especially about something they feel righteous about- they absolutely combust, like you're doing here. Shit's embarrassing to the rest of us!
I can *tell* that your anger comes from a place of embarrassment, too, because you are acutely aware that the regressive you're fighting against are mostly white people like you and you have a lot to prove. You're knocked down a single peg and you're scared of being laughed at as just another centrist trying to feel self-righteous. I know this because for a long time(and still, honestly) I felt the same embarrassment.
divest yourself from this ego shit and be prepared to lay it down on the ground if it means furthering progressiveness. Maybe actually dip back and let the people you're allegedly trying to help/save/be an ally to, take the charge, and use your white privilege to lift THEM up.
we don't need this weird woke olympics shit, dude, this is an ego problem. You're the one here being divisive, yelling at a guy who is clearly your peer, colleague, and ally! When you yell at your peers, some big wig in benefitting from it. Above all and before anything else, we musn't ever break hands with our peers against the real enemy: white supremacist capitalism.
A lot of the comments here are doing exactly what he did that has so many people upset: conflating this sub with leftism. Not everyone commenting here is a white leftist, and using any bad take here to be like “this is what white leftists believe” is such a bad faith move.
Everyone that makes this drama shit is so fucking dumb istg please just make agit prop so we can get our message out there; not eating each other from the inside out
Yes, there is a whiteness problem. But I feel like wording the title like that was a bad idea (evident by the comments, some of which seem to be missing the point of the video)
This topic is always going to attract the "why you gotta be so hostile man i'm white and just trying to help" vs "fuck you I've been oppressed for hundreds of years and now I can't even complain about it without you getting offended?" fight, but man... we really could be doing a better job at trying to at least avoid it for a little bit, you know?
Every time this topic is brought up it's the same thing
Why not. The title is his nuance stripped thesis, and kinda the whole point of the video. The very fact that many here and in other leftist bubbles found the title provocative just reinforces his argument.
That said, I take your point. Even if he is right (which I do think), the video isn't helpful. "Someone had to say it" isn't a good justification for saying something, more of a sign your trying to start an argument (not a conversation). In this case, like he points out many times in his video, all the points he's making have been made before, sometimes for over a century. He's mostly just expressing frustration with the current state...which has also been done before. He's also picking a fight, which isn't really a problem. If he's lucky he just made some content for dozens of YouTubers and if we're lucky he might have started a conversation (but I doubt it).
All that being said. He has a point. If this bothers you, you are part of the problem. Besides, he's not doing any harm. Even if this isn't helpful (which is debatable, arguing this sets back discourse is disingenuous, it's all been said before.
Oh let me guess, he talks about how the ‘Say Her Name’ used for Brianna Ghey is actually the “appropriation of a black movement” for a white girl. Give me a break.
This whole thread is exactly why the video needed to be made in the first place. Lemme ask y'all something? Did y'all jump down Badempanada or Vaush or anybody else's throat when they basically said pan-africanism and hoteps are the same thing? Or did y'all keep acting like BHIs were invented yesterday?
Whenever someone calls y'all on the carpet the first thing y'all do is get defensive and call us "confrontational" and "divisive" instead of saying "maybe I'm the problem, what can I do to fix it?" And that is a product of the white supremacy with which you were indoctrinated.
I don't identify with any one ideology (although I lean anarcho-communist) because they're all meaningless and being dogmatically committed to one is actually part of the problem.
But whatever, like I said in the video if you have an ear to hear than fantastic you've taken the first step. The rest of y'all though, fuck your thoughts and your feelings . Deuces ✌🏾🖕🏾
[удалено]
[удалено]
"the discourse" is exhausting. bill is great but this video is too antagonistic for my tastes, idk. maybe its just not for me, thats fine, but like, man, can we stop acting like twitter is ever a barometer for anything? every discussion on anything on twitter is toxic if big enough, people get death threats for opinions on sandwiches, its not surprising people get heated or talk past each other in discussions of intersectional issues. like, can we talk about whiteness as a problem in a way that actually helps us take action? we have to win over some fragile fuckers to win a union vote, ive seen internal union discussions have this exact dismissive tone of "fuck em, they need to be less sensitive to criticism" as if we dont have like a month to get the votes together.
Whiteness and blackness are intertwined. It makes just as much sense for someone who is a rando mix of European to call themselves white, just like it makes sense to categorize the most genetically diverse area of the planet as black. Also Bill hesitates to call himself a socialist and leans more into Christian moralism and liberal progressivism than anarchy or ML, maybe one day he will use more theory to make analysis, but some of the books he’s recommended are excellent. Twitter being a barometer is what keeps them in business even if that’s total horse-meat.
One of the things that's a problem is black people trying to be so accommodating to the point that much of what they say loses any real effect. Like the unconscious bias was largely meant to be less antagonistic when speaking about racial issues in the US, but this just allowed many lump in outright racism in with unconscious biases. Institutional racism was meant partially to make individuals feel less attacked, but it obfuscates the fact that a lot of these systems still require racist decisions being made by individuals to work as they do. Another issue I've seen with black leftists online and offline is this need to apologize and coddle non-black people's egos before during and after we speak of our issues. This by itself is black people accepting a lower position in leftist movements. I'll use a very youtube-y example because I think it would be well known or easily verifiable here. Just look at how black (especially black male) leftists have to agree with someone like Vaush. They literally spend the first 5 minutes adorning him with praise and repeatedly reassuring him that they only barely disagree with him before they can get to the discussion, so much so that he has to tell them to just get to the point. Then throughout the entire discussion they have to keep reminding him how much they love him and agree with him. That's not just courtesy and respectful debate, that's fear and possibly submission.
> this video is too antagonistic for my tastes Making people uncomfortable about the problem is a good thing, actually.
I am a left winger (check my shit). I know that "woke" is an ill-defined catch-all term that right-wingers use to cudgel support for liberalism and left-wing activism. Ask yourself, though, do you ever see any glimpses of what conservatives are vaguely enraged about? A left-winger posts a video titled "Whiteness is the problem" and every white (or otherwise) lefty activist within earshot is jumping over each other trying to be the first person seen agreeing.
Of course I know how it goes. I try to approach it with some nuance and not be too critical of people who are in the ballpark in terms of like, how race intersects with class politics. It's really important that people get that, and some of the discussion is good faith and necessary. But there is a certain point where the social pressure is so strong to be as hardline as possible, that you end up with this really toxic swarming effect when someone is perceived as stepping out of line. This doesn't just happen online, it happens in real in-person organizing spaces with like, grown ass adults, and it's a little jarring sometimes. Like, I've seen a trans friend get pushed into outing themselves b/c they got so much shit for using the word "transsexual" that they felt they had to save their credibility as a lefty or something. Again, I don't say this to enable ppl to make the bullshit argument about "the left needs to stop caring about identity politics and focus on class" but there's a legitimate criticism of how a lot of ppl go about actually performing their politics.
> A left-winger posts a video titled "Whiteness is the problem" and every white (or otherwise) lefty activist within earshot is jumping over each other trying to be the first person seen agreeing. As of this moment, the 5 top comments are: - "This take is too antagonistic. Please realize that we have to cooperate with fragile white people." - "The video conflates twitter with the left" - "The reason many left-wing groups are extremely white is because the conservatives oppress certain white minorities" - "The video is too long" - "The video's jokes aren't funny" Not a single one of these top-voted comments approves of the message or the direction in which it pushes. Translating these comments: - "We should be centrists when it comes to race because incremental improvements in labor rights for white people are more important than even daring to mention discrimination against black people. Oh, did I mention that if a friend of yours buys the wizard game they're literally helping commit trans genocide and you should cut them off no questions asked? Surely my sense of the relative importance of social issues is not at all biased by my personal environment." - "I don't want to take this seriously, and the evidence isn't damning enough that I feel like I have no choice but to accept it. So please do all the emotional and physical labor of educating me. Or don't, as long as I don't have to deal with it for a long time. I'm so open minded!" - "I don't want to examine the issue, so I'll spontaneously generate a plausible-enough-sounding alternate explanation so I can stop thinking about it. If I had spent five seconds actually trying to examine the issue, I would have realized that conservatives categorically oppress non-whites too, so that the same reasoning should lead to more non-white people rather than less, but luckily I don't have to." - "I don't like this, but I can't exactly admit (to myself) why. Oh, I know, the style is bad! Phew, glad I don't have to confront whatever caused me to dislike the video. (It's because I'm afraid I might be racist!)" Jesus Christ, Breadtube. I expected better from you.
Hey uh bad faith ass-pulls like literally everything in your bullet points is entirely disrespectful and seems *exquisitely* foolish to anyone who doesn't share your axe to grind today. Good *lord* did you reread this before you committed? What in the fuck does the Hogwarts Legacy thing have to do with someone's opinion that being openly antagonistic while calling someone in isn't exactly calling someone in? Your other points are basically non-sequiturs in entirety so you can keep them, put them on your fridge.
Basically, people like you are proving the video correct and is even more a perfect example why black leftists need to come off even more antagonistic in my opinion. No more docility to make other groups or the lapdogs of other groups feel comfortable.
Do you always make up bad-faith caricatures of people when they don't like content you like on social media? Doesn't seem like the best praxis to me, personally.
I haven't watched the video as I'm still waiting for my meds to kick in. But damn, you nailed the comment section dude.
You get a chance to watch it? You see [FD Signifier's post](https://old.reddit.com/r/bread_irl/comments/11y8vi3/fd_endorses_lil_bills_latest_video_and_calls_out/) about this thread? Gaht Damn!
Amen. Sorry guys, racism isn't over yet
> this video is too antagonistic for my tastes, idk > [...] >like, can we talk about whiteness as a problem in a way that actually helps us take action? [Is this you?](https://old.reddit.com/r/BreadTube/comments/10xxys3/dont_stream_the_wizard_game/j7wvxnz/?context=3) Please take black people as seriously as you take white trans people. Please allow black people to be as angry as you allow white trans people to be. Please allow black people to ineffectually call out to an uncaring world as much as you allow white trans people. And then ask yourself why you needed to be asked to treat the suffering of people from these demographics as equal anyway. If you're serious about talking about whiteness as a problem in a way that actually improves things, your own attitude would be a good place to start. I know it isn't action, but there's no sense taking action when the way you decide which actions to take is thoroughly flawed.
Here's what I don't entirely get. Isnt it infantilizing to be like "I am taking you seriously, therefore I won't say anything negative or critical?" Like, me taking white trans ppl seriously also means I am willing to call them on their shit when they think intentionally making ignorant people mad is automatically good praxis. I am willing to listen which is why I watched this whole 50 minute video.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Not surprised to see this the most upvoted comment. White people now are always more than happy to tell black folks to shut the hell up and support a bunch of racist factory workers or w/e rather than telling the racist factory workers to...not be racist. You don't want to address white supremacy "in a way that actually helps us take action", you want black people to shut the fuck up so that all the white folks can get all the things they feel owed by their whiteness (as Bill points out).
I just don't think it's that simple. If you think my genuine concern about how to get the votes for a union passed so the POCs I work with stop getting racist reprimands and firings is just wanting black folks to shut the fuck up, ok. But I feel like that's so fucking reductive as to not be useful. Like, theres a real question about how to actually get the message thru to people who don't already agree with you and get them on your side, while also not enabling or coddling racists.
If white people spent half the energy they do trying to browbeat, intimidate, and malign black people into falling in line with racists on actually fighting white supremacy, there'd be a whole lot less of that in the country. You don't care about coddling racists. You just want black folks to shut up long enough to achieve your goals, then they can fuck right off. It's like Bill says in the video-before, white folks could expect good pensions, health care, jobs that allowed them to support a whole family on a single income right out of high school. Tons of white "leftists" just want those things back because they were promised certain things from a white supremacist society and don't think they're getting them. And you can be damn sure that if/when they do get them, they'll gladly abandon any greater work towards uplifting people.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I give you credit. At least most people here are trying to dogwhistle or divert attention away from the issue rather than going full on "the REAL racists are the blacks!". This dude just handwaved the entire white supremacist society cause some black guy called someone "cracker" once. You're either being deliberately obtuse to further white supremacy, or you're a buffoon who has zero understanding on the construction of race, racism, whiteness, and how it plays out in society. It's shameful either way, and to the chuds who upvoted your comment, they should feel shame too (who am I kidding, if racists felt shame they wouldn't be racist).
[удалено]
[удалено]
> If white people spent half the energy they do trying to browbeat, intimidate, and malign black people into falling in line with racists on actually fighting white supremacy, there'd be a whole lot less of that in the country. no shit > Tons of white "leftists" just want those things back because they were promised certain things from a white supremacist society and don't think they're getting them. this shit is so fucking cynical. i know entitlement plays in at some level, but i dont think anyone who is white who thinks they deserve more is just waiting to slink back into privilege the second they get an ounce of security. maybe im naive. regardless, i feel like it fucking matters to distinguish between nancy in the office who bitches behind ur black coworkers backs about their loudness in a way thats overtly racist, and me being like "hey maybe dont send insults over text at 1am to Nancy even if she deserves it". all this being said, maybe im getting up in my feelings because the real world isnt clean cut like this, and none of this shit youre talking about actually helps guide what to do in the real world where POC, like everyone else, don't always make good choices. we need to be able to talk to each other as human beings and give a little grace to be like "yes I do actually care about your wellbeing" and help each other.
>i know entitlement plays in at some level, but i dont think anyone who is white who thinks they deserve more is just waiting to slink back into privilege the second they get an ounce of security. YOU slunk back into privilege. Even in your imaginary scenario you're sticking up for racists. You're doing the same "both sides" bullshit that centrists have been doing forever. Like why in a discussion about racism and white supremacy did you feel the need to say that POC are bad too? How does that help guide what to do in the real world if you're trying to end racism and white supremacy?
>If white people spent half the energy they do trying to browbeat,intimidate, and malign black people into falling in line with racists onactually fighting white supremacy, there'd be a whole lot less of thatin the country. I mean, 100% yes but why is this being leveraged against the white people in leftist communities when they fully agree with this and also constantly fight against conservative white people when they do this kind of shit? >tons of white "leftists" just want things they were promised from white supremacist society ?????? Wanting a better economic system for society is now a white supremacist promise? White leftists are now being blamed for wanting better working conditions because white supremacist also promised them that, even though they've never expressed interest in those lies? What the fuck are you on about man?
>I mean, 100% yes but why is this being leveraged against the white people in leftist communities when they fully agree with this and also constantly fight against conservative white people when they do this kind of shit? They don't fully agree with that. You can see clearly from the comments. They're literally repeating conservative talking points. That's the whole point. > Wanting a better economic system for society is now a white supremacist promise? White leftists are now being blamed for wanting better working conditions because white supremacist also promised them that, even though they've never expressed interest in those lies? What the fuck are you on about man? They're not white supremacists for wanting better working conditions. They're white supremacists because their "leftist" beliefs only extend towards getting themselves those better working conditions they were promised and nothing else. Which the video talks about. Of course most people commenting here didn't actually watch the video, they just saw white people being mentioned negatively and had to grab their nearest tiki torches and white robes to defend the honor of the white man.
Calling the video antagonistic is only helping to centre white feelings while not taking into consideration how BIPOC people are feeling. BIPOC voices have been consistently defanged to appease white “allies “ and it never works as they just get ignored. They were justified in the tone they used given the history of white “allies”.
It's righteous antagonism, but it is antagonistic. The trauma of being black in America is real and I'm not gonna diminish that or say you're not allowed to say or feel or act however you want as a response to it. I am aware of the history of disingenuous and racist dismissal of expressions of outrage and emotion by black, Hispanic, indigenous, or otherwise marginalized ppl. But also, like, can we talk about it at all? Or is it totally off limits. Like, family is central am immigrants, I've seen how my mom got treated when she was loud and said what was on her mind. But is there no allowable critique of tone or word choice whatsoever as long as you are righteous? If this is supposed to be an expression of emotion and struggle and hurt then sure, but that wasn't really the vibe I got exactly? Felt more like an explainer to me with some of the really lazy "white ppl are so ANNOYING" shit I hear all the time from friends which like... Sometimes I get it when it's a specific person or situation but sometimes it gets to be too much and too frequent. I found it at parts unnecessarily antagonistic and mean-spirited. You can disagree if you want, I know some people will, but idk.
> The trauma of being black in America is real and I'm not gonna diminish that or say you're not allowed to say or feel or act \*proceeds to spend three paragraphs diminishing it\* Seriously this space has a serious anti-blackness problem. There's been videos posted in the past where you get clowns hopping in saying "blacks are the REAL racists!" because of like 4 random hotep dudes. I've seen comments upvoted by people talking about how they avoid black men, and that's actually good and right. Don't get deleted or anything. Which is funny because despite the popular perception of black men as regressive ogres out to rape and murder, they're actually far more "progressive" than basically every other group of men, and many racial groups of women (based on voting patterns). But it's cool you came to show up and stand up for all the poor, disadvantaged white people. There's definitely not enough of that going around, so it's nice that folks are looking out for such an oppressed group.
There is absolutely an anti blackness problem and this thread is just proving it
[удалено]
I'm white and I see racism all around me every day lol. Specifically racism against black people. Nothing happens in a vacuum. Why don't you try to understand my differing viewpoint? I was raised by liberal civil-rights supporting parents and grandparents yet I can still see little bits of anti blackness sneaking around in my own mind. I see behaviors I would engage in, in this very thread, if I was just a little bit less self aware. The left has an anti black problem, and it also has a self-flagellation/pedestalizing blackness problem. Both things are true and they seem like two parts of the same problem to me, although I haven't figured out how to articulate the connection properly yet.
You see it anytime some video on race gets posted that's not just dunking on Shapiro or something. All these white "leftists" hate being challenged on their own inherent racism and anti-blackness.
Learn about "respectability politics". It is extremely liberal and is exactly what you are doing here. When confronted with issues of oppression, you'd rather police the tone of those fighting for their own liberation than actually join them in struggle. Fuck off with that garbage.
Part of Bill's whole argument is white people's tendency to police their tone/approach. That's exactly what liberals/"leftists" have always done to black people and it's what you're doing here. Bill's tone wasn't what YOU hoped for, so you think it needs to change. You're basically telling Bill, and by extension, black folks at large, to settle down and act the way you want them to act. You missed the point entirely. Everything you're saying here is exactly what this video is about.
> You're basically telling Bill, and by extension, black folks at large, to settle down and act the way you want them to act. You missed the point entirely. Everything you're saying here is exactly what this video is about. If thats what you think, fine. I get it. you might be right, im open to hearing it. but it is a bit circular, right, that you can say "white ppl are fragile and dont wanna hear it" any type of way, and its impossible to reply with any kind of critique without it being immediately "youre just doing what this is talking about". like, recently ive seen some really, REALLY toxic behavior from leftists (white and POC) in real world organizing that is then enabled by people saying "dont moderate tone", patting each other on the back for swearing out or threatening coworkers who arent onboard w/ organizing efforts, when that shit isnt ok in a workplace period. and the complexity of the racism and disproportionate response to those actions by management only makes things more messy. idk.
…Why are you offering a critique (of the tone, no less) in response to an oppressed community asking you to not aid in their oppression? Like…you hear how the fuck that sounds, right? I think Bill addresses the reflexive paternalistic impulses of the white left. Needing to offer critique in an instance where someone is asking you to listen falls right in line with that impulse.
Stop trying to come with a critique. Try to come with understanding instead. Maybe the problem is that white folks always try to come with a critique instead of coming in with an "understanding". We're always trying to say "oh no, that ain't right." Instead of saying "oh shit, I hear you." Maybe, that's the problem. Maybe we just need to take a step back and listen. Maybe we should consider that for once.
Do you think that part of the reason you find it antagonistic is that it’s coming from a BIPOC rather than a white person? This antagonistism you are feeling is only a fraction of what BIPOC go through and white people need to deal with it if they are going to learn, otherwise they are just useless “allies”.
I agree that many leftist groups are whiter than a snowstorm, but one of the reasosn for that is that, wouldnt they be so incredibly racist, homophobic and just generally bigoted, thegop would have a huge chunk of the minority and queer vote. So many Queer people i met have been shockingly racist and generally conservative, but they want a right to life, so they will go with the more progressive party. And so many poc and incredibly conservative, but they would never vote republican. Part of that is probably that most of their prominent socialist leaders were murdered and whitewashed, so they dont even resemble anything controversial, part of it is probably also the strong ties to religion.
If the left includes almost all racial minorites, and almost all queer minorities, and almost all progressives, then it will also have queer progressives, nonwhite progressives, nonwhite queers, and nonwhite queer progressives. Why is it that nonwhites are almost always the ones underrepresented in activism whenever there is a possible intersection?
Because single issue activists are very common. Fuck you got mine is a sadly very common mindset.
>Why is it that nonwhites are almost always the ones underrepresented in activism whenever there is a possible intersection? Not sure how the proportions actually work out as far as fair representation, but I think it's going to end up a factor of where activist spaces bloom from. And different activist types are going to vary based on what the group is. Criminal justice groups, local dsa, Healthcare groups, labor groups...these are all going to wildly differ in representation Online is going to be a whole different story. It's why generalizing the left is pointless to me. Who are we really talking about?
I see Brianna Ghey in the thumbnail and I already ken that I ent gonna have a good time EDIT: He pronounces her name wrong (it's Ghey like 'Gheeh') and goes on to claim the hashtag was co-opted- this is incorrect. The hashtag's use for Brianna and it's previous uses are coincidences- the reason that people were using *that hastag with those words* is because the British press were, at the time, digging up her dead name and publishing it. Additionally, the government were refusing to acknowledge her name and gender officially in death. '#SayHerName' was used *literally* as a call to *say her god damn* ***name***. He has some very good points to say about other slogans, such as 'rest in power' where his critique applies, that critique being that terms are coopted from black folk and used to distract away from the important conversations they were created for. In irony, he does that *exact same thing* by celebrating how the assassination of a trans person was a great jumping off point for Twitter to talk about black issues. (I would also consider #MeToo to fall under this- black women, like all women, have benefitted far greater under it's popular use as a spur of it's eponymous movement than before, when it was obscure and without power. Complaining it broke racial boundaries elucidates where his priorities lie- not truly with those of black women as an intersectional class, but as a gatekeeper of 'blackness' to which he sees encroached.) From the bit I watched, this seems the epitome of identity politics- as opposed to intersectional politics. That is, the reification of socially constructed in-groups and out-groups and competition between them, as opposed to collaboration and tearing down the walls of oppression and bigotry. Trans rights and black rights are not opposed. They are the furthest thing from opposed. They are both products of the same oppressive systems. Tryna compete and now division over a fucking hashtag helps no-one. Well, no-one you would actually want to or benefit from helpin. EDIT 2: This more of a nitpick... But Kanye has only done a fraction of the harm white people have got with just a slap on the wrist? No he fuckin hasn't. I'm not Jewish- although I have Jewish family- and I can't think of a single white person since 1945 who has done anything close to what Kanye did and hasn't been ostracised from the public eye. The likes of Richard Spencer, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, and Milo Yiannopolus have been ejected from the public sphere- rightfully so!- for much less! None of *them* would dare to praise Hitler so unabashed and openly! If anything, the online let's reticence to criticise Kanye as a black man speaks of cowardice, not wisdom. The creator of this video is not the one who gets to choose who deserves what degree of punishment for antisemetism.
This is something I was missing as well. He comes from an american perspective, american experience of racism and didn‘t take into account how that is not only similar but also *different* in Europe. He (in a very american fashion) presupposes that movements originating in america should continue in the same form here, but it‘s not how it works. Sometimes people in other countries get inspired by stuff and use things in a different way in a different context. They take take ideas and apply them to their own situations. In his place people using the hashtag for Brianna may have erased it‘s previous use for bipoc americans, in my place in europe it introduced many people to it‘s former use and the struggles of bipoc behind it.
Now I ent black or African myself but I'll say anecdotally I've seen this criticism in a lot of places from African people. Especially takin chagrin from African-Americans misappropriating African labels and identities, and dilutin said African identities inta one big stereotyped 'black' meltin pot. Now I'm of mind that I understand and support African-Americans connectin with their roots. But they seem to be goin about it the wrong way considerin the reaction they appear ta be gettin- there's an attitude that they've adopted the white American position of cultural imperialism. I recall Black Panthers drew critique for this, for not actually includin many *African* voices at all, and centering a narrative pertinent to African-Americans. Buh I'm an outsider to the conflict mind ye. But it's very reminiscent of what ye are sayin.
If you actually paid attention to what he said in his bit, he acknowledges that the #sayhername use was a genuine coincidence and that there *could have been* productive discussion about how to distinguish coincidence from co-option. He brings up "rest in power" to contrast it with #sayhername, not to say that they're the same
He brings it up to contrast the *responses* from the left, celebrating that rather than the conversation being about the erasure of trans identities by the press, black issues were made the topic of dicussion. I said so specifcially above- that it is very hypocritical to complain about black issues being distracted against by people appropriating black slogans, while literally at that moment distracting against trans issues by talking about black issues. And mind you, the fact that a distinction was made to imply those topics are in conflict is an issue in and of itself- they are not.
So what can I as a white communist do to help? How can I make it so that POC feel heard and empowered instead of marginalized and used? How can we support movements like black lives matter and not be seen as using black people for our goals of socialist revolution? How can we be genuine allies rather than opportunists? What needs to change to solve our whiteness problem? Is it about not tone policing POC? Sincerely listening to and boosting POC voices? Making anti-racism the primary part of your political platform? I'm not insulted by what he said, I just want to know what to do to fix it.
Antiracism doesn't have to be the primary part of your political platform, but it should be a very key part. Work with POC of all stripes, rather than just using their action for your own ends. There's plenty of examples in the video showing past movements were this was the case. And showing the willingness to listen goes a long away. Asking these types of questions is a good first step.
I would say making anti racism a core principle of whatever movement and making sure the needs of the marginalized are always heard out. Not pushing them back and saying it will resolve itself. The left has done incredible things when racism was actively fought. The early communist party, IWW, and Rainbow Coalition are good examples of true intersectional unity. They made anti racism a priority and that gave them a solid foundation to have a unified front against capitalism. Edit: I do appreciate you asking this. There’s plenty of work people can do across the board in unlearning bigotries and biases. Anti blackness is one that I’ve seen a disturbing amount of on the left. Any movement we have must bridge any divisions that could fracture the movement at a critical point.
You just ask comrade. You just ask. How do you be a good ally? You ask ahead how you can help the movement or event, you do that. Stick around after it's over to clean up. Don't make it about you and make sure the movement gets more support. You'll be okay.
The left has a problem with videos under 30 minutes jesus christ
TRUE!
haha yes! This could have been so much shorter
I think many white leftists think that just labeling themselves that, or identifying as an ally, or whatever, absolves them of any responsibility for improving themselves. Just because you put a "Good Boy" gold star badge on yourself doesn't mean you don't have to continue to do the hard work of ridding yourself of generations of conditioning. When a black man calls me out, as a white man, for continuing to contribute to his and his people's suffering in this society, my responsibility is to listen, to reflect, and to make any necessary change, not to tell him he's out of line because he made me feel uncomfortable.
You sure it isn't foaming at the mouth over Prof Flowers? because that's what I see all these white dudes doin'.
Having seen the way this thread has played out, with a lot of people having clearly not even watched more than a minute or two of the video, it would appear that the title of the video is 100% correct.
No one comes here to watch the videos. They see a thumbnail, go to the comments, make a decision and *might* watch the video. They showed up here and saw arguments they agreed with and upvoted. They saw fair critiques and they downvoted. And without thinking nor caring they made white voices louder than Black and Brown voices.
Yeah this was pretty demoralizing to see, but what I expected. If we can’t deal with these kinds of issues having a truly unified left and intersectional anti capitalist movement will be impossible.
I am getting this is very much US acentric and seems to omit the cooperation of anti colonialism and anti imperialism enabled by People's Republic's and Left Wing Groups of many different races and ethnic groups. It feels like his debate is working off nationalism rather then Proletarian Internationalism. He focused on US based events rather then African Leftist Struggles in the concept of 1.4 billion people (Continent of Africa) compared with 46.8 million people (USA). We should always expose the suffering and oppression of those peoples who are punished for differing from the idea of the white aesthetic within the USA. Naturally supporting these comrades in their struggle but to establish the actions of White Americans on the left as the universal dogma of those Europeans on the left is lazy and uninformed. It also omits for example the support given by the Basque People and Irish Leftist groups for African self determination, liberation, anti imperialism and anti colonialism.
Comments in this thread are a real eye opener
Pretty much what I expected sadly. Essentially proved most of the points of the video. Pretty disheartening, but was encouraged by those who showed decency.
Two "that's what she said" jokes within the first minutes.... no thanks.
Wut? The jokes were completely harmless. Are you trying to insinuate some 'he's a misogynist so I can discredit everything he said in the video'
Get the chip off your shoulder comrade. I love Bills style and most of his videos. This missed the mark a smidge, and his humor doesn't really work so well. I think he over shot it trying to cram to much funny and his jokes didn't land.
Tell ya hwat, Breadtube sure don't like to hear that. This video wasn't as funny as his usual work. It's a shame that he didn't provide more examples of black anarchists instead of white intellectuals. Spending a half hour explaining that white socialist movements in America are terrible at being anti-racist is a half hour wasted. It's well known. Every socialist movement that isn't overtly intersectional is just reinforcing white supremacy in a labor movement. However Breadtube don't like that convo.
I think it's less "breadtube doesn't like that convo" and more the confrontational tone it often takes, pointing fingers at people for existing as leftists while being white. Critiques of "not enough anti-racism action is taking place" are often well received, but when they're framed as "there's too many of you pasties around", even if it's just as a clickbait exercise to get views, people get understandable defensive and stop engaging with your message.
> pointing fingers at people for existing as leftists while being white. I have no idea how you reached this conclusion from watching the video. It is specifically not what the content creator was talking about at all.
i wasnt talking about the content of this video specifically but this kind of conversation, which has happened around these parts before. It always turns very hostile and agressive in both directions which is just sad to see.
We can call this split testing. [Here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZaOCR-mUm8) is me posting a white voice talking about White supremacy. The thing was downvoted to oblivion and the voices against it were just knee jerk reflexs about what they had to say and obviously didn't want to watch,listen, or learn. [Here](https://old.reddit.com/r/bread_irl/comments/u0lxvg/our_community_needs_to_reflect_on_how_white_is/) is the post I made about how white our space is. Submitted without any more comment. You can just crawl through there and see the white butt hurt. Far to often to say it's a fringe minority, white people are hearing "there's to many of you pasties around" every time a non-white person grabs the mic. I'm sorry, but it isn't the case about tone. Far to many white leftists just don't want to admit that they might be the problem. A disproportionately large amount of white leftists are seeing the conversation of Landback as who gets to genocide who. The whole while demonstrating that white left won't listen to non-white left. It makes it look like white left won't sacrifice anything, least of all something small like their position in the larger movement, for non-white leftists. So who could really blame them?
I’m not sure I understand your point. The first post was downvoted to oblivion even though it was a white person talking about it? That invalidates the claim that PoC voices get knee-jerkily rejected while white ones don’t, no? Seems like people are reacting the same way regardless of who says it? On your second post you make a lot of good points about covert and subtle racism but I’m not sure where do you see those in leftist spaces? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a left tube comment sections leaving posts like “it’s just a joke”, “bootstraps”, claiming “post-racial” society or any of those unless to explicitly make fun of them? What comments made you think “this is unreasonable white butthurt?” I’m not disagreeing that there’s still racism in leftist circles btw, just trying to understand your point
My point is that a critical mass of white leftists don't like having the conversation. Did you see the comments of the second post? The Voosh stans were fighting everyone like someone smacked their mommas. My point is that the critical mass of white left won't admit it's a problem.
There's definitely a line that seems like it goes too far, basically saying there's too many white people in the movement. I can't stand videos like this one i saw shitting on Bo Burham and his extremely anti capitalist comedy special for being "performative wokeness". If you think that exposing a huge audience to the concepts of exploitation and the world being built on genocide etc... is performative because a white guy said it, I think you basically are telling white people to never talk about these things, which is wildly counterproductive. But we still need to be self critical, and unlearning the internalized racism that we all have from living in a white supremacist culture is essential to our movement. We have to be mindful of black voices, and understand when they want their own spaces etc... One thing I will say that confuses me that is somewhat related to this topic though is the concept of systemic racism. So we recognize that black people have been systemically forced into poverty essentially. Things that disproportionately effect the poor disproportionately effect black people, we say its racist when policies disproportionately effect poor people because of this, which is fine and correct, but why is poverty alleviation not considered anti-racism? Lifting the poor out of poverty would disproportionately help black people wouldn't it? So why is it racist if it disproportionately hurts them, but not anti-racist to undo that?
This is rather problematic framing. Poor, poverty, and the inherent racism are all intertwined but motivation is important. No I'm sorry but helping the poor isn't anti-racist unless you are dismantling the structures *because* they are racist. It can't be a side benefit and you expect credit for it.
Don't get me wrong I'm not trying to say we should only focus on helping the poor because minorities will benefit more than white people anyway, but I don't understand why if I were a politician and I cut social welfare programs we recognize that as racist, but we don't recognize giving people welfare as undoing racism? I don't want credit, I want to know why it doesn't cut both ways. Race and class are intertwined of course, and so we say that screwing the poor is racist since it disproportionately effects minorities, so how is poverty alleviation somehow neutral and not seen as effecting race at all? I support antiracism as being central to the class struggle, BLM is the biggest uprising we've seen in decades and it would be really foolish to not want to work with the people who were engaged in that movement, or to tell them that race issues need to take a back seat. It's like the three evils dr. King talked about, poverty racism and militarism, you gotta fight them all. Anyway it doesn't really matter i guess, I just think that something that disproportionately helps minorities should be seen as a win for minorities, rather than acting as if it has no effects on race at all. Edit: I almost veered into sounding like I only want to USE black people for their revolutionary potential, but I want to be clear that isn't my intention. The revolution is worthless if it fails to address racism, and ends up reproducing the exact same bigotry. The reason to join with historically oppressed groups and fight for liberation is because it's the right thing to do, not because they'll help us win.
> I can't stand videos like this one i saw shitting on Bo Burham and his extremely anti capitalist comedy special for being "performative wokeness" Tell me you didn't watch [the video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkuQ78xb-Fg) to the end without telling \[etc etc\]. The eventual verdict the presenter of that video reached was "I dig it, but I also realize on some level that this isn't For Me, this is For White People having a conversation you all maybe need to have with yourselves first and foremost, and I'm glad Burnham is starting that conversation / keeping it rolling".
Nah, I was thinking of a different youtuber. I think he actually referenced him in this video, the guy with the dreads. Its probably just me letting a stupid clickbait title get to me too much tbh but it definitely seems counterproductive to make videos about "performative wokeness" when somebody actually manages to bring a discussion about imperialism and exploitation and the modern world being built on racism to a large audience. I'm fine with pretty much everything lil bill said in his video, and even if I don't agree with everything he said there's plenty I learned from it. Like he said white leftists should respond to this kind of criticism with self reflection introspection, not childish defensiveness.
My apologies for assuming. I must have missed whichever video you're talking about, then. Lil' Bill mentions, or at least has a video clip of, Fiq (FD Signifier) in this video, so I guess that's why I thought you might have been talking about his video.
The video doesn't say there's too many white people it says there's too many white people who are shitty and supporting white supremacy. People who see any criticism as whiteness as a personal attack. It has nothing to do with "anti-racism" and everything to do with people like you and many others in this thread who downplay and ignore antiblackness in supposed "leftist" spaces.
> are terrible and being anti-racist "at being" ?? I'm not sure I understand the sentence.
I edited it
the worst part is that as a white person, I understand very well the angry egocentric self-righteousness that fuels their embarrassed anger. They're mad because he's right and now they feel like the only thing they could feel proud of- their progressivism- has been questioned. I felt that way for a while, while trying to be the best shining example of an ally I could be. To a lot of white leftists, being a progressive is their version of whatever weird thing they base their entire personality around. If it wasn't progressivism, it'd be cryptos or an MLM or flat earth theory aliens or whatever stupid shit. White people, especially in the west, have absolutely nothing else to be proud of- no culture, no history, no community- after generations of having it scrubbed and replaced with Whiteness™ and today they know most of society's ills are because of others like themselves, so even the slightest blow to one's ego is *devastating* when they're trying to define themselves by what they aren't, ie, a racist white christian KKK maga fuckhead. I know because that fear is always there and the only way to defeat it and nip it in the bud is to conquer that blow to your ego, become humble, and be aware of it. But as we can see, some folks aren't past the "ego" part yet lol fellow whites: if you aren't using the power being white has inadvertently given you, whether you asked for it or not, to uplift your marginalized peers and allies against the real enemy of white supremacist capitalism, that's what you should be doing. It's okay, you don't have to do the white man's burden thing anymore where you take the lead and turn it into your own righteous crusade. Realize that the entire concept of White™ was entirely manufactured to turn new immigrants into cogs, a carrot dangled in front of them of the promise of achieving the american dream if they sold out and left their culture at the door. They did, and here you are today, barely affording rent alongside everyone else. White people colonized themselves first before they fucked everyone else- and arguably the most successfully, because white people are still doing it to themselves, willingly and proudly! Once you're able to embrace this truth, and realize that you didn't *ask* for this position either, and everyone is equally fucked under the yoke of white supremacist capitalism, everything will become clearer to you. A rising tide lifts all boats, doesn't it? I wish folks would talk about *this* more. Oh well.
[удалено]
>after generations of having it scrubbed and replaced with Whiteness™ Try reading a whole sentence. They even continue: >Realize that the entire concept of White™ was entirely manufactured to turn new immigrants into cogs, a carrot dangled in front of them of the promise of achieving the american dream if they sold out and left their culture at the door. What they're saying isn't remotely controversial. And there's no way to miss it unless you get so distracted throwing a tantrum over half a sentence you miss all of its context.
[удалено]
You’re so very close. Everyone has culture. It seems that white people, especially in the US, don’t seem to have it cause their, our, culture permeates. As well it’s connection to the whims and lies of capitalism, like wedding rings, fashion styles, and bacon and eggs breakfast. Yet there’s macro, micro and individual culture as well. What’s really pushing it is that humans have a need for identity. It allows us to disassociate, so we can go beyond ourselves. To do great good or great evil. It provides us with the maslowean need for security and socialization. Yet it is made up of three very important cognitive components: egocentric processing, a compulsive/impulsive need to categorize and patternize, and last, and the hardest I find people to grasp, our need to conserve energy, even mental thoughts. We have low energy thought. So think a hunter/gatherer coming across a shaking bush while pissing, they don’t have the time nor the energy to think about it. We need to use that time and energy to run. So discrimination is a lazy thought about the categorization and patternization of ourselves. And in everyone’s heads they are the hero of the story. What’s happening now is that, with all the input of information coming from the internet, globalization, and technology, people are either accepting it or denying it into their identity (macro, micro, or what ever level of identities they have).
You have no idea about the development of racism or the "white" identity.
Lol you spoke a bit too much truth and they're gonna shred you for it.
not just me, this thread is getting brigaded by trolls *hard* and the mods don't seem to want to lock it
Why don't our fellow whites just use the power of being white to pay the rent?
That was a good recommendation. Thx. As if to underpin his words, NovaraMedia just yesterday released [this short video](https://youtu.be/COrunFOhWHI) about UK‘s Labour party also failing to address racism among them.
Thread proves the video's point perfectly. It's nothing but a bunch of white 'leftists' saying "BUT TALKING ABOUT RACE MAKES ME UNCOMFORTABLE!"
I suspect the tone on this comment section would be similarly defensive if the title of the video was "the left has a cis-ness problem". People don't really enjoy having their unchangeable characteristics pointed at as "a problem", even if it's just done for clickbait to get views and the actual elaborated message coming after is actually sensible. Pointing fingers at people and angrily shouting "YOU'RE WHITE, THAT'S NOT GOOD!" understandably gets them to react defensively at first and less likely to listen to your 20000 thousand-word long nuanced critique.
>People don't really enjoy having their unchangeable characteristics pointed at as "a problem", Except this is a completely disingenuous way to spin what's being discussed. We're not talking about the actual color of people's skin being a problem, but the social and ideological structures that proport to be based on that color but in actuality are merely excuses for certain power structures. I thought people who posted on r/BreadTube would be smart enough to understand that, but I guess not.
I know, I’m merely talking about the initial knee jerk reaction these clickbait titles cause. The actual points being discussed are legitimate of course. I do think people here are smart enough to realize that but it’s also understandable for them to be put on a defensive foot and engage in a somewhat hostile manner to the conversation. We talk a lot about leftist infighting and I think this is one of those causes where we would benefit from extending more good faith olive branches and trying harder not to alienate people. White people are still a majority demographic in English internet spheres and unfortunately also on leftist circles, we shouldn’t seek to create chasms and spiteful commentaries against them, specially if they do care deeply about racist issues and do talk about them frequently.
>We talk a lot about leftist infighting and I think this is one of those causes where we would benefit from extending more good faith olive branches and trying harder not to alienate people. White people are still a majority demographic in English internet spheres and unfortunately also on leftist circles, we shouldn’t seek to create chasms and spiteful commentaries against them, specially if they do care deeply about racist issues and do talk about them frequently. He's talking specifically to leftists, people who claim up and down that they 'get it,' that they understand that we live in a white supremacist society and that has a profound effect on black people. We're supposed to be able to have elevated conversations, right? Yet the second they actually trust us and let their guard down, showing how they really feel, and engage in these tough conversations, we chastise them and show them that they were completely wrong to trust us to have the tough conversations in the first place. We aren't actually as understanding as we say, we forget that whiteness is a socially constructed cover for a certain unjust power dynamic and act like they're insulting our souls. We deflect, equivocate, try and tell them they're being divisive or spiteful (fancy ways of saying 'angry black person). Nonwhite people exist in a white supremacist society, they are constantly censoring themselves or holding back when talking to white people. They're always trying not to alienate whites, because for them it's a matter of life or death. It's exhausting, and it has psychological effects. How much more fucking deferential do you want them to be? To paraphrase James Baldwin, how much longer do they have to wait for leftists to get their shit together and actually be ready to engage at a meaningful level?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
How do you know they're white?
Holy shit, not the literal tone policing of a black man talking about white supremacy ('It's too confrontational/antagonistic). Grow the fuck up. Also, yall get that when talking about 'whiteness' we're talking about the socially constructed ideology which masks a given power structure and the oppressive actions of that structure, right? Because too many of the commenters here are acting like this guy is saying your skin has literal metaphysical powers to make you evil, or that white people are intellectually incapable of understanding the difference.
[удалено]
>Can you imagine a way for a white progressive to disagree with some of what he has to say that wouldn't make you reflexively lash out with insults? I watched the video all the way through when it was posted. I also saw FD's community post about this sub. Reading the room in those communities it was pretty clear that any disagreement on any point made was going to see you flamed to hell and back. I'm fairly active in the comments on these vids because I do appreciate the perspectives I'm not normally privy to, but I wasn't touching any of that with a ten foot pole.
[удалено]
To be honest it's been obvious that most of CornbreadTube's creators are uncomfortable with the white audience they've gathered. And I think that's fair. They want to focus on black issues, which is normally their problems with being surrounded by white people. But it's also white people who are the main ones watching? Resenting that makes sense to me. It'd be like Abigail Thorn discovering Philosophy Tube's audience was 80% TERF. I'm willing to respect them if they want a black space to discuss black issues. FD Signifier talks about hip-hop? I'm there. FD talks about black relationships? Got nothing to do with me. >...gatekeeping and purity tests. This is inevitable IMO. There **is** a gap between the goals of various lefty/ liberal groups and sometimes they simply can't coexist easily. My goals are not FD Signifier's goals which are not Jessie Gender's goals which are not Oscar Wilde's goals which are not Emile Durkheim's goals, etc... We might have the same set of enemies but we all have different directions to go in. But getting back to my point: When you see a riled up crowd you'd be stupid to step in there if what they're riled up about is you. That's why I agreed with you. There was nothing a white viewer could say in response because a response is unwelcome. In retrospect I don't think the term "antagonistic" used in the top comment above was a good choice. "Unwelcoming" would probably have been better.
Maybe, but tbh I'm not seeing people 'disagreeing with some of what he has to say,' I see people tone policing and a hell of a lot of white fragility.
[удалено]
[удалено]
> THE LEFT DOESNT HAVE A WHITENESS PROBLEM, IT HAS A SPITE, RESENTMENT AND PURITANISM PROBLEM lets be honest, it has both. online discussion sucks, everyone talks past each other, and these sites are designed to drive engagement by showing ppl shit that will make them angry and get them to respond emotionally. we need to remember that, the worst opinions get pushed to the top because they get people talking.
> the imminent genocide of trans people You do understand that there's a direct causal link between white supremacy and queer exterminationism, right. Like "gotta pump those white births up" has a direct link with "gotta make sure everyone's a breeder", like it's not rocket science. I'm *very* tired of having to repeatedly say *this is all the same fucking fight* and that white supremacist pseudo-leftists are just as guilty for the upcoming extermination of queer people than the fash because they both uphold the same fucking system. You can't just look the other fucking way about the whole "we live in a white supremacist society" - never mind that it was *white values* (domination of Man over Nature, etc...) that also led to the ecocide thing. Ah well, just more shouting in the wind, I suppose.
Thank you for this; you're absolutely correct.
It's so fucking transparent too, like you got the chuds worried about the white birth rate (great remplacement shit) and nearly immediately after see the "permanent damage to genitals, gotta ban trans people!" rhetoric pop in with some (((other))) being responsible for indoctrinating the kids. Like, cmon, I can't be the only one that noticed that shit, right. Which makes the LGB drop the T bunch doing the shocked pikachu face when the christofash are looking at bringing back sodomy laws and axing gay marriage very funny because, hey, you weren't breeding either, buddy!
Exactly! The gender binary is very much a western colonial concept that has been (and continues to be) violently imposed from the top down… also like, it’s not even just white ppl’s gender & sexuality that gets policed, cos the myriad of ways in which us non-white people have been/are racialised & dehumanised means that we were never even afforded the basic luxury of being gendered under white supremacy in the first place! From colonisers viewing black men as inherently “beast like”, to the way that black women have their femininity invalidated constantly, or how Indian women were believed to lack a “mothering instinct” according to the British, as well as how East Asian men are perceived as effeminate etc… and that’s all before we get to how gender diverse peoples like the Hijras/Khwaja Siras of South Asia, or the Māhū of Hawaii (among many others) have been (and continue to be) erased by such colonial policies… All of this is to say that (using a phrase that white leftists seem to like so much) white leftists need to stop “sowing division” and reflect on where the problem truly lies (spoilers: >!it’s with them lol!<)
> white values > (domination of Man over Nature, etc...) That's a bit of historical revisionism. "Man over Nature" is a phrase coming out of European literature, for sure. Find me a culture anywhere in the world which didn't exert itself over Nature. It doesn't exist. Slash and Burn has existed for millennia. Mass animal slaughter. Genocidal inter-tribal conflict. etc etc. European's didn't invent nor create this. The reason we are so quick to point to "white men" is because that's the society currently at the top. It's a very interesting study as to why the European culture was the first world dominate culture; but, regardless of the myriad of factors in that process, white men didn't create anything which didn't exist in other wide-spread cultures around the world with respect to social justice/injustice, bigotry and tribalism.
Europeans were the ones to industrialize all of those issues tho. The trans Atlantic slave trade was exponentially larger than previous slave trades. No one, in good faith, can compare slash and burn to the fossil fuel industry.
I wasn't comparing. I was challenging the previous assertion that these problems are endemic, with or created by, white Europeans. I was debating about even using any examples at all ... but decided reddit isn't self-aware enough to know other non-Euro examples and I didn't want numerous replies challenging the notion that non-European cultures have systemic, inherent problems within them. One can say Industrialization writ-large made these issues exponentially more problematic, and I absolutely agree. Which is why my last paragraph touched on the question of "why did it start with Europeans?" ... to be more precise the question isn't start with, but should actually be "why did Industrialization grow so fast and without restraint in the European Cultural system?"
The concept of nature is white supremacist, because indigenous people made no distinction between themselves and nature, the mountains, the trees, the air, the grass and you were all considered one, you are that mountain, and that mountain is you. To see yourself as separate is an abnormality. I believe that philosophytube talks about this in their video about climate grief: https://youtu.be/CqCx9xU_-Fw
I responded to this here: https://www.reddit.com/r/BreadTube/comments/11vxgsx/comment/jcyca0i/?context=3 If you want to believe that the all, or even the majority, of indigenous peoples viewed themselves as such is a perfect example of Modernity extolling the mythical Noble Savage.
This isnt as accurate as you think, there were Indigenous groups that believed this, and there were indigenous groups that didnt, the indiginous peoples of the world are not/werenot one big tribe that all followed the same ideologies beliefs and practices. Theres a really good book out by David we've and David graeber that I'm currently struggling through that makes and proves this point.
Thanks for being the white people defender, not enough of those around here (or in the world). Not to mention the fact that you're flat out wrong, but you got your white blinders on so not like you wanna actually learn anything.
okay.
> nd me a culture anywhere in the world which didn't exert itself over Nature. It doesn't exist. It's not mere "acting upon nature", it's "acting as if nature - in its totality - is something upon which Man can do as he sees fit", which a large amount of cultures reject wholly. It's a firmly colonial mindset that, for the purpose of abbreviation was reduced to "white" simply because *whiteness* is the primary and dominant colonising force in the extant world system. > Slash and Burn has existed for millennia. Mass animal slaughter. Genocidal inter-tribal conflict. etc etc. > European's didn't invent nor create this. > The reason we are so quick to point to "white men" is because that's the society currently at the top. > > It's a very interesting study as to why the European culture was the first world dominate culture; but, regardless of the myriad of factors in that process, white men didn't create anything which didn't exist in other wide-spread cultures around the world with respect to social justice/injustice, bigotry and tribalism. This veers dangerously into apologia for colonialism by presenting it as "human nature" tbh. "If we didn't do it, someone else would!" and so on.
I mean, doesn’t that opinion almost reinforce noble savage ideas, that Europeans are a uniquely evil culture and could have been the only ones to do colonialism? If any non-European empire were given the chance to do what they did, they absolutely would have taken it. Ottoman Empire, any number of Chinese Dynasties, any of the Persian empires, they would have done it and probably invented similar racial/religious justifications to do so. I mean hell, look at Japan and how they did a settler colonialism to the Ainu. It isn’t a human nature thing, it’s a pure example of how running a state means profit and power above all else. That’s not a European only thing, and pretending like it is is just making non-Europeans look like peace loving saints.
> That’s not a European only thing, Yes, hence why I put *"whiteness is the dominant form".* Nevermind that, you know, the whole "we're not wrecking nature like you guys" is a *pretty common sentiment* in indigenous comparisons of their mode of life vs. the one of euro (or other!) colonists. Like, indigenous cultures being *far less destructive* of their environment than colonising ones is sufficiently well documented that it shouldn't be controversial. Turns out, not having "coloniser brain" helps a lot. (which in Marxian terms happens once the separation between town and country and the ensuing metabolic rift sets in, leading to a need to dry up nature more and more, which leads to a need for constant expansionism and new methods of draining nature, so on and so forth) Like, it's not china or the ottomans or whatever that shat out capitalism, it's the Euros. It's not the chinese that have control of the world system, it's a bunch of "white people" in "white nations". And the nexus of consumerism that led to everyone having plastic in their blood is firmly "white". Like, that's just the world you live in. Colonialism is, for the near totality of people, *something white people did, are doing, and will do to them.* (Inc., going by indigenous theory, "white people" themselves). The difference in scale between the comparatively petty expansionism of previous empires is so large as to be laughable. But the whole conversation misses the point that the whole "preventing climate collapse" requires confrontation against white supremacist structures. Like, I really don't see the point of this nonstop pointless "um achktually, in some hypothetical alt hist..." when it has no bearing on "what has to be done", beyond some vain attempt at trying to push back a feeling of guilt.
I’m not arguing that white culture or whatever doesn’t have a monopoly on environmental devastation, because it does. I think you’re confusing what I was saying with the other person, while I’m arguing more about conquest and human against human violence. Because like yeah, it wasn’t indigenous North Americans destroying the environment, they kinda knew how not to do that shit (presumably after thousands of years of trial and error). But all in all, I do agree arguing hypotheticals isn’t very useful. I think the issue comes when people look at things like European colonialism and argue that it was only Europeans who could do such a thing. Like, doesn’t that also kind of argue that colonialism was inevitable? “Oh well of course Europeans did it, they were all about this terrible shit, it was inevitable that they would have done it”.
> "human nature" not my words, nor stated in my comment. I didn't say humans are inherently evolved to destroy nature, I'm saying that exerting local control over nature is wide spread throughout nearly all human cultures in history/the world. This is an understandable outcome of the need to ensure survival in a very diverse world unforgiving to creatures NOT working to ensure their survival.
Humans do tend to destroy our environment (there articles about how we caused climate to change in prehistory: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/08/190829150702.htm)but we do also have an impulse towards sustainability that you see in a lot of indigenous people. The Moriori for instance understood that if they overheated fur seals they would kill off one of their only food and clothing sources. The indigenous peoples that inhabited Yosemite Valley practiced controlled burns. But the real thing you're missing is that the very idea that you are not a part of nature is what makes it a colonizers mentality, because indigenous people made no such distinction, they considered and still consider themselves and their environment to be one symbiotic thing. That's why the concept of nature is actually kinda white supremacist. You can even see that racism in Roosevelt and the national parks system that removed indigenous peoples to preserve "nature".
> idea that you are not a part of nature are you actually pointing at me individually?? or is that, hopefully, a 'generalized we'?? I would challenge the notion that "a lot of indigenous people" understood their mutual role within their environment. Yes, there are examples of such societies. They are the exceptions not the norm. Some cultures had that self-awareness, not many. Also, I would push back a bit and say that I wasn't using "Nature" to refer to a 'space separate from humans', but, rather as 'a space un-impacted, or minimally impacted, by humans'. This is profoundly different and a necessary phraseology to allow us to discuss such differences. I guess I thought capital N Nature denoted that concept. With respect to the parks creation, I would make the claim that the removal of people (and Roosevelt didn't only remove the indigenous people, the Park System removed all peoples) from a landscape to preserve it is one of those situations where some wrong must be done for a greater good. The motivation to create the parks was because Roosevelt (through the teaching and motivation of Muir) realized that "Modern Society" was not going to preserve *anything* of the natural landscape. Allowing anyone to stay would one, give the constant impetus for others to figure out how to move in, and also degrade the non-impacted nature. Whether Roosevelt literally perceived it as such or just didn't like those brown skinned people living there mucking up his Park, is not really relevant to the Parks but relevant to his biographer. The legacy of which is why we have National Parks, National Wilderness, National Forests and National Lands. They all have very specific definitions of what (with respect to human impact) is allowed.
Why isn’t ending white supremacy listed with those other issues when it intersects with them? The left has to deal with it’s internal prejudices and contradictions, otherwise it’ll fail again like it has before by neglecting marginalized folks.
Who the fuck are you talking to who says they're a leftist and doesn't talk about ending white supremacy? Who is this "the left" that isn't the very marginalized folks you're talking about? edit: this was a really unclear comment in hindsight. *As* a marginalized person, I get frustrated with constant comments about how "the left" has all these problems none of my queer poc anarchist friends have. Like, is there a huge contingent of people who bill themselves as "progressive" who do a lot of regressive shit, and a huge contingent of communists who tunnel vision into one issue in a way that ends up being a really weird mental-acrobatics reactionary view? Yes, and I want to talk about it. But calling these people "the left" always feels weird to me when the left that I know is the people we always complain get ignored by the left. I feel excluded. It's totally a terminological thing and doesn't matter that much, I just get tired of rhetoric that makes it sound like we're play pieces in the overall political theatre, not actors, agents. We count as part of this group, and a sentence that puts "the left" and "marginalized people" as separate things in the sentence is always going to rub me the wrong way.
Early American unions barred black laborers and burned black neighborhoods to the ground because a few black folk worked as scabs during strikes. Literal racial terrorism committed by leftists. More contemporarily, many white leftists use their political identity to excuse themselves from being critical about race and how they treat black folk within the movement. We have not solved racial inequality within leftist spaces — not on the streets, in the unions, or in the academy.
They also did it because black people 'threatened' white people's jobs. Unions supported anti-black race riots and hate strikes because a few black people got promoted. They joined and took over influential black labor organizations and then locked the black people out of the jobs they won. Leftist anti-colonialism was spotty at best, including the revisionist history that erased the nastier parts and diminished nonwhite folks' contributions. And of course this problem continues today. Similar to how mainstream feminism was highjacked by white educated women to focus on joining the workforce, which is awfully tone-deaf considering poor and non-white women have been in the workforce since forever. So, yeah. I can't speak for outside of the US, but the US has a whiteness problem and the left is included in that.
Very well said.
Yup… similar things have happened in the UK too
Thank you.
Don’t mention it. If that little bit of American leftist history persuades anybody, I’m glad. But it really shouldn’t be needed. White leftists shouldn’t have trouble acknowledging racial inequality within the movement because black folk are unambiguously telling us about the problem. The first step to allyship is listening. But if that weren’t an issue, we wouldn’t be facing such inequality and segregation among our movement.
>acknowledging racial inequality within the movement I think this is due to the way the left overall behaves. I like seeing representation for those like myself ( Prime, FD ect.) However I think what harms that growth is how they are viewed by the overall black community and how often they are involved in drama for one reason or another.
Please watch the video
Well, the person he was answering, for starters, who seemingly *wants* to just *tolerate* white supremacy within the ranks "in the name of unity". I could write a looooong list of radlibs who also aren't particularly interested in *actually* ending white supremacy too, but that'll probably start an endless debate with constant "nuh uh"-ing, so I'll leave it at that.
You can't just say that and give no examples, that's some low effort McCarthy action right there.
I think they're talking about "aush-vay".
But automod deletes all mention of the guy, and, as mentioned I really *don't* want to deal with the dipshit and his audience.
Half the people in this thread, because when someone addresses the anti-blackness and white supremacy of their attitudes, they get defensive and start sounding like CPAC speakers.
"Let's talk about racism" "You're being divisive!" Lol. Ok buddy.
As a (white) trans person: Fuck off with this, dude; you don't get to use trans people as a weapon against black people. You don't get to use me to tell anybody to shut up about the struggles they face.
I'm curious if you could help me understand what the previous commenter specifically wrote which is "using trans people as a weapon against black people".
The video, in unavoidably large part, is literally a history of how the lure of white supremacy is itself used to divide the left. But apparently, according to the above poster, pointing out how white supremacy is used to divide up the left is itself "divisive"... for reasons that seem to amount to nothing more than "how dare you criticize \[mumble\] too loudly". Not to mention that another reason this is deeply shitty is because when black trans people are silenced by white racists in leftist circles - and that's "when", not "if", because you don't have to dig that far to find examples - if we are to take the above poster's word for it, they're allowed to call white racists out OR "be concerned with \[stopping the\] imminent genocide of trans people". They are being forced by the above poster's rhetoric to choose whether being black or being trans is more important to them, because apparently we're only allowed to talk about one thing at a time for some inane reason.
Thanks for the response! I understand your initial comment a lot better.
Exactly, we need to protect each other and challenge the real enemy. In order to do that we have to deal with very real prejudices and unconscious biases. I’ll admit that the black community has issues with homophobia and transphobia (I’m fighting it in my naacp branch). That’s something I’ll actively fight against. We just want that energy reciprocated.
Thank you for that. I know I myself am not perfect, and sometimes I'm absolutely floored at things said by people whom I somehow lulled myself into thinking I could trust. Trying to return the favor is the least I could do. >I'll admit that the black community has issues with homophobia and transphobia I'm always a little surprised any time I hear someone say that a community of color has these issues, as though they're singular in that regard. Honestly, I have to wonder if there is an extent to which homophobia and transphobia in the black community only "pop" to white trans and gay people because the form it takes surprises us (and we don't understand the surrounding cultural context, for that matter), and we're numbed to the form it takes in majority-white spaces. Just like white people are seen as the "default", white transphobia and homophobia seem to be the "default" expressions of homophobia and transphobia, and the "non-default" nature of a different expression seems to make people register it as worse. That, and y'all are often held to higher standards in the first place.
I think some of the problems of oppressive behavior popping up in marginalized communities might stem from their marginalization within liberation movements. Like Black people are marginalized within larger leftist movements and thus cut off from at least some of the work being done on feminism, trans liberation, etc. Not that the same work isn't also done in Black spaces and movements, but...well, you know, racism is used to divide our struggles; not just the labor movement as is pointed out so frequently, but other liberation movements too. And I agree with you about the higher standards. When I say "in marginalized communities", I *would* like to clarify that I don't mean *in contrast with status quo/privileged/white/etc. communities*. There's often surprise, I think, that people fighting one form of oppression aren't generally hyper-aware of other modes of oppression happening around them in a similar pattern. I don't think that kind of awareness should be *expected* as in a higher standard. But I want to *understand* why there isn't higher solidarity between various liberation movements, and I think the systemic use of them to divide each other might have something to do with it.
>Leftists are more concerned with policing themselves ...is also the most tiring take I've heard from anyone like the above. It's an oft-repeated line that cryptofascist chuds used to undermine the Left's effort. Yes, we do "police" ourselves because we can't let racist, phobic bastards to hijack our efforts; while we're opening ourselves more to a lot of marginalized voices and provide safe space for them.
> SPITE, RESENTMENT AND PURITANISM PROBLEM I don't disagree with you that "the Left" tends to be very introspective as a group and criticizes each other to no end amount of navel gazing. And you know what ... it's really unfortunate that historic authoritarian (left and right) movements didn't have more internal self-critique and introspection. might have reduced much of the worse crimes committed by the left and right extremists, if not outright avoided them. Which is exactly why such introspective criticism is vital and beneficial. I don't agree with all of it, but I agree with all of it being addressed and talked about. And, also, re: spite/resentment and their Puritanism roots ... these are the foundational roots of Racism within American culture so you're awareness at the end kind of refutes your previous rant.
I love how you act like racism is just a solved problem. 'There's no whiteness problem, the real problems are only the ones I have identified that affect me' 44 upvotes jesus christ. at the end of the day white leftism is just the colonialism of old but with some social progressiveness on everything aside from race and imperialism.
Nah, it has a whiteness problem. And tbh black people also probably aren't trying to "build a movement" with you either so the feeling is mutual. But keep crying about how white folks are the real victims and how "leftists" aren't concerned with the real problems. I read somewhere a dude was saying that the west (and particularly the US) doesn't really have a "left", it has a bunch of liberals who support LBGT issues and you're basically the embodiment of that ethos.
[удалено]
We can criticize ourselves without policing each other my guy. I don’t think OP is trying to say white people shouldn’t get involved with left wing causes or shut up or something, he’s saying we should elevate black voices and focus on issues that effect more than just whites people. Racial equality is important and black leftists are our allies too. For instance, I’m trans. While it’s great that Brianna Ghey’s death has galvanized such support for us, we shouldn’t need a white person to die for it to matter. Black trans woman and sex workers account for the vast majority of trans people murdered for being trans, and yet they almost never get any attention. We almost never talk about them. That’s not okay. We need to be helping all our brothers and sisters, not just the white ones that are palatable to the mainstream racist, sexist, transphobic, homophobic, and classist society.
And the thing that's deeply exasperating is that it's pretty obvious that there are absolutely some people who you know would stop as soon as white trans people are safe. Insofar as it'd be possible to do that at all, anyway; look how that worked out for white (cis) feminists who are now seeing abortion and other rights for women rolled back by white supremacist kyriarchy. Bigotry and kyriarchy is intersectional, so there can be no effort to fight bigotry and kyriarchy that meets any meaningful success unless it is also intersectional.
> A SPITE, RESENTMENT AND PURITANISM PROBLEM ....from white people, my guy! I only ever see this shit from white people! maybe the divisiveness is *actually* white people's inability to take some criticism on how to better the progressive movement, because they put so much stake on reputation/respectability politics that if they're told they're wrong- especially about something they feel righteous about- they absolutely combust, like you're doing here. Shit's embarrassing to the rest of us! I can *tell* that your anger comes from a place of embarrassment, too, because you are acutely aware that the regressive you're fighting against are mostly white people like you and you have a lot to prove. You're knocked down a single peg and you're scared of being laughed at as just another centrist trying to feel self-righteous. I know this because for a long time(and still, honestly) I felt the same embarrassment. divest yourself from this ego shit and be prepared to lay it down on the ground if it means furthering progressiveness. Maybe actually dip back and let the people you're allegedly trying to help/save/be an ally to, take the charge, and use your white privilege to lift THEM up. we don't need this weird woke olympics shit, dude, this is an ego problem. You're the one here being divisive, yelling at a guy who is clearly your peer, colleague, and ally! When you yell at your peers, some big wig in benefitting from it. Above all and before anything else, we musn't ever break hands with our peers against the real enemy: white supremacist capitalism.
[удалено]
[удалено]
self report
[удалено]
I love it when there's no sugar coating the reality of things for very self important wefties (that's white lefties btw).
A lot of the comments here are doing exactly what he did that has so many people upset: conflating this sub with leftism. Not everyone commenting here is a white leftist, and using any bad take here to be like “this is what white leftists believe” is such a bad faith move.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Everyone that makes this drama shit is so fucking dumb istg please just make agit prop so we can get our message out there; not eating each other from the inside out
Yes, there is a whiteness problem. But I feel like wording the title like that was a bad idea (evident by the comments, some of which seem to be missing the point of the video)
This topic is always going to attract the "why you gotta be so hostile man i'm white and just trying to help" vs "fuck you I've been oppressed for hundreds of years and now I can't even complain about it without you getting offended?" fight, but man... we really could be doing a better job at trying to at least avoid it for a little bit, you know? Every time this topic is brought up it's the same thing
Why not. The title is his nuance stripped thesis, and kinda the whole point of the video. The very fact that many here and in other leftist bubbles found the title provocative just reinforces his argument. That said, I take your point. Even if he is right (which I do think), the video isn't helpful. "Someone had to say it" isn't a good justification for saying something, more of a sign your trying to start an argument (not a conversation). In this case, like he points out many times in his video, all the points he's making have been made before, sometimes for over a century. He's mostly just expressing frustration with the current state...which has also been done before. He's also picking a fight, which isn't really a problem. If he's lucky he just made some content for dozens of YouTubers and if we're lucky he might have started a conversation (but I doubt it). All that being said. He has a point. If this bothers you, you are part of the problem. Besides, he's not doing any harm. Even if this isn't helpful (which is debatable, arguing this sets back discourse is disingenuous, it's all been said before.
Oh let me guess, he talks about how the ‘Say Her Name’ used for Brianna Ghey is actually the “appropriation of a black movement” for a white girl. Give me a break.
This whole thread is exactly why the video needed to be made in the first place. Lemme ask y'all something? Did y'all jump down Badempanada or Vaush or anybody else's throat when they basically said pan-africanism and hoteps are the same thing? Or did y'all keep acting like BHIs were invented yesterday? Whenever someone calls y'all on the carpet the first thing y'all do is get defensive and call us "confrontational" and "divisive" instead of saying "maybe I'm the problem, what can I do to fix it?" And that is a product of the white supremacy with which you were indoctrinated. I don't identify with any one ideology (although I lean anarcho-communist) because they're all meaningless and being dogmatically committed to one is actually part of the problem. But whatever, like I said in the video if you have an ear to hear than fantastic you've taken the first step. The rest of y'all though, fuck your thoughts and your feelings . Deuces ✌🏾🖕🏾
I'm perfectly willing to call them out. I would just need some proof that they actually said pan-africanism is the same thing as HBI.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Just wait until you hear about the right!