/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Proletariat without Borders

Mode: Reply
Name
Subject
Message

Max message length: 4096

Files

Max file size: limitless

Max files: 3

E-mail
Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

Remember to follow the rules


/leftypol/ is a non-sectarian board for leftist discussion.

IRC: Rizon.net #bunkerchan
https://qchat.rizon.net/?channels=bunkerchan

(611.68 KB 1536x2048 14Ignatiev1-superJumbo.jpg)
(74.17 KB 776x397 ignatiev-1.jpg)
Noel Ignatiev, author of "How the Irish Became White", dies at 78 Anonymous 11/16/2019 (Sat) 10:52:48 No. 128569
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/14/books/noel-ignatiev-dead.html

Professor Noel Ignatiev died on 11/09/2019. He was author of the book "How the Irish became white".

/pol/ tards knew him thanks to quote in pic 2. (https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2002/09/abolish-the-white-race.html)

He was editor of "Race traitor" magazine which was dedicated to "abolishing whiteness".

>When we say we want to abolish the white race, we do not mean we want to exterminate people with fair skin. We mean that we want to do away with the social meaning of skin color, thereby abolishing the white race as a social category. Consider this parallel: To be against royalty does not mean wanting to kill the king. It means wanting to do away with crowns, thrones, titles, and the privileges attached to them. In our view, whiteness has a lot in common with royalty: they are both social formations that carry unearned advantages.

The journal was also famous for this quote
>John Brown was apparently not sophisticated enough to realize that holding opinions about blacks made him a white supremacist
(http://web.archive.org/web/20190319192716/http://racetraitor.org/decaro.html)

What is your opinion on him, /leftypol/?
Better article from an actual commie who knew this fucker: https://thecharnelhouse.org/2019/11/10/noel-ignatiev-1940-2019/
>>128569
>dat quote pic
actual quote:
>The goal of abolishing the white race is on its face so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition other than from committed white supremacists. Of course we expected bewilderment from people who still think of race as biology. We frequently get letters accusing us of being "racists," just like the KKK, and have even been called a "hate group." ...

>Our standard response is to draw an analogy with anti-royalism: to oppose monarchy does not mean killing the king; it means getting rid of crowns, thrones, royal titles, etc....

>Every group within white America has at one time or another advanced its particular and narrowly defined interests at the expense of black people as a race. That applies to labor unionists, ethnic groups, college students, schoolteachers, taxpayers, and white women. Race Traitor will not abandon its focus on whiteness, no matter how vehement the pleas and how virtuously oppressed those doing the pleading. The editors meant it when they replied to a reader, "Make no mistake about it: we intend to keep bashing the dead white males, and the live ones, and the females too, until the social construct known as 'the white race' is destroyed—not 'deconstructed' but destroyed."
Race Traitor magazine was actually super based, btw.
>>128575
well, yeah, but it's not much different
>>128582
op's pic is streamlined to trigger /pol/. Broader context matters.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noel_Ignatiev#Ideas_and_controversies
>Ignatiev's book on Irish immigrants has been criticized for "conflat[ing] race and economic position" and for ignoring data that contradicts his theses.[9]
very based
>>128584
this would be also true for Sakai. those niggas are the real "class reductionists"

the difference of people like Ignatiev and Allen from Sakai is that they actually thought that the privileges of white workers aren't in long term beneficial for them and that they can have class unity with black worker
(109.99 KB 600x442 IMG_20191116_140657_968.JPG)
he was a strange person

claiming that "white people organized as whites are dangerous to humanity" regarding the redneck revolt is something I would expect from Black red guard
>>128569
>to be against royalty does not mean wanting to kill the king
hold it right there
>>128667
My god he’s a retard. When he says “change white supremacy”what does that entail? I can never get a good answer from radlibs about what that means?
Here's interesting article about him
https://communemag.com/noel-ignatiev-1940-2019/
>>128680
> “change white supremacy”what does that entail?
Revitiligo - the opposite of what Michael Jackson had.
>>128569
>John Brown was apparently not sophisticated enough to realize that holding opinions about blacks made him a white supremacist

This sounds like an ironic rebuttal taken out of context in support of John Brown, and it's a dead link. I could be wrong but unless you provide a working source I am very suspicious.
>>128667
yeah this is idiotic. for a while the radlibs were telling white leftists to organize among themselves so they weren't imposing on other spaces. some white leftists do that and then it's suspect
>>128851
here is the article which the quote is supposed to be from
http://web.archive.org/web/20050505071034/http://racetraitor.org/decaro.html
>>128667
Redneck Revolt does do some dumb shit though, like engaging with the Oath Keepers on Facebook and coddling them.
>>128667
>white people organized as whites are dangerous to humanity
This. Unironically.
Mind though, that's not what Redneck Revolt id doing. RV was designed from the beginning to poach members from right-wing gun right groups and subvert them towards adopting anti-racist and anti-capitalist positions.
Ignatiev just got caught up too much in the "redneck" language.
>>128984
Exactly like I said, that is an ironic rebuttal criticizing someone who was implying that Brown was racist for holding opinions of black people.

>Nopper also says that Brown had “fucked-up views that Blacks were still enslaved because they were too ‘servile.’” To borrow from her own phrasing, this is interpretation more than biography. Brown indeed held strong opinions about the lack of militance in some quarters of the black community, especially among those living in the racist North. We may debate both the legitimacy of those opinions, or (as I suspect is the case with Nopper) whether he even had the right to hold opinions about blacks. Brown was apparently not sophisticated enough to realize that holding opinions about blacks made him a white supremacist, and that it was the epitome of “white” hubris for him to interact and collaborate with blacks from the standpoint of leadership. Of course, had he waited to be led by his famous black colleagues, it is doubtful that any of his militant pursuits would even have taken place.

>>128569
You're a disingenuous faggot
>>129004
>Redneck Revolt does do some dumb shit though, like engaging with the Oath Keepers on Facebook and coddling them.
lol wtf
>To be against royalty does not mean wanting to kill the king
uhh
>>129122
Well redneck revolt's stated aim is draw right wing gun rights activists to left. But you can just draw everyone in indiscriminately, the Oath Keepers are made up of former pigs and other nasty shit. You don't want people like that joining your organization, if anything you want to be turning the guns on them.
>>128569
>they are both social formations
Okay, there's a lot to unpack there...
>>128575
>and narrowly defined interests at the expense of black people as a race.
And why the fuck should anyone trust a Jew to preserve 'black interests'? It was only a matter of time until the blacks abandoned the Jews and the Jews latched on to 'LGBT interests' instead.
>>129298
And by 'Jew' of course I mean intellectual Jew and not any regular non-practicing Jew nor a typical Orthodox Jew. I mean secular intellectual revolutionary Jew.
>>129220
It should be qualified considering how many people do want to kill royalty justifiably, but it's not a bad way of explaining it. Plenty of times people want to kill the king without being against royalty, only wanting a "good king." It's more important that the system of royalty is done away with than it is for the royal individuals to die and have more inherit. Still yeah it is a very opaque way of making a simple point, a good analogy would help clarify and not muddle it more.
Well your second image sure makes him sound like another dumbfuck liberal who couldn't comprehend class solidarity if it hit them over the head.
>>129298
what are you trying to say? he is making an observation in the quote, he's not saying whether jews can or cannot protect the black race. he is not saying that jews are stewards of the black race either. i get a sense that your projecting
>Jews latched on to 'LGBT interests' instead.
source? why are you implying that jews in particular shifted toward this as though it was a conscious collective decision? i'm getting /pol/ vibes
>I mean secular intellectual revolutionary Jew
what the fuck does that even mean?
>>128667
>white people organized as whites are dangerous to humanity

I find it strange when wokelets talk about whiteness being a social construct, but then proceed to treat ""white people"" as a monolith. That's like saying that all black people think alike, while failing to realize the difference between an Ethiopian and a Nigerian.

What he fails to address is what people is he referring to? You really think some German American from Texas is going to think the same as a Polish American from New York?

It's sad that he hits the nail on the head with the initial comment presented by OP, but then falls upon Settler-tier identity politics.
>>129122
Let's be perfectly candid, /leftypol/ used to do it, their unofficial discord does it, and this site does it as well.
>>129319
>he is not saying that jews are stewards of the black race either.
I never said that he said that.
I'm just pointing out that he is being very presumptuous in thinking that his goal of 'destroying the white race' (rather than the 'status of whiteness itself' which is the route I WOULD HAVE taken b/c I'm not a fucking retarded Intellectual Jew that doesn't understand what 'white backlash' is) wouldn't hurt the very 'blacks' that he was trying to protect.
(273.86 KB 640x567 Expulsion of Jews.preview.png)
>>129333
>Jew that doesn't understand what 'white backlash'
Do they ever?
>>129333
why do you presume that the "destruction of whiteness" is an inherently "jewish intellectual" project. that is /pol/ thinking. this isn't an ideology exclusive to jews but part of a larger liberal ideological project to disintegrate racial barriers in american history (for better or worse). so fuck off with your /pol/ shit
>'destroying the white race'
it's clearly rhetorical, he doesn't mean genociding white people but liquidating whiteness as a bearer of identity.
>>129344
>>/pol/
(512.77 KB 256x256 reallynogsthenoodle.png)
>>129329
>their unofficial discord
What did he mean by this.
>>129368
>why do you presume that the "destruction of whiteness" is an inherently "jewish intellectual" project.
Fair enough. Admittedly there are many white liberals that are actively involved in this project and the overall message contained therein (which I wholeheartedly agree with to the extent that it is, "part of a larger liberal ideological project to disintegrate racial barriers in american history (for better or worse)").
> that is /pol/ thinking.
I don't think it's /pol/ thinking inasmuch as it is strategic thinking. If the more prominent faces of an 'anti-whiteness' movement are seen to be Jewish with blatantly Jewish names for example, and if you recognize how easily this is propagandized (with great effect imo) by the enemies of this movement (especially considering historical facts such as >>129344), then it is imperative that the rhetoric used by your movement are as reasonably revolutionary as possible and not slogans that could be mistaken as being written by FBI-infiltrators.
>'destroying the white race'
>it's clearly rhetorical
I know. And it's shitty rhetoric. And it's not only shitty rhetoric, but dangerous rhetoric that can be used RHETORICALLY against you and for the suppression of your movement. And the 'destroying royalty' analogy is shitty justification because it already ruins the frame for engaging against 'whiteness' IF you are being strategic. Remember, royal persons were always the MINORITY of a population. If the MAJORITY of your population (white ppl) is what you are engaged against, by contrast, then you'd better have better fucking analogies than analogies based around destroying royalty (who were ALWAYS the fucking minority of your population back when they were relevant).

>>/pol/
The image he provided is useful. People need to understand that 'white backlash' is a real fucking phenomenon and use this historical knowledge by not failing rhetorically in their messaging. If you do not know your history, then you will be doomed to fucking repeating it.
>>129388
>If the more prominent faces of an 'anti-whiteness' movement are seen to be Jewish with blatantly Jewish names
your enemies will always find a way to be offended, jews or no jews. if there aren't jews to latch onto then they'll find something else to inflame opinion to their side. the right has the advantage that they can appeal to people's fundamental inertia and fear of alien ideas. And the fact is that jews are in prominent intellectual positions on the left and right. rightoids are already schizophrenic (or simply are ignorant) that a lot of classical liberals, neoliberals and neoconservative thinkers were jewish. There were even jewish thinkers/ideas like lombroso, max nordau, or franz boas whose ideas underpin far right racism.
> 'anti-whiteness' movement are seen to be Jewish with blatantly Jewish names
the damage has already been done, i'm sure jews, among other people, have said embarrassing things in the last 100 years that can be dredged up aplenty if someone is willing to look hard enough. Take, for example, that bernie sanders quote where he talks about cuckholding or something. I agree with your overall sentiment about image, though, but the key is to go on the attack and make counter-propaganda
>And it's not only shitty rhetoric, but dangerous rhetoric that can be used RHETORICALLY against you and for the suppression of your movement
Is this Ignatiev even a leftist? he strikes me as a liberal. The only reason OP posted him is because the "irish were considered black" meme that is popularly peddled. I honestly cannot attest to how true it was but i've read it was overblown
>And the 'destroying royalty' analogy is shitty justification
It was a dumb quote that doesn't make sense
>The image he provided is useful
It's really not, this is a literal /pol/ talking point that is dredged up to dog whistle and implant the idea that jews are fundamental ("if they were kicked out of all these countries... it's probably cause they did SOMETHING wrong")

Besides a lot of these so-called expulsions are perfectly explainable historically. Many are outright fabrications by /pol/
https://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/7295lg/antisemitism_is_historically_a_result_of_jewish/
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3prj9j/why_have_jews_been_expelled_in_so_many_countries/
And the explusions had NOTHING to do with white backlash but christianity.
>>129407
are fundamentally untrustworthy*
>>129407
ironically, the /pol/ thread the redditer links has the ignatiev quote
>>129305
>And by 'Jew' of course I mean intellectual Jew
You mean racial jew. The jews are a race, their bitter hatred for whites is based on race, and the policies the jewish diaspora support undermine unity in every single majority white country in which they live.
Ilhan Omar was right when she said that "Israel has hypnotized the [Western] world." The number of whites that support Israel as the home of the jewish people number in the hundreds of millions. The number of jews that support the US, or any other white majority country, maintaining its homogeneity could be counted on one hand. None demonstrate that hypnosis more readily than the Amerifat.
(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)
>>129413
put your flag back on
>>129416
One doesn't have to be a "literal Nazi" to observe jewish behaviour and be critical of it. One only need take his blinders off.
>>129424
and what jewish behavior is that?
>>129407
> i've read it was overblown
That’s actually a meme. Catholic Irish were indeed considered second class citizen, but not the Protestant ones.
>>129426
well yeah that's true, but I think we agree they weren't considered black literally. there were multiple waves of irish immigration in america, so irish people were in various states of assimilation, with off-the-boat types being treated poorly because of their alien cultural practices and their catholic religion (which i think the Ignatiev book is mainly focussed on?). and, yes, I'm aware of irish treatment in ireland with regards to the 1829 catholic relief act n shit
>>129413
You're fucking brainwashed kid. Try diversifying the literature that you ingest, unironically.
>>129344
>minority was historically scapegoated by those in power as the great other
Well, colour me surprised.
>>129407
>And the explusions had NOTHING to do with white backlash but christianity.
I would clarify by being a little more general here. 'White backlash' is a form of behavior more akin to what >>129439 says. And my concern is that minorities should not compromise other minorities by kicking the beehive that is the majority population, which is what I believe Ignatiev was doing to the detriment of materialism leftism/class-solidarity in general. Which is another reason why the 'royalty' analogy bothered me so much. It is dangerous because it obscures the fact that the 'anti-white' activists are in the minority, in reality.
>>129438
Was my statement wrong? Perhaps you'd like to list some jewish organizations that argue for a homogeneous white America, or white Europe, or homogeneous white anywhere for that matter, rather than the opposite. That would be simple counter example, if you can find it.
>>129448
why would anyone waste their time advocating for a homogeneous white ANYTHING? I'm baffled by the likelihood that you imagine yourself to be clever for asking such a stupid question. God damn, I think it might be worse for you than I initially thought. You're not just brainwashed, but you're also really fucking dumb! Get away from me. You're honestly embarrassing to even talk to anymore.
>>129463
So you can't then, I take it. I'm glad we clarified that.
>>129445
*kicking the beehive with shitty rhetoric
I agree with Ignatiev's overall message. But his methods are nearly indefensible.
>>129333
*that he was trying to, if not outright protect, at least aid indirectly by the abolishment of 'whiteness.'
>>129445
>And my concern is that minorities should not compromise other minorities by kicking the beehive that is the majority population
I understand your sentiment, but I think it's unrealistic. You speak as though minorities have a solid, tangible identity that and that an individual like Ignatiev self-consciously speaks for the jewish community- that he represents the views of all jewish people in the US. But that's just dumb. a white person may believe a jew like ignatiev saying inflammatory about white people reveals a streak of white hatred among all jews. But they'd still be wrong to think so. /pol/ types will also magnify any quotes like this and put make infographs to make it more propagandistic. Even if such quotes didn't exist /pol/ would just make them up, because that would be most convenient and politically expedient thing to do
>by kicking the beehive that is the majority population
This is a slippery slope. should jewish people, for example, not join politics because they'll anger whites, should they not take positions of power for fear of anti-semitic backlash? should they not join, aid and write for leftist parties because leftism is tarred with judaism and therefore will open it up to /pol/ attacks? The problem is you start to capitulate to your political enemies' logic, rather than try to obliterate it for the irrationality it is. Your enemies will attack you jews or not, no matter what I said. Jews are a convenient and familiar target, but a few years of propaganda can easily create new stereotypes, new minorities, out of whole cloth if need be. Minorities can be splintered from a majority in any manner of ways, whether through subcultures, regional differences and so on
>>129344
A lot of these supposed expulsions simply never happened. Someone unironically took the time to make images like this just because they don't like Jews.
https://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/7295lg/antisemitism_is_historically_a_result_of_jewish/
>>129482
>and that an individual like Ignatiev self-consciously speaks for the jewish community
If you are an intellectual figure, then you have an associated status function that carries many unspoken obligations with it. This is just an aspect of social ontology, imo. I'm not bashing Jews in general. I'm bashing this intellectual Jew (and his Jewishness is relevant in this context) that is acting reprehensibly and, most importantly, untactically in his role as an intellectual figure (that he donned when he received his PhD from Harvard, for example). It wouldn't bother me if he was being silly all by himself. But if he is associated with leftism, then he is bad for leftists (and I would say that same about him being associated with Jews).
>Even if such quotes didn't exist /pol/ would just make them up
this is relevant to think about. But my critique of Ignatiev should still be relevant because if you are a leftist, then you should be aware of what constitutes conscionable words and actions. Part of raising this consciousness is well intentioned critique. However, I suppose that I am mainly attacking liberals or at least, liberal leaning leftist types.
>This is a slippery slope
I am aware of this. That is why I returned to qualify my statement by adding
>kicking the beehive with shitty rhetoric.
If we are going to make people uncomfortable, as we inevitably will, then i believe that we should still be tactical about it. I think any leftist would agree with me about this. So, I agree with you that we are going to have to make people feel uncomfortable no matter what. But what I would add is that if we're going to make people uncomfortable, then we should at least not make them more uncomfortable than they have to be. And most importantly, we should not make ourselves too comfortable by speaking with too much arrogance and pomp as if we weren't already aware of our subversive goals (subversive of course, from the perspective of our adversaries). This gives the enemy too much to work with.
>to obliterate it for the irrationality it is.
You and I are fundamentally aligned on this. I would only add that it is difficult to make your opponent seem irrational when you have an intellectual (that is associated with your 'side') walking around calling for the 'end of the white race.' As a rhetorical message, it is dangerous FOR YOUR OWN SIDE, imo. But we cannot change the past. You are correct. But I would, personally, disengage from this Ignatiev person and his work (more relevantly since Ignatiev is now dead).
>but a few years of propaganda can easily create new stereotypes, new minorities
I don't know about this tbh. Sure, I agree with it hypothetically. But unless you have the money and resources, I don't see how this happens without the existence of shitty rhetoric from which to build from coming from your opponent's side.
(57.28 KB 600x249 IMG_20191117_135554_319.JPG)
(117.09 KB 600x644 IMG_20191117_135615_509.JPG)
>>129486
This postet is right. This is the real list:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsions_and_exoduses_of_Jews

But remember:
>This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it.
>>128569
piss on his grave
>>128571
Quote there from Ignatiev:
>John Garvey and I began Race Traitor with the goal of breaking up the white race, as a contribution to working-class solidarity. We never used, endorsed or promoted identity politics; we railed against multiculturalism and “diversity”; we were scornful of those who wanted to preserve the “good aspects” of “white culture” or to “re-articulate” or “decenter” whiteness. We wanted nothing to do with the growing academic field of “whiteness studies.” We did share some vocabulary with individuals and organizations that were traveling on different roads to different places.

>The most significant instance of this was the word “privilege.” In light of the political travesties that have developed under the term since, we wish we had differentiated ourselves more categorically from those who wanted to make careers in journalism, social work, organizational development, education and the arts, and who insist that the psychic battle against privilege must be never-ending; instead of challenging institutions they scrutinize every inter-personal encounter between black people and whites to unearth underlying “racist” attitudes and guide people in “unlearning” them. Hectoring people about their privileges was never our approach; it is an annoyance rather than a challenge.
But how do I make a meme from that statement to trigger people epic style?
>>129763
>we were scornful of those who wanted to preserve the “good aspects” of “white culture” or to “re-articulate” or “decenter” whiteness.
this will butthurt /pol/yps
>Hectoring people about their privileges was never our approach; it is an annoyance rather than a challenge.
this will butthurt woke scolds
>>129370
Apparently, we have a fandom on Discord. Neat!
>Jew
>Anti-White


hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
>>128593
Sakai didn't say that white privileges will be good for them in the long run, nor did he say there can't be white/black unity. He just said that people needs to realise that whites in the USA are settlers and its not just a case of waving a red banner and we're all going to hold hands, whites in the USA need to recognise the special conditions of settlerism and what its going to take to decolonise the USA.
>>129081
I wonder what Jim Goad would say about this
>>129413
Not all Americans believe this though and the number is shrinking
>everyone still talking about Redneck Revolt as if the organization didn't collapse due to the rape cult that controlled it.
If yall want to know what happened to the people who left RR and aren't rapists, look up COAL (Coalition of Armed Labor)
>>129368
those are facts
>>139974
>whites in the USA need to recognise the special conditions of settlerism and what its going to take to decolonise the USA

which usually means

<whitey should not be allowed to by himself but only under black leadership
>>140347
<whitey should not be allowed to organize by himself but only under black leadership
I believe his perception of his own Jewishness and consciousness of the suffering Jews endured from white non-Jews played a major role in his view of "whiteness" and colored his politics with a degree of sentimentality. Beyond his rational arguments to abolish "whiteness" as a concept there was a degree of genuine hatred, conscious or not, which explains things like >>128667

Delete
Report/Ban

Captcha (required for reports and bans by board staff)


no cookies?