conec posted:

repeatedly stacking things is actually a sign of autism

babyhueypnewton posted:

Not that Sanders is particularly radical but black people have come out en masse for the war criminal Hillary Clinton who systematically targeted black people in Libya for death. Can we finally stop pretending black people in America are an exception to labor aristocracy? It's time to start thinking about class again and stop being scared of 'whitesplaining', 'marxsplaining', failaidssplaining' etc.

babyhueypnewton posted:

Not that Sanders is particularly radical but black people have come out en masse for the war criminal Hillary Clinton who systematically targeted black people in Libya for death. Can we finally stop pretending black people in America are an exception to labor aristocracy? It's time to start thinking about class again and stop being scared of 'whitesplaining', 'marxsplaining', failaidssplaining' etc.

bhpn has entirely the wrong idea yet again, surprising no one

babyhueypnewton posted:

I have no illusions about Sanders, but I am highlighting that the interests of the U.S. black population no longer align with the globally oppressed Afrikan population. You could argue that is is nothing new but I do think the overtly racist nature of the Libyan invasion and its centrality in Clinton's campaign is something unique.

Gonna have to agree with bhpn here. Seems clear to me at this point that US black people voting for clinton, who helped lock them up in prison by the millions, just reeks of opportunism . im Also eyeing the homeless guy who sleeps under the fullerton/western kennedy expressway exit by my job, i havent asked him yet but at a glance he looks to have shaky line AT BEST on the revisionist treachery of the prachanda path and quite frankly smells like Crap.

babyhueypnewton posted:

I have no illusions about Sanders, but I am highlighting that the interests of the U.S. black population no longer align with the globally oppressed Afrikan population. You could argue that is is nothing new but I do think the overtly racist nature of the Libyan invasion and its centrality in Clinton's campaign is something unique.

babyhueypnewton posted:

I have no illusions about Sanders, but I am highlighting that the interests of the U.S. black population no longer align with the globally oppressed Afrikan population. You could argue that is is nothing new but I do think the overtly racist nature of the Libyan invasion and its centrality in Clinton's campaign is something unique.

you were talking explicitly about the portion of black people voting in the democratic primaries voting for clinton. sanders is not meaningfully different from clinton on foreign policy, and as the article that i posted notes (if you had read it), you have to comprehend what the goals for voting could possibly be. as it says, there are no leftists in the democrats and so the only possible reason to vote in the primaries is to make sure a candidate is nominated that one has confidence in at the national scale to offer any kind of resistance at all to the literal KKK. of course hillary isn't going to actually improve the lives of black people in the US or abroad but neither is sanders so the primary becomes an exercise in "who is least likely to hold off the literal lynch mobs", not an expression of the actual further material interests of the community

Edited by c_man (Feb. 28, 2016 19:45:16)

HenryKrinkle posted:

soicowboy posted:

just that black people in america have more wealth than 99% of everyone in any african country

this might be true, but the correct emphasis should be on "imperialism really fucked over Africa" and not on "black people in the US are labor aristocrats." i mean holy fuck people.

In the context of explaining why black Americans acted in the interests of the labor aristocracy, actually, the emphasis should be on "black people in the US are labor aristocrats" since the other statement would be kind of irrelevant to the conversation.

swampman posted:

In the context of explaining why black Americans acted in the interests of the labor aristocracy, actually, the emphasis should be on "black people in the US are labor aristocrats" since the other statement would be kind of irrelevant to the conversation.

what does this even mean? what is it here that constitutes "acting in the interest of the labor aristocracy"? voting in the democratic primary?

c_man posted:

swampman posted:

In the context of explaining why black Americans acted in the interests of the labor aristocracy, actually, the emphasis should be on "black people in the US are labor aristocrats" since the other statement would be kind of irrelevant to the conversation.

what does this even mean? what is it here that constitutes "acting in the interest of the labor aristocracy"? voting in the democratic primary?

Yes, showing up to the Democratic primary and voting for Hillary Clinton... you got it right