this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2026
40 points (87.0% liked)
The Deprogram
1961 readers
56 users here now
"As revolutionaries, we don't have the right to say that we're tired of explaining. We must never stop explaining. We also know that when the people understand, they cannot but follow us. In any case, we, the people, have no enemies when it comes to peoples. Our only enemies are the imperialist regimes and organizations." Thomas Sankara, 1985
International Anti-Capitalist podcast run by an American, a Slav and an Arab.
Rules:
- No capitalist apologia / anti-communism.
- No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
- Be respectful. This is a safe space where all comrades should feel welcome; this includes a warning against uncritical sectarianism.
- No porn or sexually explicit content (even if marked NSFW).
- No right-deviationists (patsocs, nazbols, Strasserists, Duginists, etc).
- Use c/mutual_aid for mutual aid requests.
Resources:
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Nah, this is a weird statement. Implying 1 billion people from a specific region(s) are pedophiles is ridiculous. Whether one sees the term as useful or not, the Epstein class thing has a specific meaning to do with the western capitalist class being proven to take part in organized pedophilia/trafficking.
I get there's the whole labor aristocracy designation and all, imperialist relations matter, but that isn't even close to the same thing as what Epstein class is referring to. Most people in the west are far closer in wealth and power to their global south working class counterparts than they ever will be to being a millionaire or billionaire. It's just the spoils of empire, along with various other ploys, try to bribe them into viewing the system as legitimate.
Third Worldist Maoists when a poverty-stricken, trailer-park, white family in West Virginia; Section-8 Black family in Baltimore; and a rural Hispanic family in Mississippi are virtually indistinguishable from third world populations in terms of material conditions, power, and wealth. Not to mention those groups make up over HALF the US population.
People see one labour aristocrat tech-bro on Reddit and throw in the towel.
But the US sits in a different position in a globalised economy. The poor in the US are still consumers of resources from the Global South. In terms of the Earth's production, it's a big funnel and the Global South consumes a tiny amount relative to the West. Even those in poverty in the US consume a lot more based on metrics like electricity use, fuel, steel, fertilizer, clothing etc.
There's a big imbalance there regardless of the internal inequalities of the US.
I agree, however a relatively tiny percentage of the US population consumes a disproportionate amount of resources, with a small spattering of concessions given to an almost equally tiny labour-aristocratic vanguard. The working class enjoys little to nothing of the imperial spoils, at least not much that they can buy without going into debt peonage with a credit card. However that imbalance is the result of systemic capitalist extraction and superprofit, which must be dealt with by a changing of the base. Something that is not possible without revolution, which is why I was also referring more to the necessity of building an intersectional class consciousness among the lowest echelons of US society, as hundreds of millions are internally subjugated and used as fuel for the capitalist machine.
I don't think that revolution will happen. Historically the communist revolutions took place at a nation level in opposition to EXTERNAL exploitation. You don't have that in the US. It's not in the class interest of the lowest echelons of US society to overthrow their government because they still do benefit from the imbalance of the global economy.
The buying power of the US dollar gets them the affordable clothes, fuel, electricity, white goods and so on. If the USD fell, their purchasing power would go downhill fast, leading to a drop in living standards. Similarly if they tried to produce the manufactured goods themselves rather than purchase from overseas, it would be less affordable.
This is why that solidarity doesn't exist.
This is a case where looking at the bigger picture blinds you to what actually matters: the average American cannot recognize or feel the privilege they experience from living in the West when they are living in a tent on the sidewalk, drowning in medical & college debt, unable to get a job and relying on the kindness of strangers to provide for themselves. Try to tell someone in that position that they are privileged in literally any way and you're probably not going to convince them of anything you say because in that moment, under those conditions, how can they perceive anything else?
Nearly every American communist I have met up to this point has cited common issues with housing, unemployment, disability, marginalization, or some other severe issue that goes beyond just regular exploitation of labor as would occur under a welfare state/social democracy. These experiences are radicalizing people. The fact we benefit from imperialism isn't being felt; we cannot feel or perceive it. The privilege might be there but you'd be hard pressed to find an American struggling to survive who feels like they got it better than somebody else in the world who isn't also a Marxist who understands how imperialism works.
This critique would've made sense in the 1970s but those times are over now. The "Middle Class" is being erased, the wealth gap is widening, the welfare state has been euthanized. The treats valve was keeping everyone docile and it has been not only turned off but straight up dismantled. We are increasingly relying on the crumbs of imperialism that fall off the ruling class' table and onto the floor and that simply isn't enough - which is why it's vital for communist agitation right now to convince those who are aimless about what to do that if we just go back to the way things were before we'll just end up here again. The American proletariat isn't completely hopeless. Our class interest is in socialism and if we can unlearn the propaganda we're raised on we can learn to find solidarity with our comrades around the world and bring about that better future we all want today.
Giving up on us is defeatism. There is a reason communism is an internationalist movement: we must, all of us, overthrow capitalism together. Comrades in the Periphery aren't going to save the world by themselves any more than comrades in Core will; we both need to do our part. The beast needs to be killed from within and without or it won't fucking die.
They may not perceive their advantages but the advantages exist. If the advantage of the USD value went away, they would be even worse off than they currently are. So it is AGAINST their material interest to lose the power of the USD.
Because of that, the path towards a socialist revolution in the US is not straightforward.
It's actually not in the world's interest to see a USD collapse either. Some sort of black swan event could cause that and then everyone worldwide will have no choice but deal with it.
USD value doesn't really matter. The U.S. is obscenely wealthy in many ways that go beyond just the value of our currency. Conditions might worsen immediately but the infrastructure exists to negate that effect relatively quickly - more so than many other countries could. We have a vast territory with extensive resources and a large agricultural sector. The biggest hurdle is rebuilding domestic industry, but we're still starting off from a far better position than China or Russia did.
Obviously the shape of an American socialist revolution is going to be shaped by its conditions and will likely not resemble what happened in China or Russia as a consequence. The initial shape might look more like modern China and Vietnam than, say, the USSR at any point in its history. But we will still require a revolution to make this happen. It's not something we can just vote on a ballot for.
The world operates on a global market especially for commodities like crude oil, fertilizer, natural gas, iron ore etc. Even if it is produced domestically, the base price is set based on the world's supply and demand. If the USD falls in value, many resources are inputs to the economy. Fertilizer affects agriculture for instance.
Crudely:
Material conditions (think relations rather than stresses) influence one's worldview, even with relative poverty. It's why reactionary politics still exist within a settler nation (think peoples rather than borders).
Right. And at the nation level, Global South countries learn that in particular big sectors like mining, agriculture, oil, clothing, they need some sort of nation level solidarity to make the big deals.
If they don't, they get hyper exploited. If they have a comprador class of sellouts running things, they're fucked. Hence this is where the socialist revolutions are going to come from IMO.
The socialist groups in the US don't have that aspect that can unite the masses.
MAYBE AI data centers are a unifying target for everyday people because of how much of a drain on the US economy they are.
Calling out the Epstein issue hasn't really done it.
I should have made it clear; it wasn't a retort against you. I mean look at my other comments on the thread here and the downvotes associated.
Apparently the above is too painful an analysis to consider on a fucking ML site of all places. I don't see what hope the rest of the masses the western countries have. I share your pessimissm about the lack of actual change in the imperial cores without the Global South forcing their hands.
I do understand.
But It IS a good meme to exploit the divisions within the US. There is a perception that the "Epstein class" is hierarchically above the supposed laws.
In a similar way, the build out of AI data centers are a current news item that reflects the unequal allocation of energy and water within the country because of the dominance of a few tech companies in the economy.
Both topics could unite the masses in the US to oppose the capitalist class.
What I don't see is how that would create any coordination with socialist movements in the Global South. It's not in their material interests.
Why isn't it? Clean food, water, air are universal needs. So is shelter. A survivable climate. Not everyone is so myopic, although the majority are. Corrective lenses are about to be forceably applied.
Because the US needs to purchase resources on the global market as inputs to its economy. The purchasing power of its dollar maintains the prices that it can acquire those resources.
That's why justice is represented as a scale. Ma'at/Anubis series of tests. You can say you didn't lie, cheat, steal, mistreat those of humble means, but what is done in the dark eventually comes to light. And there's always beings of more humble means.
Name your communist movement that has convinced the three aformentioned groups to your cause. Or are they props for your settler apologism.
Maybe, just maybe, consider there are oppressed nations of people within nations and not lump the Gazans with Israelis in an attempt to appeal to Israeli proleteriat.
Marxism-leninsim is a science. If black prisoner maoists have a more correct line than you then maybe learn from them.
Creating a straw man of an argument using the genocide of the Gazan population is quite disgusting. The societal conditions of the United States are vastly different to those of Isntreal, and permit for a intersectional solidarity.
The Rainbow Coalition. If the vision of intersectional class unity was realized before, and it can be done again. That is the entire point of building class consciousness.
Currently? The PSL. During my travels across the US and my work with various PSL chapters, I can say each chapter was comprised of the most diverse group of individuals that came from a litany of backgrounds. The communities the chapters were embedded in also saw marked increases of inter-solidarity and class action; as scores of people, again from all walks of life, showed up for rent protests to forcibly protect peoples homes; food drives to feed the destitute; and mobile medical clinics where "labor-aristocratic" doctors would work for no personal benefits to help those abandoned by society. Then, those very same people seemed much more agreeable to joining book studies and learning about ML thought. Strange.
It's almost like race is a capitalist construct and class is the true unifier once a class consciousness is built. Who would have thought.
EDIT:
This line was added as part of an edit well after the fact, however I feel this line is quite telling. Declaring yourself the supreme authority from which all have to learn is incredibly pretentious, especially when you present an utterly nonsensical idea.
What's their answer to the question of the labour aristocracy and settlerism?
Failed. Why?
Consider intersectionalism is not marxist. Eg trans emancipation is not add on-to fighting imperialism it is intrisic to fully understanding how capital works
There are more than enough "anti-capitalists" who evoke such sentiments without being marxist-leninist. That sentiment without the science is what leads to "pro-palestinian" westerners saying gazan proleteriat should unite with Israeli proleteriat against the "elite". (To which the correct response to that is: no you racist fuckhead the israeli jewish proleteriat is part of that elite)
COINTELPRO and direct federal repression and assassination of key members. Understanding the governmental response to the Rainbow Coalition is vital for any contemporary movement. That's the entire purpose of socialist experiments. Though using your logic, the Soviet Union failed, so socialists should never again set up a socialist state. A completely nonsensical logic.
I genuinely have no clue what this sentence is trying to say. From what I can understand, saying that intersectionality is not Marxist is so bizarrely incorrect that all I can say is that you are deeply unserious.
You are fighting a complete strawman here and conflating the material conditions and societal realities of two vastly different situations.
Consider the autodynamism of dialectical materialism and how the CPC learned from the Soviet's mistakes. The wolves have teeth are a given, we have to learn how to defend against them from previous mistakes.
on intersectionalism: it was deliberately developed in bourgoise acadaemia to evade how marxism is emancipatory for "minorities"
You are fighting a complete strawman here and conflating the material conditions and societal realities of two vastly different situations.
Israeli apartheid, ethnic cleansing and genocide is entirley western in its charecteristics; the false division imagined between "Israeli' and US"American" is the gap you are afraid to close.
Again, you are arguing a strawman which was answered perfectly by amemorablename in their comment below. I am disengaging as this conversation is completely unproductive.
Our comrade isn't wrong. It's a painful truth, but we have to face our privilege and complicity.
Who is more revolutionary: the Chinese billionaire defending the CPC or the white trailer parker family who supported Trump/Biden? The sex traffic rings are not extraneous of systems of power of capital, they are intrinsic to them. There was no mass revolt when the Epstein files were released but there are thousands of pogroms and attacks on minorities in the name of protecting white women against the Foreign Hordes. The complicity is not subtle. The scapegoating of elites against rest of westerners is to downplay then actual bribes of imperialist profits at play. It is why all your more visible communist parties will not really touch the question on labour aristocracy or settlerism.
Marxism-leninism is to truly recognise the classes we belong to as they are so we can then betray our classes successfully where appropriate. In the imperial cores it may mean we forgo collaboration with those who benefit more from their impetialist state than we can materially offer them and organise with those who don't - the lumpen proletriat, migrant workers and oppressed nations within nations.
Chinese billionaires aren't there to defend the CPC lol, what in the world. The CPC continues to succeed because political power is not in the hands of its billionaires, or any other billionaires. Billionaires would not be trustworthy to defend it, given they have fundamentally different class interests.
This is an overly vague characterization. Are we talking about somebody whose family members murder brown people overseas? Or somebody who filled out a ballot at election time? Because we as communists are supposed to recognize that bougie elections are largely farcical. Blaming the voting masses for a rigged electoral system is not a serious analysis.
Yeah, because revolution isn't a spontaneous mass action. I feel confident that you should know this from what I can recall of your posts in the past, so why are you talking like something else is true. BTW, the last time the US had major spontaneous mass action (the 2020 protests) was in response to racist police brutality and they got chemical weapons used against them (tear gas), they got beaten, some organizers were murdered. People always leave out this part when they want to lazily characterize the entire west as an inert mass of horribleness.
And in Ireland, some people are fighting back: https://thespectaclemag.substack.com/p/foreign-invaders-are-destroying-irelandand
But sure, let's ignore everyone who has ever sacrificed to try to fight the beast from within and lump them all into the same exact group. Again, this is not serious analysis.
It's not scapegoating??? It is a world of class and power difference. Getting paid slightly more or having slightly better living conditions is not the same as bombing civilians in order to try to create a failed state so that imperial power can be maintained and expanded.
Last I knew, PSL does at least acknowledge the settler issue being a thing. That said, I have never claimed the west does super well on the settler issue, but it's beside the point of what we're talking about. You were misusing a term that has a specific material meaning to make it mean something else that doesn't make any sense. And now you are doubling down in a way that comes off like you are defending billionaires. I think you need to take a step back.
If you want to say the west is not cleanly divided into elite and victim, that's fine, you can make that point. But don't go down this road that implies billionaires can have more revolutionary potential than somebody living in a trailer park because of their geography. I don't know what that is, but it has nothing to do with dialectical materialism or communism.
It's noteworthy that Ireland was once colonized, and the Irish who today are helping immigrants are doing so out of solidarity based on being a victim of british colonisation. Concerning America, an analogous phenomenon could be black and indigenous solidarity fighting against settlers, or to be more accurate, fighting settlers who are explicitly racist and dangerous.
Yes, that is a helpful thing to note and it's part of the reason why the conditions of the US are far more complicated than "white people being privileged and bad".
I would recommend H. W. Edward's Labor Aristocracy, Mass Base of Social Democracy. And then (re) read Day's essay on brainwashing (masses, elites and rebels) from Redsails thereafter.
You're part of a class on the global stage. Truly understand its material conditions and learn how you are going to betray it.
Best of luck
You are not preaching about labor aristocracy in this thread. You are taking it to some other level where billionaires are revolutionary because they're Chinese and people living in a trailer park in the US are villains because they voted for a US president. This is not an understanding of class on the global stage. It is a reductionist view of material conditions and contradictions that collapses the worldview into oversimplified nodes instead of broadening in order to be able to work through specific contradictions.
Consider reading it, and you may develop a different view.
Chareterisations of villains and heroes are besides the point. It is about understanding the science of who may be revolutionary domestically so we can spend most of our limited resources on them. This means carefully, and maybe painfully for some, understanding what it means to be a settler and bourgoisie proleteriat. It is step away from a simplistic dynamism of rich vs poor otherwise end up resulting in the same mistakes of those who Marx and Lenin criticised (eg Proudhon).
I found Cesaire snd Losurdo's works useful too. Eg https://redsails.org/discours-sur-le-colonialisme/
You literally asked this before like it was a serious question:
And have not addressed the problems with it at all. Going beyond "simple dynamism of rich and poor" does not mean defending the rich and characterizing them as more revolutionary than somebody living in a trailer park because they live in a non-settler country.
But that's not what you've been talking about.
You didn't say, "Here is where you should focus your energies domestically." You compared Chinese billionaire and white Yankee in a trailer park.
Don't say one thing, act like you're saying another, and then throw reading material at me when I don't agree, as if this will clarify.
BTW, I have read the redsails article on brainwashing before, probably multiple times by now. And it is incredibly overrated as an analysis. Here's a part that stands out to me:
The author almost realizes their own mistake, but then skips on by it and says nah, I'm not making that mistake. But they are. They are being incredibly reductionist in relation to hundreds of millions of people. They go on to double down on the reductionist rhetoric even more:
This is a nonsense argument. First, via no evidenced investigation, the author supposes that hundreds of millions of people, some of which are non-white peoples with a much more complicated history than this kind of rhetoric gives them any recognition of, share essentially the same point of view. This point of view is something they implicitly know, yet hide from. So now we have shifted from "they are brainwashed and this explains their lack of movement" to implying "they are a hyper intelligent hive mind who knows exactly what's going on and pretends not to because it feels good to pretend."
It's the kind of article that reeks of academic marxism. Of trying to "cudgel one's brains and develop an idea" without going out and investigating. The author encountered a problem, that sometimes people will reject the evidence you give them that challenges their existing worldview, and extrapolated a massive honker of a speculative generalization out of trying to answer why.
So rather than consider that westerners are acting in their self interests as beneficiaries of imperialism, and that material conditions affects what self-filtering occurs, we should instead double down on the idealistic notion that we should appeal to those who would benefit more from what the imperialist state than anything an actual anti-imperialist movement can offer them.
So for example in the US, instead of working with say original nation movements and the New Afrikan movements to better the US ML line we should focus on the settler nation folks by appealing to their empathetic sensibilities, which has so far failed for the past few centuries and no analysis about how to go about it differently that isn't much more than trade unionism and protest marches.
Fuck that White Noise. Being a westerner is a fucking disease.
Everything you've said so far has been a mix of campism and race reductionism with no actual class analysis and makes you sound more like the black American liberals that cry about white Leftists being racist and treat us as if we're one goose step away from joining the Klan.
Westerners exist as a class against the Global South and there are nations of folks that within the imperial cores that are more fruitful in targetting for whom destruction of imperialism is in their benefit.
Having a material basis for the organisation of movements means having an honest analysis on the nature of labour aristocracy and settlerism. Any succesful movement will offer more than the imperialist state can offer but that requires targetting sections of the popularion outside of typical voting blocks.
I'm not saying there isn't a creative way of getting a sizable amount of settlers to join the cause but history shows the track record has not been great.
Accusations of campism and race reductionism is why the CPUSA has devolved into what it is today. Want more CPUSAs, fucking have at it. Westerners cosplaying with sickle and hammer refusing to actually move the needle forward ain't my fucking problem. It offends your white sensibilities? Good.
The immortal science of marxism-leninism is despite Marx and Engels being white. It's that good. White is a social relation, it can be dismantled.
"Westerners" are not a class. You are bastardizing the word to the point of uselessness. May as well be calling humans a class that oppresses other primates.
My "white sensibilities" are not offended; what is offending me is your Vulgar Marxism that conflates CPUSA's pro-settler ideology with the entirety of the American Left. I didn't even mention the CPUSA and I don't care for them. I accused you of being a campist and race reductionist because that's what you're doing: making excuses for Chinese billionaires and placing race over class in a hierarchy of analysis instead of treating them as equal forces.
You say white is a social relation, you say it can be dismantled, yet you categorically dismiss the idea multiple times previously and assert that socialism in the West is pointless in what is very clearly Third Worldist drivel. Your analysis isn't productive; it is divisive. No one is going to deny that workers in the Core have it better than workers in the Periphery. No one is going to deny that this privilege makes it harder to persuade Core workers to socialism since they are used to better conditions. But to treat it like its a hopeless cause is defeatism.
What exactly do you expect comrades in the West to do? You seem convinced that we can't actually do anything useful to contribute to the international movement so should we just give up or runaway to AES states or what? Like, what is the point of saying all this stuff? What practical purpose does this kind of analysis serve?
Me: repeatedly points out that the situation in the US is more complicated than just white people
You: so you're saying we should work exclusively with white people?
I don't have any patience for this any more. I don't even know who you are arguing with.
Didn't you hear? Intersectionality is when you work only with white people. They're already so diverse as is! Who needs any other group?
Also all Westerners are white, and there is absolutely no nuance to that statement. Now, let me get back to planning my revolution with my vanguard party consisting of three guys and a dog we adopted.
Yeah, this whole thing has been baffling. Like you explicitly pointed out diversity in your experiences organizing with PSL, IIRC? In this very thread in response to darkernations? Isn't that a point of evidence toward the idea that not all western organizing is languishing in targeting white people?
I mean, I honestly don't know what some people want. Do they want white westerners to go hit up indigenous nations and the black prison population exclusively for revolutionary organizing? Or are the white westerners supposed to sit on the sidelines because they're too tainted to organize in the first place? (In which case, they'd then get criticized for letting non-white people do the sacrifice to change the world.) I never understand quite what the goal is. I get the settler issue matters, as does race, but I can remember two distinct times on here, this thread and another user/thread a while back, where in both cases the position was very strong about who to organize with and in both cases, I never got a clear answer on the logistics of actually doing it.
You have to analyse what went wrong before you to be able to move forward.
So you have reached the levels of ACP. Great. What do you have to offer materially that bests the imperialist state? Wouldn't that involve an analysis of the labour aristocracy and pitfalls of failed movements before?
WHAT. How is questioning the logistics of what you're saying make me like the ACP. Noteworthy that you didn't actually address my confusion/concerns in your response. All you did is imply I'm in favor of settlerism / want to defend it (a gross implication) and ask unrelated rhetorical questions.
You have not explained what exactly you want people to be doing or how. It's not clever to vaguely tell me to look to the past to learn for the future. This isn't a movie where I'm a young person on a hero's journey and go to an old person for advice. This is a discussion forum of equals. Act like it.
Intersectionalism is not diversity in a group. It is way of explanining oppression without cosnidering class analysis. Marxism supercedes it. Critical theories in the US eveolved as way to dance around marxism, class analysis and the imperialist characteritics of the western nation ie to remove internafionalism. It is why the CIA funded partly the Frankfurt School. For example, queer rights aren't an "add-on" to oppression, it is in intrisnic to understanding capital and the patriarchy needed to uphold it.
The white settler nation isn't just white people in the similar way zionists collaborated with nazis. Consider a nation as peoples rather than the bourgoisie borders enclosing them. Westerners are a class of which white supremacism has been the ideological vehicle suprastructure of which people of colour can join to uphold it. It's the similar thing with how for example patriarchy isn't the same as misogony.
Having an honest analysis of labour aristocracy would likely mean class betrayal, and that is a good thing.
From my personal experience with lumpenproletariat, they will always smile in your face while driving the sword to the hilt and calling you family. There may be an exception but I'm probably the only lumpenproletariat I know who wouldn't.
Which is exactly why Marx states the Lumpen are a volatile class, while simultaneously being easily swayed by socialist rhetoric. The destitute material conditions make the class ruthless.
The lumpenproletetiat are ones the captial class has excluded fron easy access as a prolteriat. The black prison populafion in the US exists even though it's a net cost to the state because it benefits the white population from labour competition and therefore preserves wage inflation and their greater cut of imperialist superprofits.
The likes of the PSL (only bringing this one up because of the rampant apologism on LG for this group. You can make the same case for all the other sickle and hammer cosplayers too) does not want to examine this dynamic because a greater share of the support draws from the latter group at the expense of the former. And the reason they have to particpate in electoralism is because there is not anything they can offer materially more to the white settler nation than what the inperialist state offers, and given they are marxist-leninist ie the material comes before the idea, it then begs the question why have they failed for several years to have any real question on labour aristocracy or settlerism.
The revolutionary groups are cleqrly those that you can offer maferiallly more than the imperialist state, which then will have to include the lumpenproleriat. It is why marxist prison movements are a thing.
Most of the lumpenprole around me traffic drugs, women, weapons, gambling and are heavily intertwined with the legal apparatus, so I'm not seeing them willing to work hard for the rest of their lives in hopes of reaping rewards for their children. Don't get me wrong, as long as you stay in your lane, they're not going out of their way to bother you, but plenty of tax free money is hard to beat.
Just from your example you can deduce there are more women lumpenproleteriat than the ones exploiting them. It is not that lumpenprolteriat are intrinsically revolutionary just like bourgoisie proleteriat aren't intrinsically revolutionary.
Capitalist states and the bourgoisie proletriat who work for them are already engaged in this.
Consider maybe that who is a crimimal and who isn't is intrinsically part of the captial power dynamics of any given capitalist society.
The trafficked women become complicit to lure more in. It starts with the drugs, or loss of a job, or both. They have to want to be done with all of it, and be done with all of it for a while. Even then, loyalty to the abusers is the last thing to die, especially when it's your blood family.
Or the black trailer parker section 8er who consider you evil incarnate for daring vote third in a crimson red fortress.
It's important to acknowledge skin privilege, but also a class traitor is a class traitor. Paying off the cops/judges/prosecutors privilege is just as real. When gang members, regardless of race work for the system that oppresses them, then what? Not all foot soldiers are souljas.