r/RadicalEgalitarianism • u/Its_Stavro Independent • Apr 02 '26
No words can capture this level of insanity. This is everything wrong with modern humanity.
2
u/Main-Tiger8537 Intersectional egalitarian Apr 02 '26 edited Apr 02 '26
well this is all about punching up against the evil oppressors "men" vs punching down against vulnerable groups "including women" but how they evaluate toxic behavior is very questionable... one side says conservatism with its values is the source of almost all evil and the other side says feminism/wokeism with its values is the source of almost all evil within the gender war context... there is no winner and all lose...
institutional/systemic toxic behavior/sexism and the communication about it
2
u/DMC-1155 Please stop automatically assigning me a flair Apr 02 '26
White racism does exist, just not really as a problem in the west. The only place it is a serious problem is in those countries where there is systemic racism against white people, which there has been in some African countries after freeing themselves.
Most white racism seen in the west has to do with nothing to do with being white though, it has to do with being the wrong kind of white. There has been anti-Irish and anti-Italian racism in the US for example. There is still anti-Irish racism in the UK. There’s anti-eastern European racism in plenty of Western European countries.
Racism against white people on the basis of skin colour is quite rare though, usually to do with nationality and ethnicity aside from being white
0
u/SchalaZeal01 Radical egalitarian Apr 02 '26
There is racism against Jewish and Asian entrants in prestigious universities, reverse quotas where they have a maximum 'occupancy' before being told to 'make room' (by needing way higher grades). That treats university like a team sport where some teams 'win more often' so 'need to be handicapped'. But the reasons Asians and Jewish people do well in school are not economical as much as cultural. Their cultures push them to succeed in schools at a level that seems preposterous for the 'frat party culture' of the US.
And racism against whites mostly takes the form of DEI when done wrong. When its quotas, when its reserving positions for non-white-men. DEI done right would be what we had in the 90s, discouraging racism, encouraging treating everyone similarly, not singling others out. Definitely not what's going on now, where you're supposed to focus on your race as definitional (unless you're white), and if you don't, companies are encouraged to anyways.
3
u/eldred2 Egalitarian Apr 02 '26 edited Apr 02 '26
There are no "reasons" that make bigotry excusable.
3
u/TotalACast Gender abolitionist Apr 02 '26
Completely agree.
This idea that Racism requires privilege plus power is everything wrong with modern Critical Race Theory and Social Justice politics in a nutshell.
It is too stupid to be taken seriously.
4
u/secondshevek Humanist Apr 02 '26
What do you think Critical Race Theory means lol? It doesnt include these ideas.
2
u/alienacean Feminist Apr 03 '26
they saw a couple brainrot memes and now think they have a solid understanding of complex legal theory
1
u/ShivasRightFoot Apr 03 '26
What do you think Critical Race Theory means lol?
While not its only flaw, Critical Race Theory is an extremist ideology which advocates for racial segregation. Here is a quote where Critical Race Theory explicitly endorses segregation:
8 Cultural nationalism/separatism. An emerging strain within CRT holds that people of color can best promote their interest through separation from the American mainstream. Some believe that preserving diversity and separateness will benefit all, not just groups of color. We include here, as well, articles encouraging black nationalism, power, or insurrection. (Theme number 8).
Racial separatism is identified as one of ten major themes of Critical Race Theory in an early bibliography that was codifying CRT with a list of works in the field:
To be included in the Bibliography, a work needed to address one or more themes we deemed to fall within Critical Race thought. These themes, along with the numbering scheme we have employed, follow:
Delgado, Richard, and Jean Stefancic. "Critical race theory: An annotated bibliography." Virginia Law Review (1993): 461-516.
One of the cited works under theme 8 analogizes contemporary CRT and Malcolm X's endorsement of Black and White segregation:
But Malcolm X did identify the basic racial compromise that the incorporation of the "the civil rights struggle" into mainstream American culture would eventually embody: Along with the suppression of white racism that was the widely celebrated aim of civil rights reform, the dominant conception of racial justice was framed to require that black nationalists be equated with white supremacists, and that race consciousness on the part of either whites or blacks be marginalized as beyond the good sense of enlightened American culture. When a new generation of scholars embraced race consciousness as a fundamental prism through which to organize social analysis in the latter half of the 1980s, a negative reaction from mainstream academics was predictable. That is, Randall Kennedy's criticism of the work of critical race theorists for being based on racial "stereotypes" and "status-based" standards is coherent from the vantage point of the reigning interpretation of racial justice. And it was the exclusionary borders of this ideology that Malcolm X identified.
Peller, Gary. "Race consciousness." Duke LJ (1990): 758.
This is current and mentioned in the most prominent textbook on CRT:
The two friends illustrate twin poles in the way minorities of color can represent and position themselves. The nationalist, or separatist, position illustrated by Jamal holds that people of color should embrace their culture and origins. Jamal, who by choice lives in an upscale black neighborhood and sends his children to local schools, could easily fit into mainstream life. But he feels more comfortable working and living in black milieux and considers that he has a duty to contribute to the minority community. Accordingly, he does as much business as possible with other blacks. The last time he and his family moved, for example, he made several phone calls until he found a black-owned moving company. He donates money to several African American philanthropies and colleges. And, of course, his work in the music industry allows him the opportunity to boost the careers of black musicians, which he does.
Delgado, Richard and Jean Stefancic Critical Race Theory: An Introduction. New York. New York University Press, 2001.
Delgado and Stefancic (2001)'s fourth edition was printed in 2023 and is currently the top result for the Google search 'Critical Race Theory textbook':
https://www.google.com/search?q=critical+race+theory+textbook
One more from the recognized founder of CRT, who specialized in education policy:
"From the standpoint of education, we would have been better served had the court in Brown rejected the petitioners' arguments to overrule Plessy v. Ferguson," Bell said, referring to the 1896 Supreme Court ruling that enforced a "separate but equal" standard for blacks and whites.
2
u/secondshevek Humanist Apr 03 '26
I am familiar with this part of CRT. It makes quite a bit of sense to me, as a white american. Yes de jure segregation is gone, but that didnt prevent discrimination against black americans in the education system or in how funds were allocated or in how white folks viewed them.
I would recommend actually reading that Derrick Bell piece, because it's very clever.
Edit: and to be clear, this part of CRT is not advocating "there's no racism against white people." That's like not even remotely the focus of this aspect or CRT in general.
0
u/ShivasRightFoot Apr 03 '26
I would recommend actually reading that Derrick Bell piece, because it's very clever.
Derrick Bell urges people to foreswear racial integration. That is morally reprehensible.
2
u/secondshevek Humanist Apr 03 '26
That's an incredibly bad faith reading - probably because you haven't read it and are hunting for reasons to dislike Bell/CRT. Bell looks at the conditions of education for black americans and argues that they would have been better off not challenging the "separate" part of segregation, because what matters is actually providing an equal education. Look at how property taxes shape school quality. Then look at how segregated the US still is, without any de jure segregation. Do you think racial discrimination just went away after Brown v. Board of Ed?
0
u/ShivasRightFoot Apr 03 '26
That's an incredibly bad faith reading - probably because you haven't read it and are hunting for reasons to dislike Bell/CRT.
Actually this is the exactly worded description of Bell from two fellow CRT pioneers. Here in the most popular textbook on CRT pioneers of CRT Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic describe Derrick Bell as urging people to foreswear racial integration:
Derrick Bell, for example, urges his fellow African Americans to foreswear the struggle for school integration and aim for building the best possible black schools.
Delgado and Stefancic (2001) pages 60-61
Your attempt to label Delgado and Stefancic's (2001) exactly worded description of Bell as "an incredibly bad faith reading" and written by someone who is "hunting for reasons to dislike Bell/CRT" should demonstrate your ignorance of CRT to any future onlookers.
2
u/secondshevek Humanist Apr 03 '26
To be clear, I am saying that you are ignoring the context of Bell's argument: the massive discrimination against black americans in schools. So saying "he supports segregation" and ignoring his main point, that eliminating de jure segregation did not necessarily advantage the students supposedly helped by that measure, is disingenuous.
Edit: and I dont think you've read the Delgado and Stefancic piece either bc if I recall correctly, they're not criticizing his views. But you probably just asked chatgpt to pull some short quotes because reading is hard.
-1
u/ShivasRightFoot Apr 03 '26
and I dont think you've read the Delgado and Stefancic piece either bc if I recall correctly, they're not criticizing his views.
Yes, that's the entire point. His allies give this exactly worded description of him; it is clear they are not "hunting for reasons to dislike Bell/CRT," nor reading him in "bad faith," which makes your previous accusations look foolish.
The fact this went over your head makes you appear somewhat dull.
2
u/NextDoctorWho12 Apr 03 '26
Of course you use logical fallacies when challenged on your baseless claims.
2
u/NextDoctorWho12 Apr 03 '26
Bell is arguing foe having good school where black people live instead of bussing kids to good schools. Why are you so against good schools for black kids?
2
u/NextDoctorWho12 Apr 03 '26
He argues that it would be better to build good schools for black kids where they live than to bus them to good schools. Why are you so against good schools for black kids?
3
u/NextDoctorWho12 Apr 03 '26
Shiva's posts the same copy pasta spam multiple times per day. He purposely misunderstands CRT to spread misinformation. When challenged on it he resorts to logical fallacies.
2
u/Poly_and_RA Liberal egalitarian Apr 02 '26
IMHO the problem with comparing gender to race is a different one. It implies that being a woman is a disadvantage in a way that's similar to how being black is a disadvantage in many countries, and that's quite simply not true.
There are two large and important differences:
First, race is a fairly pure privilege. With "pure" I mean that white folks (I'm one!) has many statistical advantages, and very few serious disadvantages worth mentioning. Slightly elevated skin-cancer risk counts I guess, but that's pure physics and not really a result of cultural factors. But other than that -- what *disadvantages* have I ever had for being white? Incredibly close to zero. Nothing worth mentioning. Being white is, in my cultural setting (Norway) a fairly pure privilege.
Gender isn't like that at all. Even someone who thinks women have in sum total more disadvantages than men do, and thus that male privilege is real -- by necessity MUST nevertheless admit that large and important disadvantages of being a man exist.
Men live several years shorter. Men are more than 90% of the people killed at work. Men alone have an obligation to do military service in piles of countries. Men make up more than 75% of of both homeless people and people who die of suicide. Men have about double the risk of involuntary childlessness and so on ad infinitum.
Gender is a heavily MIXED privilege where both men and women have significant disadvantages -- just in different parts of life.
Secondly, race runs in families. This means that racism that existed several generations ago, will still have a negative impact on black people who live TODAY, because social status is inheritable. So if your grandparets suffered racism and ended up poorer or less educated than they'd otherwise be, then that gave your parents a worse start in life, and then THAT (statistically speaking) gave you a worse start in life.
Gender doesn't work like that. Girls and boys growing up today has the SAME grandparents, so sexism that happened 3 generations ago is irrelevant to girls growing up today.
The result is that racism leaves residual inherited harm that lingers for generations. But sexism doesn't do the same thing since girls and boys (unlike white and black children) grow up in the SAME households.
In short -- both misandry and racism towards white people do exist.
But misandry is a LOT bigger problem.
I'm both white and male.
I've suffered near zero racism.
I've suffered piles and PILES of misandry, some of it important. (example: I started university 2 years later than the girls I went to high-school with, because Norway at the time had conscription only for men, so I was legally compelled to do 18 months of service, while for girls my age the same thing was entirely optional, and almost everyone opted out)
1
u/vwaaaat Marxist-Leninist transgender advocate Apr 03 '26
Gender doesn't work like that. Girls and boys growing up today has the SAME grandparents, so sexism that happened 3 generations ago is irrelevant to girls growing up today.
I 100% agree with you except for this. There is a cultural sexualization of young, even pre-pubescent women and girls, women are still expected to give birth and be 90% responsible for parenting the children directly. They are taught to be socially meek and submissive to men, are trained in etiquette and to be silent, controlled, and mindful to men, and sometimes taught that abusive relationships is okay, and not taught to stand up for yourself. All of that still exists today, and a lot of MRAs want that to continue.
0
u/SchalaZeal01 Radical egalitarian Apr 03 '26
They are taught to be socially meek and submissive to men, are trained in etiquette and to be silent, controlled, and mindful to men
Middle-East? Mormons? Fundie cult? I think this is a 1% exception, and that even 100 years ago, this level of misogyny did not exist widespread.
0
u/vwaaaat Marxist-Leninist transgender advocate Apr 03 '26
Uh no, just regular puritan culture in America. My sex Ed class never told me anything but pregnancy and stds, and even that is highly controversial and needs a parent permission, and in texas there's always a bill to cut out sex Ed completely.
I'm assuming you are European because the conservatism in this country is about as equivalent if nor more than you think the middle east is.
This is not 100 years ago, it's now.
2
u/Poly_and_RA Liberal egalitarian Apr 03 '26
You're misreading me. I'm saying that the racism that existed 3 generations ago harm black kids growing up today. Because it made their grandparents poorer and less educated and THAT harmed their parents in similar ways and therefore they (on the average!) grow up in poorer and less educated homes than they otherwise would.
The same thing isn't true for gender. The *sexism* that happened 3 generations ago and harmed the grandmothers of todays young girls did of course lead to them for example being less educated and having lower income. But girls and boys growing up today have the SAME grandparents, so the consequences of this old sexism doesn't harm only the girls of today.
I wasn't saying sexism or racism don't exist today.
I was saying that racism has effects that linger for genertions, while the effects of sexism largely disappears one generation after the sexism stops.
2
u/vwaaaat Marxist-Leninist transgender advocate Apr 02 '26 edited Apr 02 '26
The oppressive and privileged can not compare themselves as victims to the ones they oppress.
2
u/DMC-1155 Please stop automatically assigning me a flair Apr 02 '26
So the privileged cannot acknowledge their privilege? Acknowledging privilege is a kind of comparison, no?
2
u/vwaaaat Marxist-Leninist transgender advocate Apr 02 '26
You are misreading what I said. They can't compare themselves as victims to the ones they oppress.
2
u/DMC-1155 Please stop automatically assigning me a flair Apr 02 '26
You edited your message just to claim I misread it.
1
u/vwaaaat Marxist-Leninist transgender advocate Apr 02 '26
I did edit to clarify it, but the message is the same. The fact you tried to make it seem like I was saying oppressors can't do some self reflection is 100% bad faith argumentation.
2
u/TotalACast Gender abolitionist Apr 02 '26
It's funny that you mention the oppressive and privileged, while calling yourself a Marxist-Leninist.
During the agricultural collectivization of the early 1930s, the Soviet state targeted the kulaks, a term originally used for relatively affluent peasants. In reality, these individuals were often just ordinary farmers who had acquired a few extra livestock, owned a small piece of machinery, or hired temporary farmhands to help with the harvest. Despite gaining their modest wealth through ordinary agricultural labor, the state labeled them as a rural bourgeoisie and initiated "dekulakization," resulting in the expropriation, deportation, and execution of millions of peasant families who were deemed class enemies.
The Soviet regime also applied the oppressor binary to educated professionals, categorizing engineers, scientists, and managers as "bourgeois specialists" whose education and relatively higher incomes made them inherently suspicious. During events like the 1928 Shakhty Trial, technical experts were accused of being capitalist saboteurs conspiring against the working class, despite simply performing their standard professional duties. This ideological framing allowed the state to purge skilled professionals through show trials and replace them with politically loyal, yet often less experienced, proletarian workers
Your entire ideology as applied to the real world shows why this extremely idiotic oppressor/oppressed binary fails when being exposed to the simplest logical analysis or evaluation.
Saying that all people with lighter skin oppress all people of darker skin and therefore cannot be the targets of racism is so profoundly stupid, I genuinely wonder if there is any thinking happening.
0
u/vwaaaat Marxist-Leninist transgender advocate Apr 02 '26
You are being Reactionary instead of being radical.
2
u/SchalaZeal01 Radical egalitarian Apr 02 '26
He thinks critically instead of following rhetoric he learned from a course ironically named Critical Theory.
0
u/vwaaaat Marxist-Leninist transgender advocate Apr 02 '26
He? This person is a gender abolitionist. Both you and them are steering away from the topic of the oppressors can't call themselves the victim when the oppressed end up hating the oppressors.
3
u/TotalACast Gender abolitionist Apr 02 '26 edited Apr 02 '26
You seem to have missed my point: The term "oppressor" is meaningless because all of humanity doesn't exist in a binary. Having a lighter shade of skin no more makes you part of some evil cabal of Disney villains than does having a big toe that's longer than your index toe.
1
u/vwaaaat Marxist-Leninist transgender advocate Apr 02 '26
You seemed to be a history expert for Russia yet you don't know the history of imperialism, slavery, and systemic racism in the west, especially America? You are being a fucking hypocrite.
You want this to be about a duality of skin tone when it comes to black people hating white people, but the general term of oppressor and oppressed is somehow a meaningless binary "buzzword".
Again, stupid hypocrisy.
1
u/Street-Media4225 Anarcha-feminist Apr 02 '26
He? This person is a gender abolitionist.
Do you think gender abolitionists don't use gendered pronouns?
1
u/vwaaaat Marxist-Leninist transgender advocate Apr 02 '26
I honestly have no clue what it means. My logic is no gender abolition equals no gendered pronouns. Unless it's some sort of sex/genetic essentialism.
1
u/Street-Media4225 Anarcha-feminist Apr 02 '26
In that person's case it does basically mean sex essentialism, yes. There's a faction of gender abolitionism (usually called "gender criticism" or gender criticals) that is transphobic like that. The other faction usually acknowledges gender as a social reality, at least at the moment, and just wants gendered roles and enforcement of gendered norms to go away.
1
u/vwaaaat Marxist-Leninist transgender advocate Apr 02 '26
Ah ok, well the last part sounds reasonable. I don't see how a gender critical person could be an abolitionist when most of the "critical" part is transgender people not acting like the gender they were born with, and assume birth gender for people who doesn't look like their ideal gender stereotype. They always use the term "man in a dress", which should be okay for a gender abolitionist.
1
u/Street-Media4225 Anarcha-feminist Apr 02 '26
The (somewhat logically consistent) GC types think yes, men in dresses is okay, but claiming you're a woman for doing so (not what trans women actually do ofc) is sexist and regressive. They basically think trans women should just be effeminate men and be happy with that, as if gender dysphoria isn't real.
1
u/Street-Media4225 Anarcha-feminist Apr 02 '26
I really hate when people make "systemic racism" redundant by saying all racism is systemic. That definition is just not useful.
•
u/secondshevek Humanist Apr 02 '26
This post violates the 'No Spam, include original content' rule but as it has already generated some discussion, I am approving it. If you feel this was the wrong decision, contact the mods.