Edit 2 - this is a vent/rant. Just ignore it. Or maybe I’ll delete it. Sorry.
I’m sorry. Y’all are too much sometimes. You need to give up one of those identities if you wanna be included.
Edit - I feel y’all aren’t getting my point. I didn’t mean this in a “bait” way. Straight white men have the most “reactionary” tendencies among all working people by far. They’re the most reluctant to socialism and get easily swayed by the bourgeoisie on “idpol” grounds. And yes this does effect other proles to an extent (such as gay white men being slightly more conservative than other LGBTQ people on average or white feminists being more TERF than bipoc feminists on average) but straight white men are the backbone of all reactionary movements in the West, with others forming a small minority. The entire debate about “class reductionism” vs “idpol” is a thing literally just because straight white men refuse to understand the importance of other identities. Like, look at MAGACommunism. It’s literally 99% white dudes.
…It is okay to think positively of this book here, lol? Given the response this thread got, I don’t think it is appreciated.
It’s controversial even amongst leftists. It’s an interesting analysis that provides an answer to why revolution seems to be betrayed by the white working class but people often draw the wrong conclusions from it.
However, from what I’ve read the analysis doesn’t really hold up when taken outside of it’s own internal logic. Or in essence, it’s a good explanation, but if you use its theory to form conclusions outside of the book you’ll often get inaccuracies.
