The Origins of Black Neo-Marxism
“White” does not mean white. “White” in radical parlance means anyone of any race, creed, nationality, color, sex, or sexual preference who embraces capitalism, free markets, limited government, and American traditional culture and values.”
This philosophical concept belongs to Noel Ignatiev, a white American of Russian origin, who is the ideological founding father of numerous radical black movements in America. The author of this concept was even lucky enough to see his best students — Black Lives Matter (BLM) — in action.
Research into the work of this former Harvard professor finally answered the question of why BLM proponents are so negative about the perfectly rational slogan “All Lives Matter.” The fact is that the “black” in the interpretation of Ignatiev is a revolutionary Marxist. All those who do not agree with the Left ideology should, according to Ignatiev, be eliminated.
The slogan “All Lives Matter” blurs the concept of the enemy and brings confusion to the minds of revolutionaries. That is why any mention of “All Lives Matter” (or its version in support of the police — “Blue Lives Matter”) provokes such an acute reaction of the Left.
According to Ignatiev, “black” is not the level of pigment in the skin, but the level of adherence to the Marxist doctrine.
According to this definition, the great American free-market economist Thomas Sowell, although he has quite enough black pigment, is not “black.” The conservative justice of the U.S. Supreme Court Clarence Thomas is not “black” either. According to Ignatiev, many black Americans are not “black” just because they do not want to follow the Marxist dogma.
Noel Ignatiev (1940-2019) was born in America in a family of Jewish immigrants from Russia and was a third-generation communist. Moreover, he was not just a member of the Communist Party of the USA from the age of 17 but belonged to its most radical, ultra-left Marxist-Leninist wing. What was his most outstanding contribution to American philosophy? Here it is:
“Eventually white women can breed out, but my feeling is that if you are a white male, you should kill yourself now. If you are a thoughtful person, with a social consciousness who considers himself white, you will consider suicide.”
It was he, a convinced, uncompromising, and resolute communist, who in 1967 proposed the doctrine of “white privilege.” Not as a racial term, but as a somewhat modified Marxist term of the class struggle. The notorious “eradication of white privileges” is simply the standard Marxist wealth redistribution, expressed in newspeak.
Of course, the primary task for Ignatiev was never the physical extermination of whites. He was talking about the ideological purification of the “whites” from the principles of private property, individualism, and freedom — all concepts profoundly alien to the Marxists. Supporters of Ignatiev, aiming for socialism in America, have chosen a very peculiar way — the mass transformation of whites and squeezing out of them of all their “whiteness.” He sees a happy future as an all-American Gulag, where the re-education of “whites” into “blacks” takes place.
In this case, Ignatiev has no doubts about his righteousness:
“The goal of destroying the white race is simply so desirable, it boggles the mind trying to understand how anyone could possibly object to it.”
The showcase kitsch concentration camp CHAZ/Antifastan in Seattle, with its intolerance of dissent, is the pinnacle of the realization of Ignatieff’s ideas.
The kneeling of some American police offices, military personnel, and politicians in front of a crowd of “blacks” (“blacks” from a Marxist point of view, of course) is an acknowledgment of the supremacy of left-wing ideology over the law. This is a recognition of the supremacy of the leftist dogma over the Constitution and the oath.
Kneeling is a confirmation that America is not suffering from systemic racism but from systemic neo-Marxism.
Before citing another statement of Ignatiev, let’s consider its antithesis:
“Make no mistake about it: we intend to keep bashing the dead black males, and the live ones, and the females too, until the social construct known as ‘the black race’ is destroyed.”
No, this is not black racism. This is a systematic, canonical, and “ideologically correct” approach to the class struggle, designed to accomplish a dogmatic Marxist wealth redistribution. Why? Because since the 60s, all leftists have known the maxim: “The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution.”
That is why the two paramilitary wings of the Democrat party — the “white” Antifa and the “black” BLM — perfectly understand each other. After all, the race is not a problem. The main goal is the revolution. (By the way, the “white” wing of the stormtroopers was also created by the communist: Soviet agent Ernst Thalmann established Antifa in Germany in 1932.)
BLM stormtroopers are trying to provoke a racial war in America in the hope that it will develop into a civil war — simply because it is much easier to make a revolution during a war. One of the founders of BLM, Patrisse Cullors, does not hide the fact that BLM members are “trained Marxists” who “read Marx, Lenin, and Mao.”
Of course, the entire Ignatiev’s clink clank is hardly perceived by an unprepared audience. Therefore, for brevity, we formulate the quintessence of Ignatieff’s philosophy in a simplified form: racism is a form of anti-communism (meaning the “white racism,” of course).
Actually, many readers are familiar with such definitions. For example, “Zionism is a form of racism” has been an official UN slogan for many years. Therefore, the militant anti-Semitism of paleocommunist Ignatiev should not surprise anyone. Indeed, according to Ignatiev, it follows that “Zionism is a form of anti-communism.” Moreover, Ignatiev hated Christianity as much as Judaism (he especially hated Christmas and, oddly enough, Christmas trees).
The Race Traitor magazine published a policy article by Ignatiev in 1997 entitled “The Point Is Not To Interpret Whiteness But To Abolish It”:
“When it comes to abolishing the white race, the task is not to win over more whites to oppose “racism”; there are “anti-racists” enough already to do the job. The task is to gather together a minority determined to make it impossible for anyone to be white. It is a strategy of creative provocation.”