I have read quite a few. They were not social darwinists, not at all.

These type of posts are what make me cringe at KTT2, joke or not. If someone said this about any other race that dude would be banned for life. We’re better than this

Cole caught feelings over a Noname tweet and now he's pretending that 10 years of being a big brain conscious rapper never happened because he got humbled by a woman and can't handle it.

Someone could try to make this a race thing, but it's really more about gender relations and not telling women, especially black women, to "be gentle" when they have a legitimate issue about something.

while they weren't out here saying "we should lynch blacks", they believed in distinct inequalities between races, and again, this manifested in phrenology among other things. It's a self-evident truth that one foundational aspect of Marxism is about repealing western egalitarianism; how this manifests in theory is up for debate though, sure. With this creates debates over what the exact differences are between people, which while not rooted in systematically oppressive facets, still lead to racism in a non-discriminatory sense. While the discussion of non-egailitarianism is not inherently racist ofc, the context of the time in which these discussions were had meant they typically came up in what would today be considered racist discourse; especially in regards to commments on blacks & jews.
While Marx was against systematic oppression through things like slavery, it's revisionist to state that Marx believed in the sme post-60s form of intersectional action and types of oppression which is currently talked about today in that sense. It was far closer to a belief rooted in inevitable systematic accelerationism economically and socially and the effects of such. While yes, he believed this would result in shedding ideas of social-derivative racial and nationalist concepts inadvertently, they made distinctions in social-derivative "race" vs inherent (i.e. genetic) "race". People say Marx wasn't a Darwinist because he rejected the time-sensitive context of Bourgeois Social Darwinism, but Marx and Engels participated in Darwinian discourse - this is inarguable, it's just a fact of history. The fact we don't have a different word makes this discussion harder to have.

White here.

ahem

F*** J Cole, f*** Noname, f*** anyone that says 'problematic' unironically, and f*** the ATF.

That is all. Thank you for your time.

"Labour cannot emancipate itself in the white skin where in the black it is branded."

His theory was absolutely not racist and didn't have the subtle racism you claim. The last words of the manifesto are: Workers of the world unite. Not: Europeans unite or whatever.

If his racism and eurocentricism mattered, then his ideas wouldn't have been taken up by non-white people the world over.

You're not understanding what I'm saying. Yes, he very obviously believed in the restructuring of systems which perpetuated racism because he believed social concepts of race held back progress for workers. This has nothing to do with what I'm saying, and I even acknowledge this, my point in saying that Marx believed in emancipation of labor being tied to social race. This has nothing to do with what I'm saying, nor anything I claimed.
This is a separate. You have to make a distinction between racism in terms of materialism and racism in terms of cultural or abstract being. Marx did not believe in racial equality in the traditional sense of the word; i.e. he did not believe, holistically, a european, an african, and a jewish person were "equal" in the sense of only being different by genetic physique. While he believed that societally, arbitrary castes and identities were created and the perpetuation of these abstract identities led to material oppression, he made distinctions between material inequalities (that which spearheaded material dialectic theory, and thus lead to emancipation of labor), and societal inequalities (those not born from labor, but from inherent material being).
Past these abstract identities, he did not actually believe that people were "equal" in the sense of being only differentiated by skin color. Again, while non-egalitarianism is not an inherently racist concept, the application by Marx & Engels more than typically tended to be .
He more or less insinuated the desire for "equality" in the sense of social interaction was only a result of capitalism; in other words, that as long as systematic structures were elminated, it's not that racism would be gone, but rather racism wouldn't matter since it wouldn't effect anything. He very much implied "well just because some races are stupid doesn't mean they don't deserve to have their needs fulfilled". Engels's summaries of working class histories were literally tied to biological racialism as one reason capitalistic inequalities even existed in the first place. He basically formulated that inherent racial & cultural inequalities were one of the main reasons capitalism grew so out of hand to begin with.

Interesting read

Can we ban this guy please

Crazy how the OP of this thread isn’t even black

Yes it is. Period, no discussion to be had

He can still self a***yze and question whether he should be participating in the convo or not

not sure why he brought that up

to some of these cats ktt is just a game show and whoever is the least white wins

Nah. I’ve seen posts of his before on similar subjects.

This is a classic s*** on white people post.

OP isn't even white, let's lock the thread

you gon answer the question or not

Great discussion in here

Cole is half white.

So.

depends on what your take is tbh. if you're defending Cole/Kendrick just cause you like their music and it doesn't go deeper than that you should just stfu

us white folk have a million other more important things to be speaking up about rn

It ain’t that serious fam, this is KTT ffs