4 ms·

I agree, but isn't it necessary to reckon with the fact that historically, explicitly and intentionally racist policies (for example, Jim Crow voting laws) ofte

I agree, but isn't it necessary to reckon with the fact that historically, explicitly and intentionally racist policies (for example, Jim Crow voting laws) often laundered themselves, when convenient, through classism in order to escape scrutiny? Put differently, would you contend that poll taxes were not racist? Also, wouldn't we expect that organizations that are explicitly anti-racist would conclude that because classist policies or laws have racially disparate impacts, addressing them still increases racial equity even if they are ostensibly motivated by race-neutral class concerns?

lghh 4y ago
> would you contend that poll taxes were not racist I would not contend that they were not racist. I wasn't implying that every classist action is actually racist or vice-versa. Just that some are incorrectly labeled for rhetorical effect. > addressing them still increases racial equity even if they are ostensibly motivated by race-neutral class concerns Yep, nearly anything that effects class equity in the US will also effect racial equity.