Christopher B. Hajib-Niles:
> the problem with the class war analysis is that there is no
> class war going on, at least not properly speaking. that's
> why your analysis does not explain all of what you call
> "racist" practices and what i call "white" practices.
I reason that inequality and unfreedom cannot be maintained except by force. Even if this force is, so to speak, frozen into boundaries, borders, grades, levels, slots, jobs, posts, deals, cabals, contracts, chains of command, and so forth, it is still force and if challenged reverts to its essential form, violence, enacted by police or military organizations, or by private parties with State backing. So there is always a class war going on. It is a sort of fundamental note which is then resonated by particular forms of oppression as each individual under the State struggles for power and advantage. One way to get advantage over other parties is to construct advantaged categories for oneself, for example the White Race as opposed to people who were to be colonized, enslaved, or segregated.
You can see where I would agree with Yoshie that racist practice -- in the case of the U.S., the creation of Whiteness -- was the result of police and judicial action. However, there are also private enforcers besides the police -- employers, bankers, landlords, local politicians, godfathers, gang leaders, and people who work for them -- who may also do the same thing for the similar reasons. These would produce alternative forms of racist practice not directly connected, necessarily, to police actions.