Who ever said that there was a race-and-gender-neutral capitalism? Your second point that it is unlikely that there ever could be is based on an understanding of the relationship between capitalism and race and gender as static and unchanging. Then, you try to have it both ways by claiming that you allow plenty of room for changes in the relationship between race and gender with capitalism. The last sentence you again are debating strawpeople, as no one claimed that capitalism has, or that it inevitably will, completely abolish race and gender oppression. However, if we have a truely fluid and socio-historically determined understanding of the relationship between capitalism and forms of identity oppression we must include as one possibility that capitalism would seek to overcome these forms of identity oppression for both legitimacy purposes (ie: hegemony) and to increase exploitation (ie: 'reduce all to the cash nexus'). Furthermore, it also has to be a possibility that capitalism would actually benefit from both old style identity oppression and the 'movement' to abolish this exploitation. Obviously I think we are actually in or entering the last possibility: that capitalism benefits from both the racalization and gendered oppression and from seeking to overcome it. Wouldn't this understanding offer the most dialectal way of understanding the relationships?
Brad