Race discourse and the definition of a POC is completely inherent to the time period in which people are from. The Irish weren't considered white just a little while ago. It's all incredibly arbitrary and created by whatever societal currents are sweeping people up into racial identity factions.
race is manufactured by those in power to split those they oppress into manageable groups;
"are you, the poorest white man not content with your lot that you should be better than the richest black man ?" etc etc
this all being artificial horseshit doesnt mean we can disregard it out if hand though, as the fractioning of the working class by race has created real friction.
too often that poorest white man ™️ has answered the question asked with "yes, and ill put in the ground anyone that threatens that status"
so i think its important that we, who all agree in this race discourse being nonsense, not be drawn into semantic argument over whether or not someone was "white" or not, when the question is if they were prejudiced against or not
No no. Stalin was part Russian and part Georgian which was specifically regarded as a separate race by the Russians of the era. "Slav" as we refer to it now pretty much refers to the entire eastern-european ethnicity. You could say that generally speaking "Slavs" of the period of the soviet union regarded Georgians as "not-slav" and there was animosity with a clear belief they were somewhat lesser than Russians. Russian superiority towards other states in the union was a consistent problem being battled against by leaders of the ussr.
I mean, now you're getting into the whole bizarre history of weird vintage racism in European countries where everyone hated everyone else and they thought some group of people living like 50km away was a vastly different and inferior race. But that's another story. I'm pretty sure that some anglo or whatever would just consider Lenin or Stalin a filthy slav or "asiatic". It's kind of cheating to consider them a "person of color" because, like, almost everyone was a "person of color" by that standard, according to where they happened to be at that particular moment.
Perhaps yes. But the point, generally speaking, was that during that time period Stalin was in fact regarded as a POC within the context of their cultural attitudes. A half-Georgian leader was a big deal to them of the time period.
Now? Not so much. We all regard them as pretty much the same.
This is the point. Our perception of race itself is arbitrary and heavily affected by whatever the active social currents are that are sweeping through society.
I can imagine that. For instance, I legitimately can't imagine a prime minister of Albanian descent in Greece even today. Some people were pissed at a former prime minister because he was like part American and an eighth Polish.
By standards now -- no he was not.
By standards then -- yes he was.
Race discourse and the definition of a POC is completely inherent to the time period in which people are from. The Irish weren't considered white just a little while ago. It's all incredibly arbitrary and created by whatever societal currents are sweeping people up into racial identity factions.
This is kind of a bad comparison. What you mean to say is that there was (and still is in some countries) racism against slavs.
race is manufactured by those in power to split those they oppress into manageable groups; "are you, the poorest white man not content with your lot that you should be better than the richest black man ?" etc etc
this all being artificial horseshit doesnt mean we can disregard it out if hand though, as the fractioning of the working class by race has created real friction.
too often that poorest white man ™️ has answered the question asked with "yes, and ill put in the ground anyone that threatens that status"
so i think its important that we, who all agree in this race discourse being nonsense, not be drawn into semantic argument over whether or not someone was "white" or not, when the question is if they were prejudiced against or not
No no. Stalin was part Russian and part Georgian which was specifically regarded as a separate race by the Russians of the era. "Slav" as we refer to it now pretty much refers to the entire eastern-european ethnicity. You could say that generally speaking "Slavs" of the period of the soviet union regarded Georgians as "not-slav" and there was animosity with a clear belief they were somewhat lesser than Russians. Russian superiority towards other states in the union was a consistent problem being battled against by leaders of the ussr.
I mean, now you're getting into the whole bizarre history of weird vintage racism in European countries where everyone hated everyone else and they thought some group of people living like 50km away was a vastly different and inferior race. But that's another story. I'm pretty sure that some anglo or whatever would just consider Lenin or Stalin a filthy slav or "asiatic". It's kind of cheating to consider them a "person of color" because, like, almost everyone was a "person of color" by that standard, according to where they happened to be at that particular moment.
Perhaps yes. But the point, generally speaking, was that during that time period Stalin was in fact regarded as a POC within the context of their cultural attitudes. A half-Georgian leader was a big deal to them of the time period.
Now? Not so much. We all regard them as pretty much the same.
This is the point. Our perception of race itself is arbitrary and heavily affected by whatever the active social currents are that are sweeping through society.
I can imagine that. For instance, I legitimately can't imagine a prime minister of Albanian descent in Greece even today. Some people were pissed at a former prime minister because he was like part American and an eighth Polish.