Do you, OP, believe there is no such thing as class reductionism?

It’s a wierd take, I’ve never seen class reductionism defined like that.

They properly understood the battles for racial and gender equality as constitutive elements of struggle for the working class

Yeah that’s right, but who is calling this class reductionism ? If anything it’s an intersectional analysis at its core, understanding the intersection between class and other conditions.

I’ve always seen class reductionism defined as an attempt to diminish the importance of those struggle, while here the author implies that Marxism fully incorporating those struggle is the thing they call class reductionism?

I think they are good faith and got gaslit by the strategy of dirty words that liberalism relied upon for decades. He must have came across a lib saying that any attempt to build solidarity of all struggles by using class analysis is “reductionism” in order to use the rightful bad connotation of the word to smear a deeply progressive and revolutionary concept.

There are patsocs, trots, and economists that are practically “class reductionists,” but nonprincipled marxist. Liberals do like to claim we’re “focusing too much on one identity (class) over others” which is silly.

What does this have to do with anarchism?

This just seems like needless bait.

Class reductionism is certainly not a myth, you need look no further than the patsoc phenomenon or stupidpol.

To elaborate, the primary contradiction in the imperial core is colonized vs settler, this upends the typical class reductionist position that the cis-het white male proletariat is equally oppressed as others.

I will also say that ignoring intersectionality as this post seems to imply is reactionary.