All this coming from the very same people who insist that race does not exist.

Where do they draw the line on what constitutes White when, to them, genetic tests or ancestry checks reveal nothing about the blank slate individual, whose lot in life is determined purely by the outside world, its institutions, structures and systems and cannot be meaningfully improved by any doing of his own. Even a black who accrues great wealth merely from throwing a ball around on television is still 'oppressed' according to these morons. It is simply impossible for a black to escape oppression; the condition for freeing him is to harm Whites in some severe way.

Poles are both White and ethnic minorities. On top of being minorities, they have no history of colonizing others. Yet I am sure that they are senselessly lumped in with the rest of the 'oppressors'.

What about White-passing mixed people? Is someone who is 49% White and who identifies as White part of the problem? Is someone who is 75% White and who identifies as mixed not part of the problem? Because of their social constructionism, they must disassociate ancestry and genes from race and insist that race is only a matter of self-identification, or else they are conceding that race is more than mere self-identification.

But if race is purely a social construct, what stops every White person in the NHS from simply claiming to be mixed race? That would then force these morons to concede that there is more to race than mere self-identification—there is no way that these people are simply going to allow every White person off the hook just because they cease identifying as White. The assault on White identity is merely a stepping stone on the path to assaulting Whites in the most literal sense of the word—social constructionism is good for destroying identity, but they must switch back to a somewhat more immutable conception of race (with CRT being the framework for this) to come after people more generally, or else Whites can simply escape persecution by identifying as mixed.

Ask yourself how a 99.9% White Pole with no slaver ancestors is part of the problem and a 50% White mulatto whose White ancestry consists mostly of slavers is not? It seems apparent to me that the latter should carry far more guilt for slavery than the former if either should carry it. But the world says it is the exact reverse! Madness!