>racism existed before capitalism and even mercantilism so there's something wrong with that line.
I'll bite. I'll grant you (for the sake of the argument) that racism has always existed, some people have always hated/feared/distrusted those who look different than them, sure. But, that does not mean it existed in the same form throughout history because the social/material conditions give it its form. So capitalism has given racism power because it concentrates capital (effectively power) in the hands of individuals, and individuals are prone to being racist. These racist individuals used their capital, power and influence so that these other races would be treated unfavourably. They did things like fund "race science" studies, publish newspaper articles, influence laws, petition the government, etc. This created material conditions where one race did better than another, people grew up seeing this discrepancy without knowing the cause, but accepting the lazy conclusion of "they live worse because they are worse", a conclusion supported by the media owned by the aforementioned racists.
So no, racism is not a product of capitalism, but our current form of racism is. And getting rid of capitalism will not eliminate racism, but it will change the form racism holds. Specifically, it will remove the power that racists have in society. You might still have racists, but they will be powerless, unless they try to do physical harm, in which case they are not being only racist, but actively anti-social and they can be dealt with by the community. As long as racists keep their thoughts to themselves, they aren't a problem. You cannot eliminate "bad thoughts from people", nor should you try to by force. The best way to turn racists into anti-racists is to have them interact with the people they hate so that they can see that these are normal people just like they are. People who work and live together with other races are less racist than those who remain in a homogenous group.
Opposition of idpol means three things: 1) rejection of racial and other identity categories, with the understanding that they are "real" categories that are given meaning by our current socio-economic system, and knowing that "abolition of identity" at this point in history is not possible, but is desirable as soon as possible; 2) rejection of liberal tactics to mitigate the problems of racism: inclusion of minorities in leadership for the sake of their identity, reparations, acceptance of racial guilt, affirmative action; 3) refusal to engage in "identity politics", like ignoring flaws and problems to win arguments and form a narrative, or preference of ideas based on the identity of the person from whom they come, things like that.
The idea is that once everybody is working and living together as a class-conscious proletariat, notions of racism will simply wither away. We are materialists, we believe that the material world, our experiences of the physical reality, shape our ideas, and not the other way around. The way to make people not racist is not to convince them with some dank arguments, but to convince them with experience. Most racists rarely interact with the races they hate, except in passing or as participants in a market exchange, but never as people. Racists and the people they hate have more in common than not, and that's a fact. You can show people all the graphs you want, but until they actually engage with the others, no progress can be made.
This means that no progress towards anti-racism can be made anywhere where only ideas are exchanged, like an imageboard. Discussion of the topic only lends importance to it and amplifies liberal and racist voices, while muting leftist voices, because both liberals and racists are against leftists. Having idpol discussion on bunkerchan would turn this place into a battleground between two sides we don't like. It makes no sense.
As an aside, liberals and anti-racists have adopted the same categories racists use, but they try to use them "in a good way". Shit tactic because if you're trying to argue against someone's position, don't accept their wrong premises and then argue against the conclusion. The premises were literally designed to support their racist conclusion. It's a losing battle.
Everything written here is my opinion and does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the rest of the volounteer team.