Do note the usual talking point of minorities working against their own interests. Because we all know that "the interests" of minorities are determined by some white neckbeard. This has a history.

Nor did the Marxist elites, when in power, have much respect for the masses. The Yugoslav Communist Anton Ciliga tells of how in the early 1930s the Soviet Communist intelligentsia and apparat already saw the masses, as under Fascism, as merely the raw material of the party. Joseph Berger, the veteran secretary of the Palestine Communist Party, was told, when in postwar Poland: "As a Party member you have no business to talk about what the masses want. They will want what we want." In face, this was put in even more authoritarian fashion by the Hungarian Communist leader Janos Kadar, in his address to the Hungarian National Assembly in 1957:

The task of the leaders is not to put into effect the wishes and will of the masses. The task of the leaders is to accomplish the interests of the masses. Why do I differentiate between the will and the interests of the masses? In the recent past we have encountered the phenomenon of certain categories of workers acting against their interests.

Only when envisaged in the abstract, as verbal icons, did the proletariat or the masses figure positively.