I mean, M.L. Xavier has admitted to not bothering to actually read his post because a)he’s white and b)he likes to use the “caucasian dagger” line, which was intended to describe Stalin (which they have taken as a statement of white-supremacy). Regardless of what Wolfe wrote or how he goes about it, I think that’s dishonest, especially, when people are trying to doxx Wolfe and pick fights in subways and shit. Saying “He’s racist” and calling people to act against him because of these aforementioned things and cuz he shit on a book you like seems like an outrageous response (which is a different response than yours: calling him racist because he holds to a eurocentric form of marxism, and presumably calling it a day). Wolfe’s habit of posting other people’s articles with small preambles certainly seems like a safe way of causing a ruckus without having to actually argue anything, but he did post other viewpoints on it (including yours), which seems relatively honest — he could have omitted dissenting views entirely. I also think he summed up your post pretty well, saying you defended Settlers from the attacks posed by the two reviews he listed earlier. That doesn’t mean a complete endorsement, just that you responded to other writers opinion on a text. Iunno. Wolfe likes to stir up trouble for sure, and it will bite him in the ass, one day, but the response on facebook is utterly absurd. His misspelling of your name is lazy though.
I also am dubious about any claims to knowing what the motivation behind someone else’s action is. I’ve always found one’s politics on the left depends heavily on the people whom one is surrounded by at certain junctures in one’s life; that Wolfe fell in with Cutrone and became inmeshed in those politics is as much a matter of circumstance as anything. He could have fallen in with a different crowd, and developed maoist politics. Unless one can prove he got into Trotskyist Western Communism because it offered a Eurocentric analysis and praxis, I think claiming knowledge of his motivation here is a stretch. I think he believes his Marxist -Leninism by way of Trotsky is actually the proper analysis and praxis for the freedom of all people, regardless of their race. He could be wrong; I am not one to make a call one way or another — at least, not until I feel I have a firmer grasp on the dialectical method.
All this to say, I think the OP’s initial outrage is unwarranted in as far as they know very little about Wolfe or his politics, and they attacked him without even bothering to read the post. He basically said “It’s not a good book on White Supremacy”, not “White Supremacy doesn’t exist.” That he doesn’t really back that up means he’s not going to convince anyone, but it’s his opinion. Presumably he does believe racism is very much an issue one that needs to be solved. Why not start on a point of agreement, rather than finding all the ways in which you disagree?