nothing. if you read it, buy into it, and internalize it, then just accept that you're not a member of the proletariat revolutionary class. that's its whole thesis.

edit: here it is from the actual book (that most people who tell you to read it haven't fucking read)

The actual history disproves the thesis that in settler Amerika "common working class interests" override the imperialist contradictions of oppressor and oppressed nations when it comes to tactical unity around economic issues. The same applies to the thesis that supposed ideological unity with the Euro-Amerikan "Left" also overrides imperialist contradictions, and hence, even with their admitted shortcomings, they are supposed allies of the oppressed against U.S. Imperialism.

...

The thesis we have advanced about the settleristic and non-proletarian nature of the U.S. oppressor nation is a historic truth, and thereby a key to leading the concrete struggles of today. Self-reliance and building mass institutions and movements of a specific national character, under the leadership of a communist party, are absolute necessities for the oppressed. Without these there can be no national liberation. This thesis is not "anti-white" or "racialist" or "narrow nationalism." Rather, it is the advocates of oppressor nation hegemony over all struggles of the masses that are promoting the narrowest of nationalisms - that of the U.S. settler nation.

bear in mind that the whole point of the book is applying labor aristocracy to the treatment of non-whites by whites (Euro-Amerikan) by viewing non-whites as an effectively colonized oppressed nation. so when he says "Self-reliance and building mass institutions and movements of a specific national character", he's talking explicitly about forming a breakaway ethno-nationalist movement.