Marxist Feelings on Exploitation

Alright. I was running on the treadmill today, trying to ignore Dr. Phil on the television--I specify the medium because he seems to be everywhere these days, perhaps even somewhere in your house--when I started thinking about my paper. This lead me to start drawing connections between our class readings and Invisible Man. I will admit at not knowing much about these Marxist tendencies that seem to run through our selected readings, so I will present my question to everyone in hope that someone can help me with this:
Those who are not familiar with Invisible Man should know that the "theme" of the novel is the search for identity. The nameless protagonist suffers all sorts of trials through his auto-narrated story, but the worst and final offense is that of ignorance - in the sense that everyone ignores him. In "Iron Man", the protagonist eventually emerges from his stupor (or hibernation) to lay waste to every enemy that has done him wrong in the past.
Here is the initial connection that I will build upon with my Marxist question; that is, a question regarding Marxism: Throughout Invisible Man, our hero is desensitized by the apathy toward his identity that is projected upon him. He travels underground to contemplate and come to terms with his invisibility. "Iron Man", I argue, is his reemergence into the world by means of extreme violence (more on this point will be explained in my paper). One identity is ignored (Invisible Man) while the other is exploited (Iron Man).
Now, this concept of exploitation came from an intersecting idea I had around my second mile. I thought back to the Fanon reading and regarded his writings on the necessity of violence in decolonization. This gave way to memories of the film Ethnic Notions, which documented the concept of racism in America as directed toward African-Americans. We are all at least slightly familiar with the resounding prejudice toward African-American violence during the first part of the twentieth century. They were perceived as a savage people, able to act violently at the drop of a hat. How would this prejudice (that of the violent-bred African-American male) play with the justified violence of Fanon's writings? Is inssurection an ambiguous way of playing into the popular racist notions of a dominating class?
Which brings me to my initial point.
Would a Marxist thinker be pulled more to the concept of the ignored minority or the exploited minority? In fewer words, which would they deem "better": ignored, or exploited?
Any sort of assistance with this question would be greatly appreciated. I hope everyone else is having a more exciting Spring Break than me. And watch out for Dr. Phil...

~Adam Johnson