|
Squashing Machine posted:We'll listen to these groups and their concerns. We'll tell them that their fears and pain are valid and we have strategies to help them. We won't cast mean-spirited aspersions about these groups because it feels good and we think we don't need them. We will do this or we will die. You won't do this, and you can't do this. White men and the people who hate White men are diametrically opposed to one another. You can't "care about White men's concerns" and vote to bring the entire third-world into the US simultaneously.
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 05:16 |
|
|
Jack2142 posted:Out of curiosity on the white male progressives section, should in a hypothetical world not take on leadership positions, not try to run for office etc. ? You should try to run for office and you should try for leadership but realize that white straight men run everything. It sends a message loud and clear to minorities when white straight male progressives try and muscle in on every little thing and run the table. We need, need minority candidates to project the message that we aren't abandoning anyone. We need more Obamas, and not more Bernies and Hillarys. At the same time a progressive is better than no progressive. Just constantly make sure you aren't shouting down minority voices, perspectives, and bids for leadership. Kamala Harris is a better bet than Sherrod Brown, through no fault of Brown's own. Venuz Patrol posted:republicans, unlike democrats, are willing to turn up their noses and vote for things that only tangentially benefit them, rather than only things that directly benefit them. trump is greedy, yes, but he's also egotistical, and that means he will gladly support the legislation his cronies provide to him as long as he's fellated sufficiently beforehand (we'll see if that is meant literally or not when his presidency starts). trump supports the policies of whoever talked to him last, and he is currently surrounded by the losers, failures, and menaces the likes of which have never been gathered under one roof before. I was not trying to downplay the danger. Our chances of being hosed are probably better than our chances of not being hosed. But a chance is a chance and there is still slim hope. We're better off fighting than laying down to die. Zarb posted:You won't do this, and you can't do this. White men and the people who hate White men are diametrically opposed to one another. You can't "care about White men's concerns" and vote to bring the entire third-world into the US simultaneously. This is a stupid position born of white privilege. Not 100% catering to white men all of the time is not the same as not caring about them and the whole Third World isn't going to come here because they're too poor to come here, rear end in a top hat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:13
|
|
|
Wait , we all missed something important since Donald Trumps president that means we're gonna get a ton of knock off President Trump products from China and Comic Books.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:18
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:You should try to run for office and you should try for leadership but realize that white straight men run everything. It sends a message loud and clear to minorities when white straight male progressives try and muscle in on every little thing and run the table. We need, need minority candidates to project the message that we aren't abandoning anyone. We need more Obamas, and not more Bernies and Hillarys. Yeah, I mean I like voting for non-straight white male candidates for the sake of being empowering and welcoming to others, but in the end, if the only progressive available is a straight white male, I'm going to vote for the straight white male. Out of Bernie, Hillary, Cory Booker, and a hypothetical Hispanic Cory Booker, I'm always going Bernie. But Elizabeth Warren or Keith Ellison into the mix, then sure, I'll go for that. Edit: I figured it'd go without saying that whatever progressive I'd vote for would have underrepresented minority issues at their forefront regardless. Suckthemonkey fucked around with this message at 07:22 on Nov 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:19
|
|
|
There are going to be porn parodies of President Trump.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:19
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:There are going to be porn parodies of President Trump. If we follow precedent, they will feature cameos of the actual Donald Trump
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:19
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:There are going to be porn parodies of President Trump. "Parodies"
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:20
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/dnvolz/status/796727992353509376
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:23
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:5. White straight male progressives are not the future of our movement. Yes, that means Bernie should not run again. White straight male progressives need to learn to sit down and shut the gently caress up some of the time, and to listen to minority voices. POC, LGBT, and female candidates are our future and we need to pave the way for them, not throw tantrums when we don't get to run the show. And for that guy reaching for his keyboard to say " poo poo like this is why white people voted for Trump/Bernie voters stayed home. There is a large bloc of white voters that feel marginalized/unrepresented. Bernie was able to motivate a lot of them by turning their anger and frustration towards the systemic economic issues that effect them and the political establishment & FIRE industries that perpetuate them. Trump was also able to motivate a lot of them by turning their anger and frustration towards attitudes exactly like the quoted one telling them all that they aren't important. Obviously it's tough to balance winning white working class votes with winning minority/female/LGBTQ votes (and working on issues important to both groups), but just telling cis-white men to sit down, shut up, and take the back seat politically ain't gonna work.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:26
|
|
why do you hate white straight men???" shut the gently caress up. Don't even. White straight men already get to be the center of the universe every other place. If you even want to pretend to be progressive don't you start that poo poo here.
|
KIM JONG TRILL posted:poo poo like this is why white people voted for Trump/Bernie voters stayed home. There is a large bloc of white voters that feel marginalized/unrepresented. Bernie was able to motivate a lot of them by turning their anger and frustration towards the systemic economic issues that effect them and the political establishment & FIRE industries that perpetuate them. Trump was also able to motivate a lot of them by turning their anger and frustration towards attitudes exactly like the quoted one telling them all that they aren't important. Yes, it will. The point progressives keep harping on is that Obama, noted black man, won these same white people who stayed home. It's because he ran on bullshit and fairy dust but also because his black man status ensured that minority voters would show up in droves for him because they didn't feel threatened by him. Bernie didn't draw the same people despite running on a similar platform because he's an old white guy and minorities have really loving good historical reasons to not trust white liberals with any goddamn thing. Also realize that you didn't really read what I said. I did not say "white straight male progressives should not participate." I said that they should not try and take over every discussion and every leadership position. White people can participate, but if we want to claim to not literally be a "white progressive party" they shouldn't be the center of the universe. Women are the majority of the country. LGBT and ethnic minorities make up an outsize proportion of the Democratic Party's base and still will even if we attract working class white people. They deserve to lead. Lightning Knight fucked around with this message at 07:32 on Nov 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:30
|
|
|
Well ya'll can rest easy that he doesn't want the Attorney General job
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:30
|
|
|
Former Hillary adviser: https://twitter.com/peterdaou/status/797663432900300800 https://twitter.com/peterdaou/status/797663048131612672 I've seen several other people from her campaign doing the same thing, squabbling with other Dems on Twitter Let's hope the left can stop fighting itself by the time 2020 rolls around 
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:31
|
|
|
RandomBlue posted:In my earlier post about specific people not believing Trump is a racist, one of their comments was that the belief that he is a racist is due to MSM twisting his words. (specifically in regards to Mexican illegal immigrants being rapists).
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:31
|
|
|
Secretary of 9/11
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:37
|
|
|
1-800-DOCTORB posted:Secretary of 9/11 Just go ahead and change the name of the country to Extremely United States of Post-9/11 America
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:42
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:If that's the direction we go minorities will stay home just as surely as white progressives did when Bernie lost, and we will keep losing. Here's the thing though, Trump got a sizable amount of minority voters considering his message. It wasn't close to even, but there were certainly quite a few. Hilariously unpopular with blacks, sure....but you can't quite say the same about other groups. Nearly 30% of Latinos, Asians, even more in what some polls call "Other race" in the most amusing shrug off in demographics. That is not a small number. That means if you have 3 non-black minority voters, just about 1 of them voted for Trump. And those are the ones that actually bothered to come out to vote. I'm not saying "What if white people don't want a progressive movement?". I'm saying what if Americans, period, do not want a progressive movement? What if nobody really has higher aspirations than "gently caress you, got mine" and maybe "Let's not *literally* have jackbooted thugs on the street rounding up undesirables"? Even the people who are most at risk from the worst case scenario here. Put bluntly, what if progressive politics just doesn't sell?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:43
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Ok I hit the anger/acceptance stage at work. Here is my big huge pointless effort post no one will read. There is some good stuff in here, but some of it is pretty dumb. Especially most of the stuff in the "Progressive" section. Once again, barely anybody said identity politics don't matter what so ever, quite literally everything that's in that point progressives pushed for. This also conviently ignores the decrease in turnout for minorities during the election, and that all groups voted for Trump more they did for Romeny. The centrist Democratic wing is hardly the expert toward what these people want. Not pushing trade deals that screw over American workers significantly is not a "cancer". White working class people don't vote solely based on race and homophobia, they elected the Kenya Muslim twice. This also goes for the other groups. I don't see why Democrats have to give up on gun control. There aren't going to be any gun owners switching to the Democratic Party, and you'll likely deflate excitement amongst Democratic voters. I say this as someone who is completely indifferent toward the topic of guns. You also seem to be over-estimating the "civil war" against the progressive wing. As for minorities, telling any minority to flee to Canada is very dumb, and I say that as someone who is biracial (part Arabic and part Hispanic). But most of all, it doesn't seem like you know why the Democrats lost. They didn't lose due to infighting or a whitelash. They lost because they didn't motivate their base to vote as Hillary had cataclysmic turnout rate that was low enough to lose to Trump who had a lower turnout rate than Romney's crap turnout rate. The party's main focus should be clearing house and getting new leadership all around. punk rebel ecks fucked around with this message at 07:47 on Nov 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:44
|
|
|
Mulva posted:Here's the thing though, Trump got a sizable amount of minority voters considering his message. It wasn't close to even, but there were certainly quite a few. Hilariously unpopular with blacks, sure....but you can't quite say the same about other groups. Nearly 30% of Latinos, Asians, even more in what some polls call "Other race" in the most amusing shrug off in demographics. That is not a small number. That means if you have 3 non-black minority voters, just about 1 of them voted for Trump. And those are the ones that actually bothered to come out to vote. I'm not saying "What if white people don't want a progressive movement?". I'm saying what if Americans, period, do not want a progressive movement? What if nobody really has higher aspirations than "gently caress you, got mine" and maybe "Let's not *literally* have jackbooted thugs on the street rounding up undesirables"? Even the people who are most at risk from the worst case scenario here. Well, that wouldn't be surprising, because the right has put considerable effort the last 40 years into burying progressive politics and putting every last nail into its coffin.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:45
|
|
|
Mulva posted:Here's the thing though, Trump got a sizable amount of minority voters considering his message. It wasn't close to even, but there were certainly quite a few. Hilariously unpopular with blacks, sure....but you can't quite say the same about other groups. Nearly 30% of Latinos, Asians, even more in what some polls call "Other race" in the most amusing shrug off in demographics. That is not a small number. That means if you have 3 non-black minority voters, just about 1 of them voted for Trump. And those are the ones that actually bothered to come out to vote. I'm not saying "What if white people don't want a progressive movement?". I'm saying what if Americans, period, do not want a progressive movement? What if nobody really has higher aspirations than "gently caress you, got mine" and maybe "Let's not *literally* have jackbooted thugs on the street rounding up undesirables"? Even the people who are most at risk from the worst case scenario here. Ok this is a different point. I meant to address this and forgot, I thought of that dumb essay hours before I wrote it. That's why I stressed that we can't declare war on the conservative wing. I think a lot of us work on the assumption that there's millions of secret progressives who would show up for the One True Progressive Candidate and it's bullshit. Yes our positions poll better when asked about individually, but the reality of it is, like Hillary, we have to face immense, long-term propaganda from the right against our causes. We will have to compromise with people we don't agree with because every. single. time a Republican wins office they make it harder for us to win next time. A compromise liberal is better than a hostile conservative. In the end if the country is really that dumb, then we are hosed. But we have to work on the assumption that we can win. punk rebel ecks posted:There is some good stuff in here, but some of it is pretty dumb. Especially most of the stuff in the "Progressive" section. There have been plenty of people from the primary to now saying we need to downplay identity politics and go hard on "no war but the class war." Even if it isn't common outside of here it's a dumb notion and we shouldn't buy into it. Minority turnout was also down in part because of voter suppression. Not pushing trade deals that don't screw over working people is a good thing but that's not what people want. When people scream "no TPP" they aren't saying "I'm mad this doesn't have environmental and labor protections." People actually want to be anti-immigration and anti-trade but from the left and it's dumb because Donald Trump's take on that will beat us every time. We have to come up with a different platform to win, because trying to out-Republican Republicans doesn't work. I didn't say white working class people vote solely on race or prejudice. I said they are racist and prejudiced. Recognizing this reality doesn't change that we need to appeal to them anyway, it's more about understanding that minorities won't be happy about it. We have to build a coalition and it means getting people who don't like each other to play nice. Gun control massively energizes conservative voters and doesn't do the same for liberal voters. I think we should work aggressively to curb mass shootings and organized crime but we can do that through better access to mental health facilities, better education systems, and ending the war on drugs. Also if we must do gun control we can, but we shouldn't campaign on it. There might not be a strong civil-war against progressives yet but there will be push back when we gain power. I also didn't say that minorities should flee, I said if they feel that they need to (and implicitly if they have the means) then they should. I don't fault people whose lives are at stake from running. I wish they didn't need to, but I don't claim to know what's best for them. You misunderstand me. I'm not just talking about why we lost the Presidency. I'm talking about why we have systematically lost control of every level of government for fifty years running. We need more than the Presidency to enact change. Obama proved that. Lightning Knight fucked around with this message at 07:54 on Nov 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 07:46
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Ok I hit the anger/acceptance stage at work. Here is my big huge pointless effort post no one will read. Mind if I repost this elsewhere on social media?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:03
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:Mind if I repost this elsewhere on social media? Go for it. You don't have to attribute it if you don't want. I suggest changing the quote to  tho.Edit: Also "Shumer" should be Schumer. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:05
|
|
|
I like that all of us arguing eventually came to the conclusion of, "Yo, gently caress the DNC." If there is one group in this election that refused to understand or listen to voters it was the DNC. Beltway rear end in a top hat leadership spent years clowning around during the Obama presidency instead of chasing down state races. Fuckers were so incompetent Obama had to get his turnout with an entirely separate organization he built. We all bitched hard about Lieberman and other blue dogs, but like.. in some states you're just not going to elect a progressive. Better to have a blue dog than anybody who caucuses with Republicans. DWS as head of the DNC for as long as she was was a huge mistake. Donna Brazile too. All those fuckers need to be out on their rear end. We have to clean house, and as much as I like Howard Dean he is not the dude to lead us into a new era. He should be a part of it, but not the leader of it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:07
|
|
|
RandomBlue posted:I understand your point and agree with you, but you also have to realize that a large portion of this country have been raised in religions that have drilled into their head since birth that doubting their beliefs is wrong and that believing in things without proof is one of the most important things they can do. Trying to overcome that conditioning and it's effect on their decision making, especially decisions that involve emotion, is extremely difficult. I know I wrote that post in a sardonic manner, but I'm genuinely worried that it might actually be the case that people cannot change. People aren't necessarily stupid, but they sure as hell are stubborn, and that fucks us over as often as that helps us.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:07
|
|
|
People can change but they can rarely be changed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:11
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:People can change but they can rarely be changed. Agreed. I don't think we have time to wait for old white people to die out and less racist young white people to move up. Further still I think that progressives need to brace ourselves for the idea that in the beginning it is going to be a loving tough, uphill battle to win back working class white people. We don't have to win all of them right away but I'd be shocked if we won the vast majority of them in less than thirty years. The damage done in the last fifty years won't be fixed in four.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:12
|
|
|
Zarb posted:You won't do this, and you can't do this. White men and the people who hate White men are diametrically opposed to one another. You can't "care about White men's concerns" and vote to bring the entire third-world into the US simultaneously. Speaking as a mostly white man you can go gently caress yourself. I keep bringing up LBJ for a god drat reason - his Great Society identified the poo poo that mattered to both whites and non-whites. It also involved lying to the former about how it would not help the latter. The majority of people out there are not political junkies - this election proved it. They only care that the next day is the same as the previous or slightly better. Focus on that. *edit* Lightning Knight posted:Yes, it will. Basically this, only without my drunken phone posting. citybeatnik fucked around with this message at 08:16 on Nov 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:13
|
|
|
porfiria posted:No, but this will never happen. There would actually be some kind of insurgency at that point. If the GOP tries to second convention the country to suicide we may have To rebirth America on their ashes. With some laws that make their thought reason to be reeducated.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:13
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:I think - and this may be the crux of the argument - that there are vastly differing definitions of 'racism' at play. Hieronymous Alloy posted:I don't think that analysis flies because Trump's racism is not sophisticated. It is blunt and crude. He refused apartments to black tenants. He said a judge could not rule fairly because he had Mexican ancestry. He called immigrants rapists. So on, so forth. My interactions with this one guy tells me that Mendrian is right. There is both the appeal to what ~*real racism*~ is and an appeal to Trump himself not being racist. Some of it is free excuse of old racism because people can change and some of it is just not seeing Trump's campaign comments as racist. When I pointed out that neo-nazis are excited for Trump and literally saying "this guy is talking about our issues" it turns into butt-hurt city about how I'm making the discussion charged. It is like having a map committee meeting with someone who doesn't think Canada is real. I can see how Trump's make-poo poo-up campaign did so well though. Opiates aren't the only source of fantastic dreams in the Midwest.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:14
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:People can change but they can rarely be changed.  It's something that really really sucks and always bothers me when someone asks "Can we change the minds of racists or sexists?" No. No, we can't. They have to come around and the best way to do that is through immersion where they slowly get their neurons rejiggered so they no longer connect the way they used to. That poo poo can take a while depending on the person and circumstances. Even then, not all beliefs can change. Some of the real emotional poo poo doesn't change because the experiences -- sometimes years of them -- that forged those emotions are still stuck way the gently caress in there and ain't never coming out come dementia or high water.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:19
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Ok I hit the anger/acceptance stage at work. Here is my big huge pointless effort post no one will read. If you write off the entire middle class you are making a huge mistake. Those white suburbanites have so much more in common with "the workers" and if we fail to focus on that unity as a message, then this whole project is doomed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:23
|
|
|
HorseRenoir posted:Maybe during Obama's first term, but the GOP establishment no longer has control over their party and things are just going to worse for them now that Trump is president and there's no longer a central figure like Obama for them to focus their hate towards. They now control all branches of government, and a 7-2 Scotus is only a matter of time. The establishment GOP will fall over itself sucking his dick and pretending they never said a single disparaging remark to their Great Leader.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:25
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Not pushing trade deals that don't screw over working people is a good thing but that's not what people want. When people scream "no TPP" they aren't saying "I'm mad this doesn't have environmental and labor protections." People actually want to be anti-immigration and anti-trade but from the left and it's dumb because Donald Trump's take on that will beat us every time. We have to come up with a different platform to win, because trying to out-Republican Republicans doesn't work. I disagree with the first point. I don't presume to know exactly what goes through everyone's mind who opposes TPP or freer trade in general, but I know that there are a non-zero (and I would argue likely substantial) number who dislike it because they fear (with some good reason, I'd also argue) that it will lead to their jobs going away (due to the absence of environmental and labor protections, although from what I understand, TPP was pretty good on this front). I can't quantify the extent that this is true, but the big Obama -> Trump shifts in Rust Belt districts makes me think that it's not just because they all hate non-whites. Why are you so certain about this? I'm sure racism may be an issue too, but I think the economic component is so entrenched that it's not possible to say it doesn't exist. Being anti-free trade used to be a old-school labor position -- definitely not a traditional Republican one -- and given that four years of Trump are not actually going to lead to an economic rejuvenation of the Rust Belt (and the fact that Trump is the outsourcing, contractor-stiffing, tax-evading rear end in a top hat that he is), I could see that a Sanders/Warren-style candidate could hold some sway (as I believe Bernie could've in the general). Either way, if not through being anti-trade, you're going to have to find some way to show that you give a poo poo about the working class's employment situation, and TPP definitely isn't it. White working class people are indeed racist and prejudiced. So are non-white working class people. So are non-working class people. I'm racist and prejudiced, and so are you (as well as pretty much everyone else in the goddamn world, as we're hard-wired to make judgments based on preexisting perceptions, even in the context of race). The better of us have realized this and make conscious efforts to fight against this and not let our biases control our thoughts and actions, but definitely a lot of people on the white working class side do not. But some do. I don't really see how generalizing an entire group of people (especially those, despite being white, my not be in especially good financial circumstances and certainly do not think of themselves as being especially privileged) as racist is exactly going to endear them to you and get them to join the coalition. Some of them could be reading your post and may think, "why do I want to spend my time fighting with people who don't even respect me?" Yeah, a lot of them voted for Trump, which definitely reflects, at the bare minimum, a lack of concern over racial rights and justice, but something like 1/3 of Latinos and around 15% of blacks did too. Do those votes testify to their racism as well?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:26
|
|
|
Mister Macys posted:They now control all branches of government, and a 7-2 Scotus is only a matter of time. The establishment GOP will fall over itself sucking his dick and pretending they never said a single disparaging remark to their Great Leader. You underestimate the amount of contempt that the GOP is capable of even towards their own.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:26
|
|
|
cheese posted:So after abandoning the working class in favor of trying to appease the middle class and getting utterly destroyed in almost every metric for the last 8 years, your new plan is to abandon the middle middle class to appease the working class? There is a difference between acknowledging that you just arn't going to win some suburban white voters and saying "gently caress it" to the whole middle class. Those white working class voters that went for Trump are like working class voters all over this country in one key way. They don't dream of someday having a better working class life - they dream of making it to the middle class. There are a whole lot more working class and poor people than middle class people at this point. Also we didn't abandon working white people, they abandoned us for Reagan. We didn't bother trying to recapture them, which isn't much better, but that distinction is important because we didn't choose to be massive gently caress ups with a weird base, the Republicans scooped our base out from under us. Also I personally think that the middle class people who vote for us will continue to vote for us because they tend to be motivated more by identity politics than economics. The majority of middle class white suburbanites vote Republican nowadays. The median income in America is, what, 60k? That's who we should be focusing on, because wealth inequality is so bad that the median income is approaching poor working class.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:26
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Yes, it will. This is retarded. The people that need to lead the Democratic party are the most capable politicians who can successfully push the best policies. There are no turns. There is no deserving based on past injustice. There is only equal opportunity. Anything else leads to the system of concessions that gave us candidate Clinton.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:29
|
|
|
Suckthemonkey posted:1/3 of Latinos and around 15% of blacks did too. Do those votes testify to their racism as well? I don't know about yours but the Castillian/penisulare side of my family was hella racist with regards to the older cohort. "White" Latinos like Cuban expats or my family have a wildly differing view than the natural born offspring of undocumented immigrants, LPRs, and those here on TPS.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:32
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:You underestimate the amount of contempt that the GOP is capable of even towards their own. I hope they enjoy being primaried by loyal Trumpers (Trumpets?) then.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:32
|
|
|
KIM JONG TRILL posted:Obviously it's tough to balance winning white working class votes with winning minority/female/LGBTQ votes (and working on issues important to both groups), but just telling cis-white men to sit down, shut up, and take the back seat politically ain't gonna work. I think the goal that I'd like to have hopefully do in the coming years is sit down, shut the gently caress up, and listen to what people are saying when they say they're hurting. I don't know if I can do anything to help directly but there have to be ways to help them get what they need done.There's too many white male progressives that just think they have the right idea and dismiss everyone's concerns that aren't there own. If this is wrong I want to find out why so that I can change what I'm doing to be more effective with them and on their behalf. Again, this could be totally wrong but I just want to know how to be more effective.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:35
|
|
|
Gun control massively energizes conservative voters and doesn't do the same for liberal voters. I think we should work aggressively to curb mass shootings and organized crime but we can do that through better access to mental health facilities, better education systems, and ending the war on drugs. Also if we must do gun control we can, but we shouldn't campaign on it. [/quote] A thousand times this. Atop it all, the particular approaches to gun control endorsed by most Democrats are as effective in curbing gun violence as the approaches of most anti-abortion people are in protecting children. It's not even a progressive cause so much as it is a socially conservative cause for city folks. If you want to spend any finite amount of money and effort on reducing murder rates, you're better off spending 100% of it on pulling back the war on drugs and strengthening social safety nets. And even if those programs also will get opposition from the same conservatives that fight gun control, they'll fight tooth and nail to protect guns in a way they won't to shut down the rest. Because that's something that affects their daily lives in a visible way. Seriously, call single-issue gun voters dumb all you want, but there's lots of people who are only affected indirectly and abstractly by many political issues but are affected directly and concretely by gun laws. And they know enough about the topic to see what factually ridiculous bullshit AWBs and rantings about mostly imaginary gunshow loopholes are. If you harp on those they'll just assume you're full of poo poo and malice on every other issue too. Yeah, most of the damage on gun control is done by this point, but that's no reason not to stop the bleeding. It's fine not to like guns and it's not like all restrictions are going to get equal pushback, but especially if you don't actually know the topic well shut up about it and focus on progressive causes where you can find some common ground. Like, literally you'll hurt your chances less inviting them to gay muslim weddings.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 05:16 |
|
|
Suckthemonkey posted:I disagree with the first point. I don't presume to know exactly what goes through everyone's mind who opposes TPP or freer trade in general, but I know that there are a non-zero (and I would argue likely substantial) number who dislike it because they fear (with some good reason, I'd also argue) that it will lead to their jobs going away (due to the absence of environmental and labor protections, although from what I understand, TPP was pretty good on this front). I can't quantify the extent that this is true, but the big Obama -> Trump shifts in Rust Belt districts makes me think that it's not just because they all hate non-whites. Why are you so certain about this? I'm sure racism may be an issue too, but I think the economic component is so entrenched that it's not possible to say it doesn't exist. I didn't say that the Obama to Trump shift in the Rust Belt was solely due to racism. The point is that people are tripping over themselves to be anti-free trade without understanding that the world isn't like it used to be. There was a big effort post about neoliberalism and what it is awhile ago and one of the correct points he made is that it and globalization are inevitable. They aren't a result of imposed policy, they are a result of social and technological change. Free trade is not the problem, a complete disregard for working people and wealth inequality is the problem. TPP was an odd thing because it was clearly designed as a measure to pen in the Chinese, not primarily as a free trade bill in and of itself. I'm not really hugely pro-free trade in the sense of seeking it out but realize that we haven't had a major direct war between two first-rate powers since World War II primarily because of a combination of nuclear weapons and free trade. Seeking to knee cap global trade will just push the standard of living down for everyone while increasing the likelihood somebody decides to make a major play for territory and resources. I'm not sure what pro-labor platform we should use, but I think some starting points include increased minimum wage, push back against anti-unionization, and most importantly a shorter work week. We could artificially increase employment fairly easily by just making it so people can't work as much, combined with a higher minimum wage to keep wages going up. Edit: what I'm trying to say is that the left being anti-free trade is the same thought process as the right being anti-multiculturalism. It's a nationalistic, nativist position that emphasizes our own importance at the expense of everyone else and focuses in on isolationism and detachment from a world we are responsible for loving over. quote:White working class people are indeed racist and prejudiced. So are non-white working class people. So are non-working class people. I'm racist and prejudiced, and so are you (as well as pretty much everyone else in the goddamn world, as we're hard-wired to make judgments based on preexisting perceptions, even in the context of race). The better of us have realized this and make conscious efforts to fight against this and not let our biases control our thoughts and actions, but definitely a lot of people on the white working class side do not. But some do. I don't really see how generalizing an entire group of people (especially those, despite being white, my not be in especially good financial circumstances and certainly do not think of themselves as being especially privileged) as racist is exactly going to endear them to you and get them to join the coalition. Some of them could be reading your post and may think, "why do I want to spend my time fighting with people who don't even respect me?" Yeah, a lot of them voted for Trump, which definitely reflects, at the bare minimum, a lack of concern over racial rights and justice, but something like 1/3 of Latinos and around 15% of blacks did too. Do those votes testify to their racism as well? Non-white people aren't racist in the same way though. Institutional racism versus personal racism. The question is why do white people who are racist expect to be respected if they don't respect others? Why are white working class people more deserving of our automatic implicit respect than black working class people and why is white anger at marginalization more worthy than black anger at marginalization? Further still I didn't make that point to say we should campaign on "white people are bad." I said that we as progressives must acknowledge this because we expect minorities to put up with being in the same party as these people and it's a lot to ask. The Puppy Bowl posted:This is retarded. The people that need to lead the Democratic party are the most capable politicians who can successfully push the best policies. There are no turns. There is no deserving based on past injustice. There is only equal opportunity. First of all, you're an idiot who subscribes to the just world fallacy. There absolutely is deserving based on past injustice. We enslaved black people for five hundred loving years and built a nation on the backs of their labor, on land taken from murdered natives. Secondly if minorities make up the majority of the base they deserve to lead because they are the majority. Seems simple enough to me. On Terra Firma posted:I think the goal that I'd like to have hopefully do in the coming years is sit down, shut the gently caress up, and listen to what people are saying when they say they're hurting. I don't know if I can do anything to help directly but there have to be ways to help them get what they need done.There's too many white male progressives that just think they have the right idea and dismiss everyone's concerns that aren't there own. If this is wrong I want to find out why so that I can change what I'm doing to be more effective with them and on their behalf. not an empty quote
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:39
|
|