Neurolimal posted:

....that's what most leftists have been saying, though? That it's important to address both social and fiscal leftism, and ignoring either causes both to lose.

Fluffdaddy posted:

who is this conversation you are holding for? This is the black people thread about black people. We don't want to hear your lovely sermons. If you don't have anything to say about black culture or black people or black things then get the gently caress out you are not welcome here.

Neurolimal posted:

They aren't going to be shamed into voting. On the flipside it's hilariously easy to bring them back into the fold without stepping on anyones toes.

I'm not tone policing or focusing on black people, I've been saying all this stuff to centrists online and in-person since the election was decided.


Just replying to show I'm not ignoring you; I just checked the exit polls and you are correct, black voters are the only demographic to have not gone more for Trump (8%) than they did for Romney (13%). Of note is hispanic voters, who voted for Trump a whole 19% more than they did Romney.

Sun Wu Kampf posted:

Housing prices are poo poo in SF because the local regulatory climate makes it a huge pain in the rear end to build stuff, especially apartments, for various reasons (NIMBY, not wanting THE POORS to move in nearby, etc).

....

This is not because of racism

Neurolimal posted:

I'm not tone policing or focusing on black people...

Majorian posted:

Yup. It's really heartening to see how much he seems to have learned his lesson.

Neurolimal posted:

My original post was pretty specific, things just got more general as the barreling ocurred and people looked for more things to get angry about.

New avatar is cute, kinda weird to see the focus on trying to shame a gay poster by talking about how much they love cum though.

Fluffdaddy posted:

After all, you ARE the real victim here. Seriously, get out. You have brought your tiresome poo poo into a second day.

There are a ton of black folks stuff to talk about and you are actively making yourself the center of attention because you people need everything to be about you.

Dog Jones posted:

What was his lesson ?

Neurolimal posted:

Getting replied to isn't a horrific burden, suggesting I'm victimized even jokingly is an insult to actual victims.

I just made 1-2 posts about something on-topic, and continue posting because people saw the need to branch out into other things, which I also enjoy discussing. Nobody is forcing you to read anything, you can just follow my new avs' advice.

Captain_Maclaine posted:

Early on in the primary, Bernie caught a fair amount of flak for focusing so exclusively on economic justice issues without comparable emphasis on the need to deal with systemic racism outside of the economic framework (ie: raising the minimum wage is a good idea, but doesn't help much if you can't get a job because of your skin tone). In large part this this came from an older leftie perspective that privileges economic matters, but to his credit he's recognized his own blind spot and down what he can to correct the shortcoming.

Neurolimal posted:

Getting replied to isn't a horrific burden, suggesting I'm victimized even jokingly is an insult to actual victims.

I just made 1-2 posts about something on-topic, and continue posting because people saw the need to branch out into other things, which I also enjoy discussing. Nobody is forcing you to read anything, you can just follow my new avs' advice.

Koalas March posted:

Black posters are saying we don't want you here. Get the gently caress out of our ghetto. You are ignoring every rule in the OP made to combat behavior like yours.

This is another great loving example of white privilege. Black people are telling someone that they don't want or need their advice/opinions and some cracker wants to stand his loving ground and not give a gently caress about our feelings, concerns and opinions because by God, someone WILL listen to him.

Captain_Maclaine posted:

Early on in the primary, Bernie caught a fair amount of flak for focusing so exclusively on economic justice issues without comparable emphasis on the need to deal with systemic racism outside of the economic framework (ie: raising the minimum wage is a good idea, but doesn't help much if you can't get a job because of your skin tone). In large part this this came from an older leftie perspective that privileges economic matters, but to his credit he's recognized his own blind spot and down what he can to correct the shortcoming.

This isn't to say that he's ever ignored racial justice issues, far from it. But it's hard to deny that the main focus of his primary campaign was one of economic inequality and injustice, which gave shorter shrift to race issues than he probably should.

Neurolimal posted:

The OP also says to relax, and if you do then you may find that you can still talk about black issues just fine in spite of me lurking, like you have before.

Fluffdaddy posted:

Oh goddammit what the gently caress is wrong with you?

Fluffdaddy posted:

Lets see here. White people enslave my ancestors for a few hundred years. The first free person in my family was named James..

Neurolimal posted:

The OP also says to relax

Dog Jones posted:

Right right. I kind of felt like that stuff was unfair because I'm not sure what Clinton ever did exactly to address race issues in a more satisfactory way than Sanders did. And also it seems like Sanders has a better actual record on the race issue than Clinton afaik. It really sucks that the fact that Sanders supposedly didn't address the race issue well enough is one of the main reasons Trump got elected!

Fluffdaddy posted:

Being a victim of white America is not an identity. It is a reality. You don't go to survivors of rape and say "hey its time to move on". You don't go to a family that lost everything in a fire and say "hey, maybe you should think about something else".

White people stole our past, our present, and we are doing everything we can to not steal let y'all steal our future too. But until you people clean up your problems and deal with your racism, we have done everything we can.

Majorian posted:

I'd advise against telling people to do this, when they're on the receiving end of a lot of oppression from people who look like you and me. Their outrage is pretty valid, and the right thing to do is listen, instead of telling them how to feel.

Fados posted:

but dude all I'm saying is even the fact you can frame your own position like so means the tools are in place to formulate a different future. i deeply admire malcom x because he dared propose a new and original shared future for all (against a more common 'return to the roots') . Although I don't agree with the particular content of his solution which was embracing Islam, I think the formula he proposed is truly revolutionary because it was universal. he wasn't just directly asking for whites to get their poo poo together but offering an option that he hoped would be inspiring for all, a neutral universal container where their differences could be subsumed.

And yeah i get that this is a purely speculative point, hardly provable by any statistic or whatever empiric fact you might ask me as a garantee that you aint gonna get hosed over in the end again so take that as you will

R. Mute posted:

I think Fados might be referring to past views on slavery and oppression, where anything written or said about those topics was still entirely centred on white people. Black people were essentially bit players in an essentially white story. You'd have histories written about slavery where black people would only be mentioned in relation to the oppression inflicted by white people, or when talking about abolition, it'd only be about the (white) political/electoral aspect. And while all these aspects aren't wrong, per se, by focusing on them and forgetting about for instance the black experience during that time or any type of resistance by black people, a one-dimensional image of black people in American history was created - that of the victim. And while black Americans were certainly victimised by white people, the problem was that their identity was reduced to just that single aspect of their identity. Hence protests about agency and efforts to treat black people as human beings for once.

This is a concept that I believe had its origins in postcolonial studies, where the objection centred around entire countries, cultures and civilisations being defined by colonisation down to the very periodisation of those countries' history (pre- and post-colonial).

So the calls for stepping away from framing black history within the victim role and giving black people agency isn't really a call to forget (though I can see how it can sound like someone accusing you of playing "the victim card"), but a call to empower. That said, I have no idea how and why it's being called upon in this conversation. Seems misguided.

e: oh he replied while I was typing this. Even more confused now.

Neurolimal posted:

I'm 100% willing to listen, I only say to relax because it sounds like arguing about this is causing them grief. I don't control the direction of the black cultural thread in the debate and discussion forum, i can only read and contribute to topics.

Neurolimal posted:

I'm 100% willing to listen, I only say to relax because it sounds like arguing about this is causing them grief. I don't control the direction of the black cultural thread in the debate and discussion forum, i can only read and contribute to topics.

My original post was that I felt that critiques of approaches towards social leftism have been accidentally ignored as tone policing; I didn't bring it up to inspire a pity party for the critiques writer, but rather that I want social leftism to succeed.

Neurolimal posted:

I'm 100% willing to listen, I only say to relax because it sounds like arguing about this is causing them grief. I don't control the direction of the black cultural thread in the debate and discussion forum, i can only read and contribute to topics.

Neurolimal posted:

I'm 100% willing to listen,

Koalas March posted:

Black posters are saying we don't want you here. Get the gently caress out of our ghetto. You are ignoring every rule in the OP made to combat behavior like yours.

This is another great loving example of white privilege. Black people are telling someone that they don't want or need their advice/opinions and some cracker wants to stand his loving ground and not give a gently caress about our feelings, concerns and opinions because by God, someone WILL listen to him.

Neurolimal posted:

I'm 100% willing to listen, I only say to relax because it sounds like arguing about this is causing them grief.

Fluffdaddy posted:

No, what he is doing is saying "Maybe you should black people like THIS instead of like THIS." which is absurd.

Fluffdaddy posted:

Let's see here, lets look at what being a revolutionary will get you in this country.

Huey P. Newton: Dead.
Malcom X: Dead.
Nat Turner: Super Dead.
Medger Evers: Dead in front of his own home.

AggressivelyStupid posted:

Fred Hampton: executed in bed by Chicago police with FBI assistance.

The list is real long

Neurolimal posted:

I'm 100% willing to listen, I only say to relax because it sounds like arguing about this is causing them grief. I don't control the direction of the black cultural thread in the debate and discussion forum, i can only read and contribute to topics.

My original post was that I felt that critiques of approaches towards social leftism have been accidentally ignored as tone policing; I didn't bring it up to inspire a pity party for the critiques writer, but rather that I want social leftism to succeed.

Neurolimal posted:

I'm not saying "dont promote social issues" or "black people are to blame", I'm saying that taking the attitude of "we outnumber whites now, gently caress their [actually everyones] issues" was a strategy that got us POTUS Trump.It's not about scaring whites away (every race turnout for dems was depressed), and more that not everyone is into having a political racewar, and minority groups are not a unified voting bloc to the extent people think. It's not as clear cut as "social minorities vs. fiscal whites".

It's hard to talk about because there ARE whites who are essentially telling black people and allies "shut up, you're inconveniencing us" that muddle the waters. But, in my opinion, anyone who is afraid to call out a bad strategy is not your ally. Good allies are like best friends, you want them to be honest with you and willing to keep you from doing something dumb, even if it makes them look like an A-hole.

Neurolimal posted:

accidentally ignored as tone policing

Fluffdaddy posted:

this is the place for you to shut the gently caress up and learn something

Darth Walrus posted:

The problem is that you're expressing a great deal of unfounded arrogance about the worth of your opinions, and ignoring the possibility that other people might be upset because you are saying upsetting/annoying things (which would place the onus on you to sit down and shut up). Basically, you're prioritising your desire to be heard over the opinions of everyone else in the thread, which makes you nothing more than a loud, tedious rear end in a top hat.

Gloryhold It! posted:

Fluffdaddy posted:

But she did address racial issues and she has a better record on race than Sanders.

He and his dumb supporters thought being one of the thousands of people who got arrested during the Civil Rights Movement was more important than Hillary dragging private schools and housing authorities in the south violating the Civil Rights Act.

She visited a school one city over from my hometown in the 70s and had to put them back in their racist place.

Between that, her constant push for protections for women, which include POC women, she has a way better record on standing up for us, which is why we overwhelmingly voted for her in the Primaries and the election.

Fluffdaddy posted:

Its funny how white people like to pretend we are being tricked into voting for people when our votes don't match their narrative. It is almost as if they think we are incapable of understanding the issues.

They hold us to a higher standard and question our voting habits harder than they do their racist relatives who have voted for racists the last 2 centuries.

Neurolimal posted:

stop trying to have the last word, and move on

stone cold posted:

Dog Jones posted:

What did she do to address race issues? Every time I heard her talk it was a lot of insubstantial bullshit to my recollection. I didn't know about that thing she did with the private schools that sounds interesting. Its interesting especially in light of the fact the work she did expanding the prison industrial complex and helping to build the school to prison pipeline. What do you think about Clinton in re: to the criminal justice reform and welfare reform that happened in the 90s? I thought all of that poo poo was a disaster for black people.


Hey I hope you aren't putting words in my mouth!!

Dog Jones posted:

What did she do to address race issues? Every time I heard her talk it was a lot of insubstantial bullshit to my recollection.

Fluffdaddy posted:

I am not going to give you a blow by blow about Clinton's racial record. And last I check she wasn't the President in the 1990s, her husband was.

quote:

Even as a child she thought in terms of mobilizing constituents for her causes, organizing neighborhood carnivals or clothing drives for migrant workers. As a young teen she helped her youth minister, the Reverend Don Jones, in counseling black and Hispanic teens from the South Side. “She would think things through to see what would be appealing to the group,” recalls her brother Hugh. “We would just follow along as little brothers.”

R. Mute posted:

I feel like people are going to trip over you saying that the only way for the side without power to modify the relationship is seize power from the other - that's what the references to agency are about. It should be noted that the oppressed can always take steps to modify that relationship, but this will always be limited by the willingness of the powerful to cooperate (unless, as you said, you go full seizure of power), so that goes right back to putting the onus on the powerful.