|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
DaveWoo posted:Sorry, that idea is far too radical for the folks in this thread. Accurate now that you're here.
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 05:14 |
|
|
honestly if hillary had advocated for any form of justice at all i would have been content
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:"It does not solve racism, therefore the only reason you could want it is because you are racist." Calibanibal posted:honestly if hillary had advocated for any form of justice at all i would have been content
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:I agree that policy advocacy is part of campaign strategy, but Robbie Mook listening to his computer algorithm instead of activists doesn't have anything to do with policy advocacy. Staffing a campaign with yes men doesn't have anything to do with policy advocacy. Misallocating campaign resources and ignoring important geographic and demographic groups doesn't have anything to do with policy advocacy. The more important those issues are in explaining the loss, the less important "failure to advocate for leftist policy in an honest and believable manner" becomes. This is fundamentally the same argument as 'Wall Street isn't going to stop racism'. No one believes you when you make this argument because no one believes you have any genuine interest in changing Dem policies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
Mister Facetious posted:I would love to know how people believe "A livable minimum wage for all citizens" = racism. Because some of those citizens are white and therefore already hegemonic and instead greater and more achievable change would come from addressing issues of diversity and its not my job to educate you what those are or how they'd be addressed, PoC_reacts.gif That's about as far as I've gotten.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
I suppose that if you are comfortable enough yourself, it's easy enough to forget that others still need food, shelter, medicine, data... And the struggle then becomes a rhetorical thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 20:37
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Accurate now that you're here. Hey, now, DaveWoo is a drat good poster, and I think he probably agrees with most folks here more than you realize.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
The whole thing is bullshit anyway because minimum wage is something you can affect with concrete policy (such as a raise) and racial issues aren't that so much. That's why the only answer I ever got on this thread for asking for an alternative that would address racial inequality was "reparations" Which seems like a form of economic justice but that can't be because we all know economic justice isn't racial justice Oh and then the fact Bernie wasn't for reparations was used as an attack. Mentioning that neither was Clinton was met with silence (until the next time someone spoke about minimum wage and the cycle began anew) Hail Mr. Satan! fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Apr 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:I suppose that if you are comfortable enough yourself, it's easy enough to forget that others still need food, shelter, medicine, data... And the struggle then becomes a rhetorical thing. I really cannot overstress both 1. getting to an actual, IRL, organizational meeting 2. getting the gently caress of twitter jesus christ for personal well-being regarding that line of argumentation. You simply do not encounter that poo poo when folk are face-to-face and attempting to build coalitions instead of packing zingers into retweetable 140 character chunks
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:Because some of those citizens are white and therefore already hegemonic and instead greater and more achievable change would come from addressing issues of diversity and its not my job to educate you what those are or how they'd be addressed, PoC_reacts.gif So, do these people sidestep the fact that minorities have disproportionately higher rates of extreme poverty and single parentage situations which would be disproportionately improved over that of whites by increasing the minimum wage out of malice, or ignorance?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:The whole thing is bullshit anyway because minimum wage is something you can affect with concrete policy (such as a raise) and racial issues aren't that so much. That's why the only answer I ever got on this thread for asking for an alternative that would address racial inequality was "reparations" There's a lot more than that that can be done to fight racial injustice, though. Stuff like cracking down on racism and brutality in police forces, prosecuting companies and landlords for employment and housing discrimination, pushing for enforcement of the Voting Rights Act and fighting voter suppression efforts, or advocating for humane immigration reform? These are all super important things for leftists to fight for. If we don't fight for these things, then we don't deserve to say that we're interested in justice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Hey, now, DaveWoo is a drat good poster, and I think he probably agrees with most folks here more than you realize. Unless no-content whining suddenly counts as goodposting I can't really agree with you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
Majorian posted:There's a lot more than that that can be done to fight racial injustice, though. Stuff like cracking down on racism and brutality in police forces, prosecuting companies and landlords for employment and housing discrimination, pushing for enforcement of the Voting Rights Act and fighting voter suppression efforts, or advocating for humane immigration reform? These are all super important things for leftists to fight for. If we don't fight for these things, then we don't deserve to say that we're interested in justice. What if we increased the minimum wage, so that minorities could afford lawyers to sue the poo poo out of racist police/etc. organizations in civil court where it hurts- in their budget? You know, like better-off white people do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
Majorian posted:There's a lot more than that that can be done to fight racial injustice, though. Stuff like cracking down on racism and brutality in police forces, prosecuting companies and landlords for employment and housing discrimination, pushing for enforcement of the Voting Rights Act and fighting voter suppression efforts, or advocating for humane immigration reform? These are all super important things for leftists to fight for. If we don't fight for these things, then we don't deserve to say that we're interested in justice. But nobody ever says anything about giving up on those things. If anything the criticism of Clinton from the left were that she has done more harm than good on these issues so far, right now promises too little, and as such is not a credible reform candidate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:26
|
|
|
Mister Facetious posted:So, do these people sidestep the fact that minorities have disproportionately higher rates of extreme poverty and single parentage situations which would be disproportionately improved over that of whites by increasing the minimum wage out of malice, or ignorance?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:47
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:But nobody ever says anything about giving up on those things. I know, and I know it's stuff that we all genuinely care about. But it's something that leftists have to commit themselves to keep repeating. A lot of people of color are suspicious of white leftists' commitment to helping anybody but other white people, and again, there's some historical justification for that. We need to keep reassuring them that we're not going to forget about helping them, and that we take challenges that underprivileged minorities face seriously.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
Majorian posted:There's a lot more than that that can be done to fight racial injustice, though. Stuff like cracking down on racism and brutality in police forces, prosecuting companies and landlords for employment and housing discrimination, pushing for enforcement of the Voting Rights Act and fighting voter suppression efforts, or advocating for humane immigration reform? These are all super important things for leftists to fight for. If we don't fight for these things, then we don't deserve to say that we're interested in justice. Those are all super good things to pursue! But at the same time the one thing that does the most to give people more options in life and more ability to control their world is just to give them more money. For better or worse we live in a capitalist society and money can at least ameliorate basically any problem. Its vitally important we reform the policing institution yes, but at the same time if minorities could access better legal representation because they had more money they could better protect themselves from the existing racist cops. The most common form of voter suppression is to just not put any polling stations in poor communities. If poor communities were less poor they would have more opportunity to find where the polling stations *were* set up. Companies and landlords wield outsized power because the poor have no options. They have no savings to fall back on if they want to quit a poo poo job or move to better housing if their landlord turns on them. Economic security should be priority one because it touches on basically everything that sucks. You'll never legislate someone to be less racist, but you can legislate to give people the economic power to avoid racists as much as possible and downplay their effects. However, increasing economic equality hurts those already in power so they tend to avoid it as much as possible. Its way easier to talk about how racism is bad, or to pass the 'Racists Are Bad' Act and proclaim victory. It doesn't really do much though if the people still lack the access wealth provides to get those laws actually enforced. I mean, in theory there are *already* regulations that say its super bad to be a racist police officer. They just don't have any teeth because nobody cares.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:55
|
|
|
Mister Facetious posted:So, do these people sidestep the fact that minorities have disproportionately higher rates of extreme poverty and single parentage situations which would be disproportionately improved over that of whites by increasing the minimum wage out of malice, or ignorance? They don't want to pay more money in taxes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Unless no-content whining suddenly counts as goodposting I can't really agree with you. Dude's been making solid, thoughtful effortposts since before you'd ever heard of Something Awful. You and I can disagree with him all we like, but he usually posts in good faith IMO. Mister Facetious posted:What if we increased the minimum wage, so that minorities could afford lawyers to sue the poo poo out of racist police/etc. organizations in civil court where it hurts- in their budget? This would excellent, and I don't think I need to say that I support it. But again, employment discrimination would remain a barrier. Plus let's face the facts - it's not like courts, civil or criminal, are uniformly free from discrimination, either. Increasing the minimum wage is A Good Thing, and I think it will attract a lot of working class PoC; we just need to keep in mind that they need more out of us if we want to work towards a just society.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:59
|
|
|
Taking a glance at income and net worth broken down by race is all it takes to understand what a load of bullshit the "Would stopping Wall Street end racism???" concern troll is. It's just rhetoric cooked up by 'socially liberal, fiscally conservative' types who are against the policies but don't want to openly say it and prefer to use other people as human shields.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 22:05
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Dude's been making solid, thoughtful effortposts since before you'd ever heard of Something Awful. You and I can disagree with him all we like, but he usually posts in good faith IMO. Get off your high horse, he's just shitposting in this thread. "since before you'd ever heard of Something Awful" with a 2009 reg date, it really doesnt get much better
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 22:26
|
|
|
This is the archetype of a concern troll post, right? "Well of course I AGREE WITH YOU, but i'm ~*concerned*~ that this isn't really enough!"
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Get off your high horse, he's just shitposting in this thread. "since before you'd ever heard of Something Awful" with a 2009 reg date, it really doesnt get much better I'm an '04; this is my third account. Maarek posted:Taking a glance at income and net worth broken down by race is all it takes to understand what a load of bullshit the "Would stopping Wall Street end racism???" concern troll is. It's just rhetoric cooked up by 'socially liberal, fiscally conservative' types who are against the policies but don't want to openly say it and prefer to use other people as human shields. It is, but there's a kernel of truth to it: neither the Dems nor any leftist movement is going to win without support from PoCs. Bernie et al. have done a much better job of reaching out to these communities since the primary; I hope they keep working on it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I know, and I know it's stuff that we all genuinely care about. But it's something that leftists have to commit themselves to keep repeating. A lot of people of color are suspicious of white leftists' commitment to helping anybody but other white people, and again, there's some historical justification for that. We need to keep reassuring them that we're not going to forget about helping them, and that we take challenges that underprivileged minorities face seriously. But as it has been pointed out these reasons for People of Color to not trust white leftists isn't because of the actions of white leftists but because of white centrists. White centrists worked to exclude black people from the New Deal and to limit how much they could benefit from the The Great Society. It wss the establishment of the AFL-CIO that excluded black membership. It was the radical anarchists and communists that fought for integrated unions. And when a poster brought these up a few pages ago it all fell on deaf ears and the usual gang of suspects that claim economic justice is racist were quite for that page and at least another before coming back up. So why are white leftists to blame for racist sins of white centrists politicians?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:But as it has been pointed out these reasons for People of Color to not trust white leftists isn't because of the actions of white leftists but because of white centrists. White centrists worked to exclude black people from the New Deal and to limit how much they could benefit from the The Great Society. It wss the establishment of the AFL-CIO that excluded black membership. It was the radical anarchists and communists that fought for integrated unions. And when a poster brought these up a few pages ago it all fell on deaf ears and the usual gang of suspects that claim economic justice is racist were quite for that page and at least another before coming back up. You're 100% right, but that's something that takes a bit of historical digging to find out. What's most important, IMO, is not necessarily proving that it wasn't white leftists who were to blame for PoC being excluded from social welfare programs; it's to prove that now, at this stage in history, we do give a poo poo about PoC's struggles and barriers and hurdles, and that a lot of leftists nowadays are, in fact, PoCs and women and LGBT people. That's all I'm saying: just as it's important to let the white working class know that we give a poo poo about them, we also need to make sure that every group we claim to fight for, feels like it's being listened to, and has a place at the table.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 23:00
|
|
|
But my issue seems to be that this "Oh POC can't trust white leftists because of these reasons" seems to be well a Centrist Clinton talking point they used to try and discredit all criticism from the left of her. One which now after her failure is being used by Centrists to discredit the attempt to swing the party left. Especially since these arguments that say that economic justice is rascist outs directly contradicted by the talking point of POC can't trust the left because of FDR and LBJ would have to also remember how every civil rights leader made economic justice a key part of civil rights and plenty of them were socialists that worked with white socialists. This argument has been grating on me for over a year because it's obviously bunk, but it's been accepted as fact
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 23:17
|
|
|
It's not "economic leftism" that can't be trusted but "economic populism", and the two terms aren't interchangeable
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 23:21
|
|
|
Majorian posted:You're 100% right, but that's something that takes a bit of historical digging to find out. What's most important, IMO, is not necessarily proving that it wasn't white leftists who were to blame for PoC being excluded from social welfare programs; it's to prove that now, at this stage in history, we do give a poo poo about PoC's struggles and barriers and hurdles, and that a lot of leftists nowadays are, in fact, PoCs and women and LGBT people. That's all I'm saying: just as it's important to let the white working class know that we give a poo poo about them, we also need to make sure that every group we claim to fight for, feels like it's being listened to, and has a place at the table. Is it possible to prove that, though? It seems undeniable that historically the white beneficiaries of progressive policies were at best ambiguous about their effects on minorities, quite content to limit their agenda on themselves. The truly universalist progressives would have been the exception. However, it is just counterproductive to assume that the mistakes of the past are a manifestation of some original sin, rather than a stepping stone towards improving leftist attitudes towards marginalized groups. Learning and improving rather than making essentialist assumptions should be an implicit assumption of any progressive movement.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
I mean keeping in mind that FDR had left opposition, both from socialists and also "mainstream" politicians like Long
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 23:24
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:It's not "economic leftism" that can't be trusted but "economic populism", and the two terms aren't interchangeable The scope of the populus being courted can change, and should be taken into account. Assuming that all populism is the same in targeting the same people is disingenuous.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 23:24
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:But my issue seems to be that this "Oh POC can't trust white leftists because of these reasons" seems to be well a Centrist Clinton talking point they used to try and discredit all criticism from the left of her. One which now after her failure is being used by Centrists to discredit the attempt to swing the party left. Especially since these arguments that say that economic justice is rascist outs directly contradicted by the talking point of POC can't trust the left because of FDR and LBJ would have to also remember how every civil rights leader made economic justice a key part of civil rights and plenty of them were socialists that worked with white socialists. I wouldn't overestimate how many people have heard this argument, or have internalized it, though. I don't think too many PoCs actually mistrust white leftists - it's more that leftists are rare enough in the U.S. that they don't get much exposure to them. Part of that is, of course, the fact that centrists tend to crowd them out of the spotlight. steinrokkan posted:Is it possible to prove that, though? It seems undeniable that historically the white beneficiaries of progressive policies were at best ambiguous about their effects on minorities, quite content to limit their agenda on themselves. The truly universalist progressives would have been the exception. I think it's at least possible to signal that you care. There's a reason why "I've been out LISTENING to REAL AMERICANS" is such a popular (albeit extremely hackneyed) refrain among politicians, regardless of their ideological stripes: listening and taking time to understand people's challenges signals that you care, and you want to learn more. And it helps that there are a lot more leftist PoCs, women, and LGBT leaders out there than there have been in the past. The more diverse the group becomes, the more different people of different backgrounds will feel welcome to join as well. I definitely agree that the argument that there's an original sin that keeps minorities from joining leftist groups is ridiculous, though. Leftist parties, movements, and hell, the political left writ-large, are all works in progress. We've evolved a lot over the years, and we're going to keep on evolving. Majorian fucked around with this message at 23:39 on Apr 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 23:26
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Bernie et al. have done a much better job of reaching out to these communities since the primary; I hope they keep working on it. He was actually doing quite well before and during the primary, thank you  (Berne would have won)
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 00:14
|
|
|
Older African-Americans were in the tank for Hillary and there was very much a generational divide, which is not unexpected since Hillary loving sucked at impressing the youth vote.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 00:18
|
|
|
call to action posted:He was actually doing quite well before and during the primary, thank you And he improved, and keeps improving. I hope he keeps it up, and I hope other lefties keep it up too. And yes, Bernie would have won. dont even fink about it posted:Older African-Americans were in the tank for Hillary and there was very much a generational divide, which is not unexpected since Hillary loving sucked at impressing the youth vote. I loved that clip they played on The Daily Show, where a reporter approached a group of college-age black activists who were trying to get out the vote for Hillary in...I want to say North Carolina: Reporter: Are you excited for Hillary? Activists: YEEAAAAAAH!!! R: Are you as excited for her as you were for Obama? Activists: NOOOOOO!!!!! Majorian fucked around with this message at 00:22 on Apr 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 00:19
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I think it's at least possible to signal that you care. There's a reason why "I've been out LISTENING to REAL AMERICANS" is such a popular (albeit extremely hackneyed) refrain among politicians, regardless of their ideological stripes: listening and taking time to understand people's challenges signals that you care, and you want to learn more. And it helps that there are a lot more leftist PoCs, women, and LGBT leaders out there than there have been in the past. The more diverse the group becomes, the more different people of different backgrounds will feel welcome to join as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 01:15
|
|
|
Calibanibal posted:honestly if hillary had advocated for any form of justice at all i would have been content she advocated justice for the defense industry
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:I cringe nearly into a singularity every time I hear that because my first thought is "okay who are all these fake Americans you're ignoring on purpose?" Maybe it resonates well with most people but I loving hate it. Yeah, the implication is usually, "People who aren't coastal elites," and when it's a Republican, of course "coastal elites" means "non-whites, Jews, LGBT people, etc." But the Dems really do need to move away from looking like the party of the professional class, because thats a look that hasn't served the Dems very well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 01:43
|
|
|
Anyone else read 'Shattered' (the HRC campaign autopsy)? No revelations but you really get the impression that while the Russia hacks etc. contributed to her loss, it came down to Abuela being a lovely candidate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 03:16
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:Anyone else read 'Shattered' (the HRC campaign autopsy)? No revelations but you really get the impression that while the Russia hacks etc. contributed to her loss, it came down to Abuela being a lovely candidate. Probably gonna spend an Audible credit on it tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 03:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 05:14 |
|
|
As further evidence that the Democrats are a waste, I present: My state party. God drat. Digging through charters and bylaws and I hate these people and what they have done here.
GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 04:56 on Apr 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 04:45
|
|
