|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
Futuresight posted:White supremacists vote against their actual material interests all the loving time by virtue of their stupid ideology so I wouldn't use them as evidence for voters making correct choices. See, you believe racism confers no material benefit, so you are unable to understand why racists would do things.
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 17:00 |
|
|
People vote for the best candidate given their experience, which often means voting for the person they trust most. Clinton had decades and literal millions of dollars on that with black voters over Sanders. A trust that was gravely misplaced, because that trust was made with the expectation that Clinton could actually win. Yet she lost, and not just against anyone, but against Donald Trump. The fact that even white dems went for Sanders over Clinton, should have been a massive warning sign to black dems, that Clinton couldn't deliver in the general. Yet, because the voter experience in America is segregated by race, this warning sign was ignored.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:25
|
|
|
I think B5's argument is that the white supremacy offered by Republicans is somehow more beneficial to white voters than the policies offered by Democrats?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:25
|
|
|
Which is wrong, btw. And demonstrably so, if you look at who pushes austerity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:27
|
|
|
No I understand the benefits of racism, but I also believe it's a net negative even to white people because of the way it divides the lower classes and harms society. Not to mention how it leads to voting for Republicans.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:28
|
|
|
The argument is that white supremacy is something that benefits all white people and so it is in a white person's self-interest to support it. Now, there are multiple interests that any one person has, and people don't act as perfectly self-interested entities, so not all white people will support white supremacy or flock to the most racist candidate, for that matter.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:29
|
|
|
Yes but the argument is wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:33
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:The argument is that white supremacy is something that benefits all white people and so it is in a white person's self-interest to support it. Now, there are multiple interests that any one person has, and people don't act as perfectly self-interested entities, so not all white people will support white supremacy or flock to the most racist candidate, for that matter. And those multiple interests are other ways to analyze our political scenario right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:34
|
|
|
Futuresight posted:Yes but the argument is wrong. No it isn't. You are concluding that socialism is inherently better, but egalitarianism is not something everyone values. You can frame it as liberating the authentic human nature to convince people to value it, but that's self-righteousness and contrary to most socialist thought.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:35
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Emasculating EugeneJ on live teevee. Can you seriously respond to his question, because I like your ideas just not sure how that could come to fruition in this political climate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:And those multiple interests are other ways to analyze our political scenario right? Quit playing Sokrates.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
stone cold posted:which is why france overwhelmingly elected le pen and she took every department She won 35% of the vote (twice what her father got, and much much more than Nazis got in the 1970s when France was fighting a literal war against Algeria but the labor movement was strong, powerful, and capable of giving people hope that didn't rely on white supremacy), which is a pretty bad sign. She's a literal Nazi who unlike Trump didn't have the support of a major political party with a large loyal partisan base, yet 1/3 of the country voted for her anyway. Yikes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
Socialist policies won't be sold on egalitarianism. They will be sold as an attack on the ultra wealthy, and the working class will benefit the most from these policies.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:39
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:She won 35% of the vote (twice what her father got, and much much more than Nazis got in the 1970s when France was fighting a literal war against Algeria but the labor movement was strong, powerful, and capable of giving people hope that didn't rely on white supremacy), which is a pretty bad sign. She's a literal Nazi who unlike Trump didn't have the support of a major political party with a large loyal partisan base, yet 1/3 of the country voted for her anyway. Yikes. 1) France wasn't fighting in Algeria in the 70s or most of the 60s 2) The National Front is obviously a major political party in France now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:40
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:Socialist policies won't be sold on egalitarianism. They will be sold as an attack on the ultra wealthy, and the working class will benefit the most from these policies. A politics predicated on people being sheep who can be led by the nose wherever you like is hardly leftist. Nor is it likely to work. But I'm just part of the "reality-based community".
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:41
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:A politics predicated on people being sheep who can be led by the nose wherever you like is hardly leftist. Nor is it likely to work. But I'm just part of the "reality-based community". Why is socialism as an attack on the ultra wealthy predicated on people being sheep? Do you think it is impossible?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:44
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:The argument is that white supremacy is something that benefits all white people and so it is in a white person's self-interest to support it. Now, there are multiple interests that any one person has, and people don't act as perfectly self-interested entities, so not all white people will support white supremacy or flock to the most racist candidate, for that matter. Mmmm yes, the one unifying feature of racial supremacist fascist states was how well the people prospered under their rule, yep.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:44
|
|
|
Wouldn't the success of the Republican party in the past 50 or so years run counter to that theory B5?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:44
|
|
|
People are more sensitive to potential loss than they are to potential gains, this is a well established bias. This means fear of harm to oneself, once established, is difficult to dislodge. Further more, everyone knows everyone else is human, and will act in a similar manner. This means that people will, in a time of crisis, fall back on what they believe they can trust, because the act of establishing trust is difficult to do. It is also impossible for anyone to secure themselves, as individuals (without being a member of a group). Therefore, since racism exists, it continues to exist - everyone assumes it exists, thet trust it to exist, they act as if it does. It is a self fullfilling prophecy. The key to disabling racism, is to engage in the difficult task of building a new 'trust', that people know exist, and can therefore assume to exist. That cannot be done with words, or shame, or guilt tripping, or smug self righteousness, or any of the absurd behaviors on display by stone cold or b5. It is common action and unified structures, that lay the ground for emancipation. If you expect people to be virtuous before anything can start, for everyone to prostrate themselves before your superior intellect, you are not engaging in a mass political movement. You are engaging in a petty and vindictive power fantasy. You are an elitist piece of trash.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:45
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:Why is socialism as an attack on the ultra wealthy predicated on people being sheep? Do you think it is impossible? People will still figure out that redistribution of wealth is egalitarianism no matter how many snuff channels you put on basic cable, my guy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:A politics predicated on people being sheep who can be led by the nose wherever you like is hardly leftist. Nor is it likely to work. But I'm just part of the "reality-based community". Well look at it this way - if trends continue, automation will have eliminated a substantial amount of jobs in the next decade The Democratic platform will be: "We will ensure you a Guaranteed Basic Income so that you will not suffer while unemployed" The Republican platform will be: "We will create new jobs so that you can work again" Which platform will attract those unemployed voters more?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:1) France wasn't fighting in Algeria in the 70s or most of the 60s yeop but yeah the evian accords were signed in 1982 and not 1962, deffo it's amazing how many people will bend over backwards to justify white American racism
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Mmmm yes, the one unifying feature of racial supremacist fascist states was how well the people prospered under their rule, yep. Once again we circle around to the claim that white supremacy doesn't benefit white people. Funnily enough, the slaveowners of the Confederacy often shared this view.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:47
|
|
|
EugeneJ posted:Well look at it this way - if trends continue, automation will have eliminated a substantial amount of jobs in the next decade gently caress off, fascist.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:48
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:gently caress off, fascist. ?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:49
|
|
|
EugeneJ posted:Well look at it this way - if trends continue, automation will have eliminated a substantial amount of jobs in the next decade Actually, the 2nd one. People in America take value from jobs, as dumb as that is. If you sell it like that, Dems will lose.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:49
|
|
|
Peachfart posted:Actually, the 2nd one. Correct
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:49
|
|
|
rudatron posted:People are more sensitive to potential loss than they are to potential gains, this is a well established bias. rudatron posted:This is sort of the problem with a lot of other post-colonial theory, and their strategy. You build up an alliance united against a common enemy, but in order to do that you play down intra-group conflicts and some of the other real problems that still exist. Then, when the big enemy leaves, everything breaks down, and they all fight against each other. Because there's no ideological glue binding everything together. Ultimately, Islamism can only be of benefit to muslims, ergo it is a reactionary, tribalistic tendency.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:49
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:People will still figure out that redistribution of wealth is egalitarianism no matter how many snuff channels you put on basic cable, my guy. Your fear of creating a Jim Crow socialist state in America is interesting but hardly founded in reality.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:50
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:2) The National Front is obviously a major political party in France now. No it isn't. Le Pen left the FN party before the election so she wasn't running as their representative, and they only control 2 seats in the assembly
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:50
|
|
|
Pretty bold of the fascist to start down endorsing global war to bring the jobs back.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:50
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:Your fear of creating a Jim Crow socialist state in America is interesting but hardly founded in reality. quelle surprise that klansfish supports Jim Crow (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:Your fear of creating a Jim Crow socialist state in America is interesting but hardly founded in reality. What? I'm saying your idea of using Videodrome to fix racism is bullshit, Barry Convex. VitalSigns posted:No it isn't. Le Pen left the FN party before the election so she wasn't running as their representative, and they only control 2 seats in the assembly The hair, it is split.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:What? I'm saying your idea of using Videodrome to fix racism is bullshit, Barry Convex. I have no idea what you are talking about.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Pretty bold of the fascist to start down endorsing global war to bring the jobs back. Democrats have a narrow window to start selling progressive ideals before the average working American finds no value in them because they're unemployed and ashamed that Amazon Bot replaced them and made them feel obsolete
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:55
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:I have no idea what you are talking about. You are saying opposition to egalitarianism can be countered by selling socialism as a means to rape and murder people and take their poo poo, but as there are more than 100 people for every bourgeois person in the USA, this can only be done vicariously through televised snuff films. Also it presumes people are too stupid to figure out what redistributing wealth entails, and also you forgot to take off the white robes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:55
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Once again we circle around to the claim that white supremacy doesn't benefit white people. Funnily enough, the slaveowners of the Confederacy often shared this view. Slavery was bad for free labor though. It was only good for the superrich slaveowners. That's why it was so bitterly opposed by northern whites, they didn't want to be replaced by slave labor. The Free Soil movement (mostly) didn't oppose slavery because they were altruists.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:55
|
|
|
the one thing is, I'm confused on the substantive differences between leftists and liberals (in the typical enthusiastic Hillary Clinton supporter sense) on the ground, when it comes to fighting systemic racism. like, both groups seem to me equally concerned about demilitarizing the police, drug legalization, and ending mass incarceration. Both could agree, given knowledge of it, that redlining's effects persist to this day in ways the government could, and should ameliorate. The difference, to me, seems to be purely aesthetic, all about tribal signifiers. It's all about saying Racism is the Only Problem that Matters, and talking about class is verboten, for Reasons. I guess the subtext now is that even talking about economic class is racist. Generally, only the stupidest would say this out loud, but it's the meaning behind a lot of the other blather. Whether they believe it or not...some do, some are arguing in bad faith. It's funny, too, because Intersectionality has become a real buzzword in liberal circles, but they absolutely will not let class in as one of the things that can intersect. lol at liberals still believing America is a classless society, somehow, despite all evidence to the contrary. Despite all evidence that it's strictly stratified with low social mobility. the divide only really makes sense in the context of the primary. Howard Zinn would've been going all  at the idpol/socialist wars. Any non-stupid economic justice movement is also a racial justice movement , gender justice movement, disability justice movement, LGBT justice movement, etc. We look out for each other, we help each other out, in a coalition of the People Who Are Not Shitheads.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:56
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Slavery was bad for free labor though. It was only good for the superrich slaveowners. Nope, Free-Soilers believed free labor was inherently superior. You should also consider Mudsill Theory.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 17:00 |
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:You are saying opposition to egalitarianism can be countered by selling socialism as a means to rape and murder people and take their poo poo, but as there are more than 100 people for every bourgeois person in the USA, this can only be done vicariously through televised snuff films. Also it presumes people are too stupid to figure out what redistributing wealth entails, and also you forgot to take off the white robes. I didn't say anything about rape or murder you weirdo. Egalitarianism can be sold as a means to achieve a higher standard of living. You are the one presuming people are too stupid to realize what redistributing wealth would actually mean for them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 03:00
|
|