|
The Kingfish posted:Immigrants drive down wages. ok then make the mandatory minimum wage 15$ dollars an hour. that way everything is fair. there you go, not so difficult now was it? Oh wait here comes the part where you explain why you dont like that idea, meaning that you weren't actually interested in the welfare of lower wage workers after all and was just looking for excuses to blame immigrants.
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 23:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 17:41 |
|
|
khwarezm posted:I consider nationalism to be an incredibly powerful form of Identity Politics, so that's one of the reasons why I will say that Trump won by exploiting Identity Politics. DISAGREEMENT _____BOX____ How can you consider nationalism a form of identity politics? It's an actual ideology. Is Globalism identity politics too? Your second video has NOTHING to do with identity politics. He is literally suggesting economic policies that will help his voterbase. Here i'm just gonna post an exceprt: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/full-transcript-trump-job-plan-speech-224891 The incredible piss bitch posted:A Trump Administration will change our failed trade policy - quickly How are these NOT economic issues? _____ OwlFancier posted:The difficulty there is that unlike the economics of the 1800's there is no single enemy. It is entirely possible for people on the same side of economic conflict to be on opposing sides of a racial or sexual conflict. OwlFancier posted:I would suggest that probably all black people want to stop being racially discriminated against. And all gay people similarly would like the same thing for sexuality reasons. Al-Saqr posted:ok then make the mandatory minimum wage 15$ dollars an hour. that way everything is fair. The hiring of undocumented workers is already illegal, raising the minimum wage just incentives companies more to try to save a buck. But to continue your thought experiment to try to save it, we could give them all work permits, but that would have the follow up effect of making it even more lucrative to cross the border. The real root of the issue the existence of economic inequality between Latin America and USA. But trying to solve economic inequality in Latin America is a different issue then trying to solve it for just the USA, a much harder one at that. White Rock fucked around with this message at 23:49 on Jan 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:ok then make the mandatory minimum wage 15$ dollars an hour. that way everything is fair. The existence of a price floor doesn't change the underlying dynamics driving down salaries. True, the minimum wage would be $15, but there are a number of situations where immigrants can work for less than $15/hr, such as an owner-operated business, or if the laws regarding immigration/labor are toothless and immigrants work under the table for less money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
White Rock posted:How can you consider nationalism a form of identity politics? It's an actual ideology. Is Globalism identity politics too? Nationalism is literally the attempt to build a unified identity in order to organize people to strive for a goal together. If it isn't identity politics then very little is. It's stupid identity politics and dangerous to boot, but it has the concept of individual and collective identity and their interaction with politics at its very core. White Rock posted:And the buck stops there at those issues. the rich black people and the poor black people have ultimately vastly different interests. You can't have a big tent party different material interests get along. They have different economic interests but possibly similar racial interests. Economics may make them largely immune to some of the racial issues because say, rich people don't get arrested very often, but the bias remains. If we are envisioning a hypothetical economically equal society, I see no reason why that would guarantee equality in other areas.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 23:48
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Nationalism is literally the attempt to build a unified identity in order to organize people to strive for a goal together. If it isn't identity politics then very little is. It's stupid identity politics and dangerous to boot, but it has the concept of individual and collective identity and their interaction with politics at its very core. Nationalism is a construction, a potentially useful construction. Remember, you can redefine what it means to be American. The alternative is some sort of globalist individualist identity which is only accessible to the well off. OwlFancier posted:They have different economic interests but possibly similar racial interests. Economics may make them largely immune to some of the racial issues because say, rich people don't get arrested very often, but the bias remains. If we are envisioning a hypothetical economically equal society, I see no reason why that would guarantee equality in other areas. Again, i have no problem including analysis and working with race as part of an ideology. I just don't believe in identity politics in a vacuum. White Rock fucked around with this message at 00:02 on Jan 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
White Rock posted:____________ Are you serious? Dictionary definition of Identity Politics: "political activity or movements based on or catering to the cultural, ethnic, gender, racial, religious, or social interests that characterize a group identity." If that somehow doesn't include every Nationalist movement ever then the term has no meaning anymore. quote:Your second video has NOTHING to do with identity politics. He is literally suggesting economic policies that will help his voterbase. Here i'm just gonna post an exceprt: They are economic issues... refracted through the lens of nationalism which is coloring what Trump's policies are and as such are also examples of identity politics.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:ok then make the mandatory minimum wage 15$ dollars an hour. that way everything is fair. Even if the least possible amount that anyone works for is a living wage, the working class still gets hosed over by immigrants. You can't bandaid over such a basic supply/demand antagonism with a higher minimum wage. It doesn't work. The Kingfish fucked around with this message at 00:21 on Jan 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 00:08
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:Are you serious? Dictionary definition of Identity Politics: By this logic almost every issue that is constructed to appeal to a group on the planet is identity politics Whether to keep or repeal the ACA is an identity issue under the identities "Republican" and "Democrat".
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 00:10
|
|
|
I don't think idpol is necessarily bad but the currently fashionable style of idpol rhetoric ends up creating bitter internecine conflict and probably depresses deeper engagement with and within the Dem coalition.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 00:36
|
|
|
White Rock posted:Isn't the point of identity politics is something you are? If identity is just opinions the term seems meaningless. If identity politics was just "what you are" then it wouldn't need to exist, it would just automatically happen. If we're talking about the somewhat recent use of the term to reflect attempts by people to take traits of a person and use them to build a group identity in order to facilitate a political goal, that's obviously quite a constructed thing. A very sensible thing in that it's exactly what Marxists have historically tried to do with the working class but still a constructed thing all the same. Nationalism, Marxism, and racial/sexual/sexuality...al identity politics can all be put under a fairly simple umbrella of trying to construct a collective identity to inspire collective action. The latter two are generally productive, the former seldom so. I think understanding that is quite important because it helps you see that the method is difficult to criticise and instead you really do need to criticize based on whether you judge the goals of the people using it to be valid. The idea of someone who thinks that the class war is good criticizing other forms of identity politics for, well, being identity politics is rather silly. Much better to criticise them for having lovely ideas about what to use that method to achieve. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 01:00 on Jan 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 00:57
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:Even if the least possible amount that anyone works for is a living wage, the working class still gets hosed over by immigrants. You can't bandaid over such a basic supply/demand antagonism with a higher minimum wage. It doesn't work. On the other hand, for this thread, it seems to me it's less relevant what actually happens, but rather what people think happens, and Trump rode on a wave of people who bought into the "chinese robots are taking my masculine car manufacturing job" story while the other side didn't have a counter-narrative that actually effectively took on that fear. White Rock posted:By this logic almost every issue that is constructed to appeal to a group on the planet is identity politics Whether to keep or repeal the ACA is an identity issue under the identities "Republican" and "Democrat". Cingulate fucked around with this message at 01:17 on Jan 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 01:15
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:I know this totally makes sense in your head, but economics isn't as simple. The science on immigration doesn't paint it as a zero-sum game where jobs are simply "taken away". That can happen; but alternatively, greater prosperity for most natives, including the working class, can happen. Immigration definitely creates wealth, but such wealth is not equally distributed - and it makes sense for certain groups to fight immigration if, while decreasing the total wealth creation, the reduction of immigration would lead to a structural change that would benefit them personally. You could also argue that the strikers who fought against the employment policies of early capitalism were causing a dip in wealth creation, because they objectively did have that effect.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 01:27
|
|
|
NONE of the wealth generated under neoliberalism, whether from immigration, the depression of wages, the breaking of unions, the free trade agreements or any other source during the last 30 years has gone to the average worker. That's why threats of damaging the economy didn't work against Brexit or Trump. They know it doesn't matter if wealth keeps being generated without forcing a change in the distribution of the wealth between the classes. The wealth from immigration and outsourcing goes to the top 1%, meanwhile the poor in the native country get worse off, and watch inequality soar. Then they get pissed off, and you can either direct them towards socialism or they'll turn to other means of protecting themselves economically out of despair. Let's remember who the immoral ones are here - The plutocrats and the establishment of both parties, not ordinary workers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 04:55
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:I know this totally makes sense in your head, but economics isn't as simple. The science on immigration doesn't paint it as a zero-sum game where jobs are simply "taken away". That can happen; but alternatively, greater prosperity for most natives, including the working class, can happen. Do you really think a nebulous promise of future gains is going to be attractive for most people? The past 10 years has been a vivid reminder that "sure bets" for prosperity such as education and homeownership may not grow in value the way that proponents claim. There's a lot of reasons to be skeptical of the claim that immigration will generate long-term growth that outstrips the short-term losses it creates. Also, it's worth looking at who is immigrating from where, the benefits we've seen from different immigrating groups, and who ultimately reaps the benefits.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Nationalism, Marxism, and racial/sexual/sexuality...al identity politics can all be put under a fairly simple umbrella of trying to construct a collective identity to inspire collective action. The latter two are generally productive, the former seldom so. Can you please explain to me what the difference is between Nationalism and Racial identity? Surely they come from the exact same place? Never heard of ethnonationalism?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:Can you please explain to me what the difference is between Nationalism and Racial identity? Nationalism is a collective identity built around mutual citizenship of a nation state, bound together by ethnic, civic or cultural bonds. Racial identity is constructed from within and without a given often supranational group on the basis of shared ethnic and cultural origins and characteristics. You should really get clued in on all this stuff if you're serious about being a nazi, I mean this is national socialism 101 right here. Very basic stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:NONE of the wealth generated under neoliberalism, whether from immigration, the depression of wages, the breaking of unions, the free trade agreements or any other source during the last 30 years has gone to the average worker. Who is the average worker? Some kind of underemployed goonlord who feels like capitalism has failed because he should've been handed a 50k a year office job where he sends out a few emails a day and goes to a meeting or two? You're not the average american, sorry. The Saurus posted:The wealth from immigration and outsourcing goes to the top 1%, meanwhile the poor in the native country get worse off, and watch inequality soar. Compare the level of poo poo your "average" American has today to one in 1980 or 1960: a mcmansion in the suburbs, at least two cars, and electronic gizmos out the wazoo. Do you like asian food or do only cucks eat foreigner food? The Saurus posted:Let's remember who the immoral ones are here - The plutocrats and the establishment of both parties, not ordinary workers. No doubt, but you're pretending like whites don't benefit from cozy neoliberalism at all. Sure, the median 40k a year person got blown out but for anyone making more than that they've seen an increase in their standard of living. That fact that you think your plutocrat buddy trump is about to show those (((globalists))) who is boss is hilarious. Explains why he's stocking his cabinet with Goldman Sachs alumni right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 05:12
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:Will I link this article again? Here are some choice quotes to show how he could have done better but didn't: Thanks for this it was interesting to read. The real big problem with this is that idpol is far better for the Republicans than for the Democrats because they serve a single identity. Identity politics unites their entire base all across the board. Whereas Democrats then have to appeal to various minorities in order to get them on board during the primary, and then they have to appeal to a large chunk of the identity the republicans hold a monopoly on in the general. And every bit of progress in one demographic is essentially wasted on another. Not entirely because it builds up an impression of being a real progressive when you're consistent about advancing the entire coalition, but it's a much smaller effect than if you could just dump everything into one demographic. Which really weakens to Democrats vs Republicans. Actually that article made me think; would a candidate largely ignoring minorities but having well funded and supported advocates work? Like if they just gave Danny Glover a bunch of money and allowed him and a team of black activists to essentially drive the whole black outreach program, give them power to add to the platform, and guarantee them access over Bernie for X time a week, and promised cabinet positions, would that have potentially worked? Would you accept a candidate that essentially said "I'm a senator from Vermont so I don't know as much about this subject as I'd like, which is why I've assembled a team who will tell me what I should be doing in this area and given them power to dictate policy"? He could throw in something about how his main objectives will help everyone and the team is there to make sure it doesn't miss the black community, and to address other important concerns that economics doesn't. Or would it have to come directly from the candidate? Because it would be a lot easier to appeal to and serve a coalition if you ran and governed as a coalition instead of one person trying to be everything to every part of the coalition. But I don't know if people would take to that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 05:16
|
|
|
Higsian posted:Thanks for this it was interesting to read. you're ignoring a big part of the democratic black base, which is the black (mis)leadership class. You can tell this thread is mostly pasty folks peering into the fishbowl because they have no idea how these identity dynamics play out in practice when it comes to progressive politics. Identity politics have been fully recuperated by wealthy democratic interests and gets used to punch left/deflect from real issues all the time. See for example when Comcast and NBC wanted to merge, the Organization of Chinese Americans, Urban League, etc: all came out of the closet to say what a wonderful thing the merger was for minorities and how anyone standing in the way just didn't care about ____________ people. Ofc this is after all those groups took a bunch of money from Comcast with the quid pro quo of telling congress what a cool deal it was. The OCA is particularly egregious because nearly all their programs now have corporate sponsors, so when a group of shitdisturbing interns protested Wal-Mart sponsoring their intern program at the national convention a few years ago the OCA swiftly kicked them out and muzzled them from further protest. In most urbanized locations with significant african-american populations there's an incumbent class of black clergy, politicians, and business leaders that work hard to keep themselves in power. One of the ways they do this is through identity politics and ad homming anyone coming after them for ethics reasons or whatever as racists. You can give killer mike and other outsiders a platform and sprinkle cash, but in the end there's an incumbent group in power that can still mobilize community resources like the black church to hustle for your candidate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 05:25
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:Who is the average worker? Some kind of underemployed goonlord who feels like capitalism has failed because he should've been handed a 50k a year office job where he sends out a few emails a day and goes to a meeting or two? You're not the average american, sorry. The vast majority of Americans have seen their living standards drop or stagnate as the growth of the last few decades. Especially non-white Americans, in fact - Because most of the oligarchic class running things and pushing IDPol is white. quote:Compare the level of poo poo your "average" American has today to one in 1980 or 1960: a mcmansion in the suburbs, at least two cars, and electronic gizmos out the wazoo. Do you like asian food or do only cucks eat foreigner food? Most millenials can't even afford to move out of their parents' house, those mcmansions were all repossessed. I am a foreign immigrant, and I only eat vegetarian asian food. quote:No doubt, but you're pretending like whites don't benefit from cozy neoliberalism at all. Sure, the median 40k a year person got blown out but for anyone making more than that they've seen an increase in their standard of living. Rich whites benefit from neoliberalism just like rich non-whites do. Will Smith does not face the same struggles as everyday black Americans. quote:That fact that you think your plutocrat buddy trump is about to show those (((globalists))) who is boss is hilarious. Explains why he's stocking his cabinet with Goldman Sachs alumni right? He's publically and repeatedly spoken about wanting to bring jobs back to America, end China's currency manipulation, renegotiate trade deals, put taxes and tariffs on companies that outsource, and deport/prevent illegal immigrants who are used to undercut American wages. He also promised no cuts to social security, medicare and medicaid. If he decides to go back on his promises, then he's going to have a very rough time in his presidency, with the rising up of the working class on the right and the left against him. Hillary Clinton offered nothing for the average working class person.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 05:29
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:He's publically and repeatedly spoken about wanting to bring jobs back to America, end China's currency manipulation, renegotiate trade deals, put taxes and tariffs on companies that outsource, and deport/prevent illegal immigrants who are used to undercut American wages. He also promised no cuts to social security, medicare and medicaid. If he decides to go back on his promises, then he's going to have a very rough time in his presidency, with the rising up of the working class on the right and the left against him. He's publically and repeatedly spoken about all kinds of awful, unconscienable poo poo too, but according to you that's all just hot air. So what psychic gift do you have that allows you to divine the promises The Donald intends to keep and which (often contradictory) ones he intends to discard? The most likely case is that he'll cave to the interests of his capitalist cronies and throw the masses all the racism and scapegoating they want in order to placate them, because he's a selfish narcissistic piece of poo poo demagogue and nothing matters to him but his own power and prestige, you loving idiot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 05:37
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:The vast majority of Americans have seen their living standards drop or stagnate as the growth of the last few decades. Especially non-white Americans, in fact - Because most of the oligarchic class running things and pushing IDPol is white. Hahah, no. The vast majority of white Americans are far better off now than they were in the 1980s. White wealth in particular has only gone up over time:  The Saurus posted:Most millenials can't even afford to move out of their parents' house, those mcmansions were all repossessed. Your statement is contradictory. They can't afford to move out because homeowner equity is at an all time high again, which is a policy endgoal predicated on strict zoning and limited construction. Once again, middle class whites do not want to see their homes shrink in value due to affordable housing policies. Ownership society and and all. The Saurus posted:He also promised no cuts to social security, medicare and medicaid. If he decides to go back on his promises, then he's going to have a very rough time in his presidency, with the rising up of the working class on the right and the left against him. Well you just got loving played because congress is sharpening the knives for those right now already. The Saurus posted:Hillary Clinton offered nothing for the average working class person. Capitalism offers nothing for the average working class person, I agree. Trump is like a white Obama for people even more gullible than democrats.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 05:39
|
|
|
Populism is directly opposed to idpol, you have to make a choice. Again, no one's asking for and end to combating racism, or whatever other strawman you want to deploy, that you think is going to make you look sympathetic here. Link that article as much as you want, whose only sources are a bunch of anonymous 'staffers', it has an axe to grind and it does that from the start. It, like a lot of smears against Bernie, uses the reparations deflection to try and make him look racist "oh, so you support measures against income inequality but not reparatiosn?!?! Don't you know they're both pie in the sky ideas, according to my beliefs about what is achievable, which happen to exactly coincide with neoliberal idpol dogma?!?! Guess bernie was racist!". Like, you can pretend that Bernie was somehow given a fair shake, but he wasn't, and a lot of criticism came from 'minority community leaders', who had a vested interest in the success of the Clinton campaign and the democratic establishment more generally. Having an outsider come in and 'disrupt' that gravy-train automatically makes him a threat, regardless of what Bernie says or does when it came to minority issues, which he actually handled very well. But he wasn't treated with respect. BLM didn't steal the mic from clinton, then call all the audience racists bigots, just because they didn't want to listen to them. That's the kind of behavior BLM actually did do, and there's video evidence of it. How long are you going to live in denial here?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 05:47
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:Can you please explain to me what the difference is between Nationalism and Racial identity? It is possible to construct a racial class geared around fighting against racial inequality, in the same vein as one would construct an economic class geared around fighting against economic inequality. Nationalism as practiced doesn't generally have that goal, and tends to be centered around the concept of the nation-state whereby the state uses the national identity to control its populace. It does generally try to enforce things like racial supremacy for the majority ethnic population but that's largely a bread and circuses thing, minority populations make a useful scapegoat, there's little actual concern for the wellbeing of either majority or minority populations. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 05:51 on Jan 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 05:48
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:Hahah, no. The vast majority of white Americans are far better off now than they were in the 1980s. White wealth in particular has only gone up over time: It's been great for some whites, but we're definitely entering a 'two-speed' economy, where if you're 'in' you're set, and if you're 'out' you're hosed, and that's not correlating as well with race as much as you think.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 05:48
|
|
|
the black husserl posted:Using the puerile term "idpol" makes you a tool of alt-right idiots who are trying to rebrand the voices of literally all racial, sexual, and political minorities as somehow irrelevant to the national discourse. It's the same slur as "crybaby", "whiner", etc - an obvious "war is peace" ploy to make people think resistance and strength is actually weakness.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 05:52
|
|
|
rudatron posted:That doesn't include the rural vs. coastal divide, which is a lot more telling. In particular, the life expectancy of rural whites has dropped hard very recently, and pretty much all of that is due to opiod abuse, from rural areas. Similar mechanisms in play when it comes to Japan, Norway, and practically every other industrial country. National government builds a highway out to bumfuck nowhere and a straw effect emerges sucking young people out to where the jobs are. The only difference is that in Norway there can be a town of 100 and 95 people are employed by the government doing various things, while Americans here would shudder at the thought of a jobs program for rurals only.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 05:54
|
|
|
Identity politics is a really useful term to be honest because it accurately describes how the method works and the flaw is really just the idea that it's a new thing. It's definitely not, it's just applied in new ways now. Recognizing that is, I think, going to be key to unifying socialist and social leftists.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 05:55
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:Similar mechanisms in play when it comes to Japan, Norway, and practically every other industrial country. National government builds a highway out to bumfuck nowhere and a straw effect emerges sucking young people out to where the jobs are. Basically, what you're seeing is what happens when you ignore a problem, hoping it goes away.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 06:03
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:He's publically and repeatedly spoken about all kinds of awful, unconscienable poo poo too, but according to you that's all just hot air. So what psychic gift do you have that allows you to divine the promises The Donald intends to keep and which (often contradictory) ones he intends to discard? The most likely case is that he'll cave to the interests of his capitalist cronies and throw the masses all the racism and scapegoating they want in order to placate them, because he's a selfish narcissistic piece of poo poo demagogue and nothing matters to him but his own power and prestige, you loving idiot. Nothing matters to Hillary Clinton but her own power and prestige either, (I won't stoop to calling you a loving idiot). At least with Trump you take the chance he might improve the lives of you and the people you know. With Hillary, she straight up said she didn't give a gently caress about anyone in the "flyover states". I mean ffs: "If we break up the big banks, would that end racism, would that end sexism?" - "We're going to put a lot of coal miners out of work", the wall street speeches, the clinton foundation donations - It was so obvious she was a corrupt plutocrat who would do nothing to change the decline the working class and the country has been on for so long. Not our fault you made sure our only alternative to her was Pisspig Grandad instead of Bernie Sanders, Who Would Have Won.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 06:51
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:Nothing matters to Hillary Clinton but her own power and prestige either, (I won't stoop to calling you a loving idiot). Hillary was poo poo, I'd be the first to agree. I could go on all day about how poo poo she was. Cheeto Benito is the worst, though, and you're either thick or disingenuous if you're saying he's going to improve anybody's life but his own and his cronies'. The Saurus posted:Not our fault you made sure our only alternative to her was Pisspig Grandad instead of Bernie Sanders, Who Would Have Won. I'm interested in how I made sure of anything since I don't live in America or have a vote in their elections, let alone the democratic primary. And I'd have voted for Bernie anyway so I don't know what the gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 07:04
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Populism is directly opposed to idpol, you have to make a choice. Again, no one's asking for and end to combating racism, or whatever other strawman you want to deploy, that you think is going to make you look sympathetic here. Link that article as much as you want, whose only sources are a bunch of anonymous 'staffers', it has an axe to grind and it does that from the start. It, like a lot of smears against Bernie, uses the reparations deflection to try and make him look racist "oh, so you support measures against income inequality but not reparatiosn?!?! Don't you know they're both pie in the sky ideas, according to my beliefs about what is achievable, which happen to exactly coincide with neoliberal idpol dogma?!?! Guess bernie was racist!". You know, there's a popular Politico article that has been linked a million times in various threads concerning the Clinton campaign's failures during the election that been the source of a lot of astonishment and amusement for people here. It also uses some anonymous staffer sources, it also arguably has 'an axe to grind' but its an invaluable source of information on what not to do in the future for creating a successful political movement and I think it would useful if folks like you could learn from the other political disappointment last year rather than sticking your fingers in your ears and pretending like nothing could have been changed. Why the gently caress are you here, totally ignoring the actual real life named people constantly referred to in the article like Roy Tatum and Danny Glover who offered open and valuable insight into what was going on during the campaign trail? Why are you here pretending like the article is trying to scream racist when the worst it says is suggesting that a 70 something old Jewish guy from Vermont might have been a bit ignorant of black people and their plight (their words, not mine)? Why are you acting like its playing into the neoliberal agenda when the author repeatedly talks about how most of Bernie's policies would have helped Black people and they could have been a natural allies? Christ, even the reparation thing was more about how Sanders was willing to be extremely radical, by American standards, on a lot of stuff (and lets face it, even if he was elected he probably wouldn't have had great ability to implement most of his platform if the Republicans still had control of Congress) but erred uncharacteristically onto political reality whenever that idea was raised. And this 'fair shake' crap is its own kind of dodge. The Sanders campaign knew the realities of what it was up against, we all know that the Democratic establishment was vigorously opposed to him but that's just the reality of it. Politics is never fair, you achieve nothing by moping about it and that's all I'm getting out of you. He was able to break through with White voters, with younger voters, with equally powerful forces arrayed against him, but on the whole Black voters eluded him and Sanders was wrong-footed constantly, and honestly I think he was more to blame than anyone else in letting that happen. If all the hard left is going to take out of this going into the future is conspiracies and resentment towards other radical movements like BLM (God, you really are furiously salty about that still, aren't you? Did you already forget about this?) then they are well and truly hosed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 07:27
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:Nothing matters to Hillary Clinton but her own power and prestige either, (I won't stoop to calling you a loving idiot). Trump is literally everything bad about Clinton except worse. If you want an alternative that will require engagement, you won't get it by sitting around and voting for the most reactionary idiot you can find every four years. That you do not have the option of using your vote as you might like does not excuse you using it in the most stupid loving way you possibly can. You are not a child. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 07:29 on Jan 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 07:27
|
|
|
Trump will either improve things for his constituents like he promised or accelerate us towards socialism, though. Hillary would have maintained the status quo. for another 4-8 years. Sorry that you were privileged and you're worried Trump is going to threaten that. But those of us with painful lives are done waiting for things to get better. Perhaps if more of those middle/upper class coastal liberals or the ones supporting actual lovely conservative republicans/gary johnson have their comfort and security taken away like we have to live with, they'll join us in voting for a solution. If not, I'm happy just to vote out of spite and schadenfreude against people better off than me who were acting like smug assholes and flinging around insults and constant propaganda in favour of Shillary. crazy cloud posted:
The point is, you can either come up with a left-wing program that appeals to people like me, or we'll vote for people like Trump and laugh at you as you throw tantrums, spout over the top nonsensical hyperbole about concentration camps and whine for several years. We're already dying, we're already destitute, we're already in poverty. At this point, we have far less to lose than you do, even if all of the horrible threats you're hysterically crying about come true.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 07:50
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:I'm interested in how I made sure of anything since I don't live in America or have a vote in their elections, let alone the democratic primary. And I'd have voted for Bernie anyway so I don't know what the gently caress. What country are you from? It's important to know for the sake of cultural relativism. Perhaps you just can't understand the American mindset where Trump isn't that bad to us? I mean the Europeans love to act smug and superior about Trump while doing the most Heinous poo poo, like austerity all over, massive unemployment, especially for youths, letting German bankers run the EU and literally beggar and starve the Greek people to death.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 07:52
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:Trump will either improve things for his constituents like he promised or accelerate us towards socialism, though. Hillary would have maintained the status quo. for another 4-8 years. You are voting to gently caress yourself and people in worse positions than you over, Trump is not going to do anything to destroy the privilege of wealth because his life revolves around it. You are literally saying you voted for basically the avatar of bourgeois excess supported by the party of entrenched wealth because you think he'll usher in socialism. That makes absolutely no sense at all and if you believe that then I don't know what to tell you because your concept of reason appears to be be completely different from mine. Once again, you do not effect political change by voting once every four years, if you desire change you must engage at other times.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 08:13
|
|
|
I wasn't allowed to vote - I'm an immigrant. And also I think Trump will literally make life better for the average American with the policies he put forward in the election than Clinton - And I don't believe all that crap spewed by the Lugenpresse owned by plutocrats that will do and say anything to get what they want and maintain their power, influence and wealth. I mean look at the people who were attacking him - The entire loving establishment including every single politician, the media and the rich and powerful rallied behind Hillary. With enemies like that, he must be doing something right. The Saurus fucked around with this message at 08:23 on Jan 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 08:19
|
|
|
Accelerationism is a loving stupid ideology for idiots because putting people in hardship doesn't make them behave rationally and only idiots believe it does. And no, that Trump is unversally reviled does not make him good, people don't hate him because he's a secret millionaire socialist. I would say I hope he deports you so you can stop wrecking the country but I don't want you back in the UK either because you'd probably vote for UKIP. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 08:32 on Jan 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 08:29
|
|
|
No, I'm a Jeremy Corbyn supporter. Just like I'm a Bernie Sanders supporter. Because when there's an actual left-wing option, that's what I vote for.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 08:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 17:41 |
|
|
"I can take anarcho-communist or literal hitler, I don't mind which" is not my preferred political ally.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 08:40
|
|