Mourning in America - Trump Year One: November '16 to

OK. If you accept that each and every vote for trump came from a deeply contemptible motherfucker, then I guess the only way to win future elections will be to mobilize more voters who agree with you, so they'll outnumber the mfs in swing states. That's fine. You realize Clinton just tried that. We might want to win back a few of the contemptible mfs who voted Obama in 2008 and 2012, just to be on the safe side.

Also, giving up on racists who might vote for you means giving up on swing states where minorities and queer citizens live, and, no, I'm not ready for that leap.

David Cole (old prof of mine!), on "The Way to Stop Trump"

http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/11/14/way-to-stop-trump-lessons-of-war-on-terror/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NYR%20Brain%20schools%20Trump&utm_content=NYR%20Brain%20schools%20Trump+CID_5a9edb3a4e7bd8d2015c58b250d54c5b&utm_source=Newsletter&utm_term=The%20Way%20to%20Stop%20Trump

Who in this thread said anything about "giving up" on anyone? Calling racism racism is not "giving up" or saying ppl are "irredeemable" or consigning them to being unreachable deplorable.

I'm responding to got no reason not to hold them in contempt. we are talking about some deeply contemptible motherfuckers here, whose meaning I may've misinterpreted.

"We have to lie about what happened or it might be mean to sensitive white people who voted for a racist and we'll never lure them into our trap"

I guess we shouldn't be surprised that a board w members arguing a Muslim shouldn't lead the party have about as little interest in being anti racist as the "deplorables" they oppose

I'm responding to got no reason not to hold them in contempt. we are talking about some deeply contemptible motherfuckers here, whose meaning I may've misinterpreted.

― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, November 16, 2016 4:15 PM (one minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Oh yeah that pov is dumb self righteousness I agree there

"We have to lie about what happened or it might be mean to sensitive white people who voted for a racist and we'll never lure them into our trap"

I guess we shouldn't be surprised that a board w members arguing a Muslim shouldn't lead the party have about as little interest in being anti racist as the "deplorables" they oppose

― Listen to my homeboy Fantano (D-40), Wednesday, November 16, 2016 5:16 PM (three minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Nobody has said that. I've said that referring to 50 million odd people as uniformly racist is both a back-patting strategy meant to absolve the speaker of their associations with Trump voters and a terrible idea politically if you actually want to build support in opposition to the blatantly racist aspects of Trump's platform.

Nor have I said that building support will necessarily work. But I'm hard-pressed to think up alternatives that go beyond dice-rolling in the courts.

I think whether or not we call them racist in messaging (fwiw I think there are effective ways to do this that will hemmorage support from the right, as well as ineffective ways) is a different question from whether or not they actually are racist, and it feels like the resistance to simply calling them racist has a lot to do w people's back patting ideology

Cf "I understand the working classes better than you"

I misused cf. I think I mean ie

They don't think of this as racist because they have no problem with people who work and are a productive member's of society,

yes. I forget which of the "real talk about rural whites" thinkpieces addressed this, but a lot of these Trump voters have this cognitive dissonance/split view of race and racism. The concept of "the good ones" is definitely present, but they make this distinction (I'm not defending it) between those we know, who live in places like we do, who have similar lifestyles as we do, and the ones who live in scary cities. The latter category is where the textbook racism really comes into play.

And also the idea of work and being productive is something that I feel tends to sway people towards Republicanism and conservatism. Like if you simplified the appeals of Bernie and Trump, on the Bernie side, a lot of people were stoked by the idea of getting things for free: education, health care, dismissal of student loan debt, whereas the Trump appeal was, I will give you something valuable to work for.

GOP, the party of officials who don't want to do their jobs

So Trump's going to continue to live in Trump Tower? That's fucking nuts, imagine the constant security detail

which is why things like a New WPA would probably be immensely popular if there was a non-nil chance of getting through Congress (or the financial interests behind parts of the Dems)

that was an xp to the appeal of work

re: staying in Manhattan - definitely stay in the media capital of the world where only 10% of the population voted for you who all live nearby and the mayor and governor hate you. Definitely won't be a 24/7 protest situation.

xp to D40. sure, but that argument is located way deeper in the left (i.e. white Marxist grad student gets on department listerv and excoriates his female, poc colleagues for downplaying class struggle in favor of identity politics) than the mainstream huffpo-esque articles i keep seeing bluntly equating racism with voting for trump (or those that make the opposite argument).

i would pay people 20 dollars an hour to pick up garbage if i were president. full health benefits. retirement package. the whole nine yards. The People's Beautification Army.

and i would make Wal-Mart pay for it.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/viral-fake-election-news-outperformed-real-news-on-facebook

http://i.imgur.com/HhoW59G.png

If a persuadable can't handle the argument that a vote for trump was racist they probably aren't actually that persuadable

i would pay people 20 dollars an hour to pick up garbage if i were president. full health benefits. retirement package. the whole nine yards. The People's Beautification Army.

https://i.imgur.com/AnlTIDp.jpg

dollar an hour raise every year for full-time beauty workers.

I just think it's about decoupling the concept of racism from the concept of "a racist." The important thing isn't whether a person is a racist or not-a-racist. That focus on individual character and intent is a red herring. The focus should be on racist action (including inaction) and racist speech. It's about consequences, it's about complicity in maintenance of a regime. People can be held accountable for their speech and action without needing to determine whether these emanate from some essential attribute.

Somehow we need to convey this through messages that pack a punch. It would also help if high -profile figures (white) on "both sides of the aisle" would stand up and acknowledge their own racism.

But of course, yeah, that's not magically going to convert everyone.

http://i.imgur.com/2i7OlbR.png

heh

i think we have a philosophical problem right now re: the legitimacy of corporate/business rights over the public good, all that great stuff. so far this is the culmination of decades of this belief system. i think that's gotta change before a lot of this gets better... draining the poison Milton Friedman and his ilk gave us doesn't necessarily mean hard communism, either, just you know, being a little more sensible about the long-term consequences of these beliefs. not that the wealthy or the dead really give a damn, this is our issue here we have to fight for, "our" being the non-wealthy and still-living.

we've been in this exact spot before re: capitalists/corporations vs. the public good, roughly 100 years ago

xp - Jacob's post about isolationism and racism -- I think isolationism is a broad idea that has support from both the left and the right and different aspects have different appeals.

I just think it's about decoupling the concept of racism from the concept of "a racist." The important thing isn't whether a person is a racist or not-a-racist. That focus on individual character and intent is a red herring. The focus should be on racist action (including inaction) and racist speech. It's about consequences, it's about complicity in maintenance of a regime.

― never have i been a blue calm sea (collardio gelatinous), Wednesday, November 16, 2016 5:50 PM (three minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Agreed. I'd much rather the people writing 'you're a racist, accept it' pieces wrote 'a muslim registry isn't just racist, it's a harbinger of actual fascism: ten historical facts you need to know now' instead.

Yeah, I think the majority of people who voted for Trump hate Hitler more than Hillary. Those that prefer Hitler are the lost causes that should be executed.

yeah but they share two letters

What do you do with those who call her Hitlery then? indefinite detention ?

maybe they get electroshock therapy like Pence.

People can be held accountable for their speech and action without needing to determine whether these emanate from some essential attribute.

they can, but people also appear to be remarkably resistant to letting themselves be held accountable in ways uncoupled from their conceptions of their essential attributes

trying to come to a calculation in millifucks how much effort it's worth decoupling racist speech from the people who enunciate it

what about the ones who mumble it?

i just heard of this talk of the new potential 'muslim registry' and that resulted in significant google'ing and now i know about the NSEERS list which sure seems like a decade long, pretty gross, and still existing until 2011 'muslim registry' so thanks, internet, for that

That Muslim registry thing has been sort of misreported. It said they were mulling a registry of people immigrating from "Muslim countries." But as immigrants, wouldn't they be registered already? I'm still not sure what more they're talking about at all, especially since I guess this has been a thing since Bush (whatever this thing is).

Non-white nationalists voted for an authoritarian fascist this election out of 1.) impish curiosity 2.) because he promised to "make america great again" 3.) because they are terrified of a country that is changing rapidly at the same time they feel they are losing power 4.) because real wages have been stagnant under obama yet hillary said "america's already great" 5.) because they think it's fun to be racist, especially now that the powers that be are finally starting to tell them that racism is not ok and most importantly 6.) they have been subjected to a decades long misinformation campaign that has taught them to hate and fear democrats, and hillary specifically. Their latent racism and misogyny made them more susceptible to 1-6 then they would have been otherwise. Still, i feel that there has been a profound communication breakdown between ordinary Americans and the conditions of their own society, which can only be broken through via a grass roots kind of politics that gets people involved in their communities. This sideline spectator stuff led to a catastrophe. The dems and republicans (mostly the dems) wanted a rule of "experts" and technocrats and now we've got the opposite.

it was abandoned because it was redundant and was mostly just a panicky islamophobic PR move. as usual, Team Trump has no idea what they are actually doing/talking about.

xp

This is about confusion breeding recklessness imo

Keith Ellison has got it right. Dems need to be talking to people on the ground, starting locally. Federal politics is apparently so opaque that people didn't know any better than to elect a wannabe autocrat. It defies belief but it happened. If they knew what they were watching they couldn't possibly have liked Trump more than Hillary.

Despite all those mitigating factors, though, and my sincere hope that people in rural america get a fair shake now that the democrats are doing some soul searching, I still consider all Trump voters to be ignorant racists. It's offensive to all people who managed not to vote for him to say otherwise. I believe in redemption but I also think a high degree of indifference, recklessness or malice was necessary for them to do what they did. How we move forward without "alienating" them requires some sidestepping I guess -- I believe in redemption -- but the struggles of the rural poor are not more noble now that they have done this horrible thing. They could have made their point another way.

I don't know if this has been posted here, but this is one of the most harrowing interviews I have read https://www.revealnews.org/episodes/a-frank-conversation-with-a-white-nationalist/

Why do republicans/conservatives have to be such dicks? I've always thought if there were a liberal branch of the republican party I would be happy to sign up. Like get rid of the conservative ideals, accept people in their differences but keep a lot of the economic ideas, great! But I'm beginning to think there is something inherent about the platform that attracts vile and mean people.

Yeah gutting the government to punish poor people -- their economic idea -- is inherently vile and mean

and in the united states inherently racist

The only big "economic idea" the Republican party has had in the last half century is supply-side and it's been an unmitigated disaster for everyone but the very richest people in America. So, you know, there's pretty much nothing to recommend it.

https://twitter.com/crushingbort/status/463132110006784000

any sensible economic idea the republican party ever has gets adopted by the democratic party