2020 Democratic presidential primary

Does that include the very large portion of liberals and centrists who are in fact black Americans?

xxp

"what about these other people, they suck too!" ok but communists should not suck at this

xp

i loathe the distortion of this word

What do you mean by this?

Does that include the very large portion of liberals and centrists who are in fact black Americans?

say it louder for the people in the back

idk "liberal" meant something different to me ten years ago, it is now shorthand for "neoliberal" and i think it's tiresome

That's true, "progressive" have essentially replaced the old meaning of "liberal."

I remember when Obama called himself progressive. I lol'd.

Does that include the very large portion of liberals and centrists who are in fact black Americans?

say it louder for the people in the back

― brigadier pudding (DJP), Wednesday, October 16, 2019 9:41 AM (two minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

I made it clear I was talking about "the entire spectrum of white voters" ignoring black American economic concerns, not excluding black Americans from liberals and centrist (there were black American communists too, and a "large portion" of the left is also black)

idk "liberal" meant something different to me ten years ago, it is now shorthand for "neoliberal" and i think it's tiresome

― american bradass (BradNelson), Wednesday, October 16, 2019 9:41 AM (four minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

The current usage of liberal is actually much more in line with the historic usage of liberal. Liberal briefly meant "kind of leftish" when the left had dwindled to almost nonexistence and conservatives started using "liberal" to bash people to their left.

If by "historic usage of liberal" you mean "19th century definition of liberal," then it's close to what I see from people further left.

o_O ok

xp

All I'm pointing to is that this winds up becoming a bad faith argument sometimes in the hands of liberal and centrist politicians -- " "If we broke up the big banks tomorrow would that end racism?"

If by "historic usage of liberal" you mean "19th century definition of liberal," then it's close to what I see from people further left.

― TikTok to the (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, October 16, 2019 9:49 AM (twenty-four seconds ago) bookmarkflaglink

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nFvhhCulaw

Literally everything becomes a bad faith argument for someone; that doesn't make it an invalid argument or a concern unworthy of consideration.

Sure, but saying, in a presidential primary thread "The left ignores the economic concerns of black Americans just like back in the day" seems like a distortion if the (white) left does so no more than any other (white) part of the political spectrum

yeah what about the white republicans

A couple of the more savage anti-Clinton voters in fall '16 did cover themselves in spittle while yelling on my FB wall about Hil the Corporate Shill who's dying to sell off queer people. Not once did they show their concern during the primaries. Fuck'em.

I feel I have every right to be suspicious when someone yells "break up the big banks" and I say "I agree but let's make sure we don't adversely hurt minorities in comparison to white people when we do it" and the response I get is "why does everything have to be about race"

^^^ otm

given the classes that their ideology prioritizes, the left ignoring the economic concerns of black americans stings way more than my shallow expectations for neolibs and centrists

"working class Americans" never includes "black working class Americans"

And I also don't think it makes a lot of sense to spend time criticizing the obvious and well-documented failings of the modern right on race on a thread titled "2020 Democratic presidential primary"

If you're going to come at me with some "but Democrats aren't on the left" nonsense, we don't really have anything to discuss

Sure, but saying, in a presidential primary thread "The left ignores the economic concerns of black Americans just like back in the day" seems like a distortion if the (white) left does so no more than any other (white) part of the political spectrum

― longtime caller, first time listener (man alive), Wednesday, October 16, 2019 10:54 AM (one minute ago) bookmarkflaglink

Wouldn’t it be that people have expectations with the spectrum of the left when it comes to racial issues?

only when it's a media dipshit trying to explain Trump America does "working class" equal white. Leftists go out of their way to note that the actual working class isn't majority-white or majority-male.

"working class Americans" never includes "black working class Americans"

^I hear this all the time and it's true in many cases, but surely more people are conscious that it does and must, compared to 3-4 years ago?

xp

Yes, I've seen improvements in media coverage.

To me it also feels like ‘working class americans’ never includes immigrants.

I feel I have every right to be suspicious when someone yells "break up the big banks" and I say "I agree but let's make sure we don't adversely hurt minorities in comparison to white people when we do it" and the response I get is "why does everything have to be about race"

― brigadier pudding (DJP), Wednesday, October 16, 2019 9:56 AM (twenty-three minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Is there an argument that breaking up the big banks would actually disproportionately hurt minorities? I don't mean that as a rhetorical question, but I don't think that was what Clinton meant and I've also never heard it before.

You do understand the historical context of how virtually every major American policy has been instituted at the expense of minorities, particularly black and native people, right?

No, I actually don't understand what you're talking about here, that's a highly vague and general statement that doesn't respond to what I asked, sorry.

i.e., yes in a general sense I understand that and no here I don't see what point you're making

To take one example (not related to banking): the New Deal's existence required a coalition comprised in part by Southern Dem racists who made sure black Americans saw little to nothing of the program's benefits.

IE DJP is saying "I agree but let's make sure we don't adversely hurt minorities in comparison to white people when we do it <s>as happens every fucking time</s>"

bah, teach me to keep out of US politics threads.

Would there not also be adverse effects to black and native communities by leaving things as-is or, as per usual, things are further deregulated?

New Deal carve-outs noted, but I’m not sure how that would work in 2019, particularly at the fed level and with Warren or Bernie in charge.

perhaps things that were implemented at the state or local level...?

the New Deal's existence required a coalition comprised in part by Southern Dem racists who made sure black Americans saw little to nothing of the program's benefits

and then abandoned the coalition by the mid-30s in part because they understood that the new structures of power the new deal was creating endangered southern white supremacy safeguards or no

Any changes in a banking system could lead to unintended consequences like even less home ownership for minorities. It could be a question of suddenly higher rates because fractured banks would be less willing to take risks, which would expand bias against minorities trying to take out loans. It could be many other things. Maybe nothing happens. The point here is about a holistic approach in which every point of view needs to be addressed, so it’s a bit odd that one would be defensive about race vs class when thinking about the policy when it’s still very abstract and upstream.

nah, the South loved that federal boodle! That's why they got so many Army bases. WWII was another federal program.

https://www.history.com/news/gi-bill-black-wwii-veterans-benefits

I mean sure (and I'm aware of the new deal history), but again it's just a weird point to suddenly bring up whenever leftist policies are raised when the same is equally or more true of other policies. I mean, I don't hear pro-Syria-interventionist liberals discussing the fact that minorities disproportionately serve in the military.

Also, the New Deal wasn't leftist.

lol "suddenly"

Also, did you mean to undermine your "why are you only criticizing leftist policy" argument by pointing out that the New Deal, which we are criticizing, wasn't leftist?

it's just a weird point to suddenly bring up whenever leftist policies are raised when the same is equally or more true of other policies

"what about these other [x]"

no, it's not whataboutism to ask why race seems to get used as a cudgel against Bernie by people who support candidates whose policies are actually arguably worse for minorities

They aren't.

Maybe you should let the 51% of Bernie's supporters who are non-white know that

And I’m sure they are very happy that you are here to speak for them

Nobody thinks the policies of their fav candidate are worse than others for minorities. Everyone will use that cudgel, like you just did.

Bernie (and left policy in general) seems to understand the lesson of the New Deal and Great Society pretty well - universal programs are absolutely necessary to attempt to avoid the discrimination of the past. Means testing and targeting allow the "welfare queens with Cadillacs" bullshit to flourish and for programs to be dismantled because they only benefit/apply to the powerless.