Identity politics, scarcity and war vs unity, vision, and shared prosperity
There is a division within the Democratic party, this is well known, but it extends far beyond any party or lack thereof. Among those that proclaim to be “left” within the party, one can see on a smaller scale the true division and choices facing us as citizens regardless of party affiliation and so I will use the party division to explore the two main paths that are currently struggling to shape the party to better explore the larger picture.
The Clintonite vision is of course neoliberal and tactically they attempt to gain power via “identity politics”, claiming that if one champions economic progressive values then one is somehow inherently against progressive social values, this is to be expected from that camp when one understands their ideals as laid forth since the rise of the DLC, the third way, and all other associated false flag infiltrators of a once proud party of the people (no longer even recognizable to those of us that remember an earlier time).
Al From and the Clintons’ old crew had a specific tactic and political ideology that could only give rise to such an attempt to seperate social from economic justice which were once both the true goals of Democrats, back when they championed both civil liberty as well as championing a war against poverty and other economic liberties. New Democrats ignore what the best among us have always known (including MLK) that one can not have one form of justice without the other as they are inextricably intertwined.
The “Third Way” refers to various political positions which try to reconcile right-wing and left-wing politics by advocating a varying synthesis of right-wing economic and left-wing social policies. In other words, identity politics and attacking those who may attempt to reclaim the left wing economic policies was not only inevitable, but unavoidable.
The true left, even it’s watered down mixed economy versions (the only left ever achieved successfully) is Supposed to embrace a synthesis of left-wing economic and left-wing social policies. This is a threat to the very ideology and power structure of the third way neoliberal advocates, and so they use the left wing social policies (they claim to champion yet usually fail to actually fight for, leaving all the work to committed activists) as a weapon to divide those people that rightfully champion such social values against those that would also wish to achieve economic justice, who here has not had attacks aimed at them of sexism, racism or other unfounded accusations for daring to support the policies often spoken of by Bernie Sanders?
Any candidate that would actively try to divide Americans across racial and cultural lines, then attempt to foster hatred of each group against the other is harmful not just to the process but to the innocent people they are trying to divide by using such tactics as political warfare, it is deplorable behavior and often seen used by hate groups across the globe. Republicans do it all the time, but Democrats like Clinton and her third way true believers also use this tactic as their “go to”. This became a pattern from the Clinton Campaign during the last primary.
Well-respected surrogates carefully chosen from among those known once to have fought for social justice, were sent out to attack Bernie or his supporters with a scripted false narrative that he was somehow “anti-social justice” (absurd to those that knew his record, even among those that made such false claims), after receiving push back for these absurd claims, they then accused Sanders and all his supporters (as if they were a single being made of straw) of racism and/or sexism for pointing out such smears weren’t true. It was sickening, cynical, divisive and still is today when used. One expects this from Republicans – but seeing such divisiveness from the Democratic party used as standard fair is heartbreaking and leads one to believe the party is forever lost, simply a sub specie of a Republican party no longer opposed by a major party in our two party system, but rather joined by them in a common cause that is purchased by the few for the few.
Brock was a big part of this (pit one poor faction against another) in order to win victories designed to profit the wealthy at the expense of all the people that will suffer under their trickle down neoliberal policies which will harm all of us struggling people no matter our race, sex, or sexuality. Those that hire people like him, no matter the party, are agitating people to hate by minor differences and so are just as, if not more accountable, for such deplorable tactics as any such Brock or Breitbart like lackey they choose to hire.
It is a tactic often used by the wealthy in order to keep the power and money while continuing to steal even more in the face of glaring wide spread wealth disparity across all racial and social lines, In war the tactic is called divide and conquer, the wealthy have throughout history done this at the point where the difference between the rich and poor becomes widespread and apparent.
A true leader on the other hand, one that wants to help all the people historically tries to bring all the people together to fight the aristocracy while trying to achieve both social and economic justice for everyone.
It is clear which part of the party divide is following which tactic, just as it is clear which “Democrats” are little more than puppets of the wealthy attempting to win yet more of their favor. Such political operatives often acquire excessive wealth during their lapdog tenures practically rubbing it in our faces (how much wealth have the “public servants”, the Clintons acquired again, and from whom?)
The honest advocates, not swayed by or willing to be used by an uncontrolled group that worships at the altar of greed often live relatively normal lifestyles, not depending on acquiring wealth in order to achieve their version of a happy life, and when running for public office would be seen as not willing to accept and depend on billionaire or corporate legal bribes to obtain the offices they seek.
I have told you of tactics as old as the existence of extreme wealth at the expense of others. In your hearts the signs of their uses are evident, some would say axiomatic, those that would seek power or wealth via legal bribery and perpetually profitable perpetual warfare will be the ones dividing us by race, sex, sexuality or other minor differences while advocating senseless bloodshed that harms women, children, and the poor of all countries involved (including our own) far more than the “masters of the universe” that profit from it all.
I have also told you of some common traits of leaders on the side of the populace.
There is enough for you to decide for yourself which side you are on and who is on your side as well. It is also increasingly clear such choices have less to do with party than individual character, this is not a time to rally around party but rather a time to rally around true leaders possessing character that cannot be purchased while ignoring proclaimed party affiliation or lack thereof.
One only hopes there are enough good leaders to be chosen, and enough of us will choose wisely, building a progressive coalition from all available sources.
Comments
'Identity Politics'
Results in the Dems eating their own... care of the carefully cultivated financial 'donation'.
(see electoral demise, and/or 'Shrinkage' (Seinfeld)).
Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.
IMO this was the most
damaging part of Hillary's toxic campaign:
I think this part is worse than the right wing talking points to bash single payer, and worse than the excuses for fracking and warmongering.
There have always been Democrats more animated by social than economic issues but they weren't against economic equality per se, it just wasn't their focus.
Now they reflexively and vehemently oppose it. The question: why shouldn't we help poor people more is answered with the question: why do you hate women and people of color?
They're so consumed with their obsessive fandom that not rejecting out-of-hand anything that sounds like Bernie Sanders might have said it is a betrayal of Hillary Clinton. It's really sick.
Throw that question right back in their faces
I'd respond with "Why do you hate poor women and poor people of color?"
@LoneStarMike I've tried and it
I've tried and it worked about as well as beating my head against a brick wall. We all know what's that's like on Daily Kos... I've tried harder on Twitter than I'm allowed to at TOP (because twitter won't ban me for it) and it's hopeless.
It reminds me of arguing with hard core tea party loons when the tea party was still a thing. Convince a guy with a "Don't tread on me" flag that raising the minimum wage isn't tyranny or convince a Bible thumper that abortion isn't murder... there's no convincing them because they have ZERO interest in your facts or logic. It's all tribal to them and fuck your tribe.
There are people who were mutual follows for years on Twitter who I liked and respected (similar to TOP) that ended up on the other side of this thing and I don't even recognize them anymore.
Sometimes that tactic works
But usually you get something along the lines of, "How could you be so racist as to say all poor people are black? Most blacks are middle class!"
At this point you can try to point out their logical fallacy or post statistics, but this bears as much fruit as teaching a pig to sing. They have their narrative: solve every social ill resulting from racism or sexism first and then worry about what to feed your family. To disagree with them means you have "white privilege," though when I pointed out to Kos himself that Hillary didn't look very black to me, I heard the thunderous roar of crickets.
I'd respond to that question with this:
"I didn't ask why you hated middle-class blacks. I asked why you hated poor women and poor people of color. And btw, people of color includes Hispanics, Asians, and Native Americans - not just blacks."
And yeah, arguing may not work, but I'm still going to do it. Loudly and often.
@SancheLlewellyn That is one of the
That is one of the most poisonous of all the talking points, because it makes poor POC not only a fringe group, unimportant to the POC who are middle and upper-middle class, but also into a white person's insult to richer POC.
Imagine for a second the fact of your existence being made into an insult or a shame to others who look like you and share the same history.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Dopeman The establishment is
The establishment is attacking a very weak spot in the American left: if a Black person says something is racist, no white person can contradict that; if a native Spanish speaker says something is racist, no native English speaker can contradict that; if a woman says something is sexist, no man can contradict that; if a homosexual says something is homophobic, no straight person can contradict that. There are good reasons for this, but unfortunately it also means that all the establishment has to do is find a handful of Black people, Latino people, white women, or white homosexuals to say on TV that critics of the establishment are racist, sexist homophobes, and those critics will be automatically silenced, or at least discredited.
It works even better on line, where you don't even have to corrupt Black people, Latinos, white women, white homosexuals, etc.--you could hire a white, straight, 50-year-old heterosexual male and put him at a keyboard and have him say he's a Black lesbian, and it would work fine. Perhaps even more pertinent is the invention of advanced forms of sockpuppetry, also known as Opinion Management Software (OMS), which would allow said 50-year-old white heterosexual male to control up to twenty personalities, each of which could be made into any kind of identity you like. So one white fifty-year-old heterosexual man could control eight Black identities, two Latino identities, five white female identities, four homosexual identities of various races, and one trans identity, all of them saying that critics of the establishment are bigots.
This tactic makes it impossible to continue in our accustomed vein of "if a Black/Latino/gay/lesbian/trans/woman/otherwise oppressed person says they're experiencing prejudice, they are automatically right, and everybody of good conscience should immediately stand in solidarity with them." However, retreating into a reactionary position of "fuck all those people and their supposed experiences of bigotry" is obviously unacceptable as well.
This is a brilliant maneuver which will ensure the establishment stays protected from criticism as long as 1)all the other Black/Latino/gay/lesbian/trans/women/otherwise oppressed people stand automatically in solidarity with other people like them, even when they're lying, or 2)Americans continue to accept illogical arguments just because they're repeated a lot.
It could also expand the race war, and add other kinds of reactionary and possibly violent activity to the pot.
We are stuck in a binary opposition between automatically making members of oppressed groups into good guys, assuming they are all incorruptible saints, and being reactionary fuckwads.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
The Berniebros Stigma
Exactly. I participated in BLM at L.A. City Hall and was frankly astonished at the presumption that I was a racist old white guy. I was also accused of being homophobic until a trans friend showed up and cleared things up. Identity politics has regrettably been weaponized to divide us along racial, gender and class lines.
"They'll say we're disturbing the peace, but there is no peace. What really bothers them is that we are disturbing the war." Howard Zinn
The ADL set the standard, accusing its targets of anti-Semitism
The SPLC then expanded the model — alarm, accusation, and blacklisting — to cover a broad spectrum of minorities, identities, and “protected categories.”
(ADL = Anti-Defamation League; SPLC = Southern Poverty Law Center)
Edited to add link to this Politico story:
@lotlizard The ADL has broken my
The ADL has broken my heart over the last few years. They used to be my heroes.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@lotlizard Wow. Everybody should
Wow. Everybody should read that.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Speak it!
It's the government we deserve.
Yet there is no real revolt or revulsion? Most americans accept what is, as it is. Is ninja warrior on tonight?
2.5 million plus incarcerated. Wonder how they feel about our freedoms.
45 million living in poverty. Ask them what they think about equality.
Everybody spied upon by our own government. How do you feel about rights?
Nice diary. Fuck our current government.
Happy hallmark holiday by the way.
Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.
@Pricknick This argument is
This argument is fallacious, as I've said many times.
First, how would you know if there is any real revolt or revulsion? Do you expect the corporate media would report it to you? Though actually, I'd say what data we do have suggests there's plenty of revulsion.
All non-violent efforts so far have failed. There are a few yet we might try, but they wouldn't be likely to occur to most Americans. Most Americans think you either need to work within the system, primarily through elections and lobbying your representatives, or you pick up guns and have a bloody revolution. That's what our history tells us. And clearly working within the system has failed. So it's down to having a violent revolution.
Understand that rising up in revolution against the military/surveillance we've got here is suicide. Most Americans are smart enough to understand that. Asking them to revolt is like asking them to die, and since they don't believe they can win a military conflict, it's like asking them to throw away what remains of their lives for nothing. They prefer to watch Netflix. I'm not surprised. I prefer to watch Netflix too, if those are the only choices.
Cake or death is not a hard choice. The fact that we're going to run out of cake and then our only choice will be "or death," doesn't make people want to hasten that day by dying in a futile uprising against a military run at the highest levels, apparently, by psychopaths.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
OMG Thanks for Eddie
I will now switch to youtube and watch clips all night.
Trump and Brexit are *signs* of sub-surface revolt & revulsion
Analysts can analyze all they want, but it’s hard to top Michael Moore’s insightful prediction that Trump would win not on merit but purely as a symbol — a way of sending the entire establishment the biggest “F— you” ever.
People know the media don’t report genuine revolt and revulsion — nowadays, if it gets a lot of coverage, it’s a pretty sound bet that it’s astroturf.
I’m convinced a lot of votes for Trump, Brexit, German right-wing populists, et cetera, stem from exasperation and frustration at all the elite gaslighting and gatekeeping.
It’s all a way of saying, “Okay, elites, we get it — you’re determined to ignore and belittle us. If truths don’t fit your narrative, you cover ’em up or shove ’em down the memory hole. But you can’t exactly refuse to report vote results, can you? Let’s see you ignore this.”
Are you talking about leaders within the democratic party?
"One only hopes there are enough good leaders to be chosen, and enough of us will choose wisely."
Because if that's our only hope, we might as well pack it in right now.
There will be no shining white or black knights saving the democratic party, I think Obama and Bernie should have proven that.
And now Warren is BFF with McCain and Graham.
Nothing but a nag.
Warren will piss and moan all you like but never jump over the fence. She'll be a contender I tell ya!
I've had better goats.
Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.
Since having my blinders removed
It's amazing that there are so many others who have kept theirs on.
I admit that I got suckered by Obama's hope and change spiel, but after his FISA vote, I knew that he wouldn't come close to keeping the rest of his campaign promises.
I watched after one betrayal after another came to pass when he appointed the same people who crashed the global economy.
I watched as people kept saying that he was playing 11 dimensional chess or that he had the republicans right where he wanted them.
As he and the democrats did nothing to help main stream Americans and let the bank CEOs walk off with a slap on their wrist and the profits they made by illegally foreclosuring on millions of people's homes.
Even after everything he did with domestic and foreign policies, he has an 80% approval rating and people wish he was still president. Better yet, make Hillary president so she could continue his policies.
Great essay,
This is a great article about how the democrats became the sniveling cretinous critters they are today.
The Democratic Party's deadly dead end
Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.
the Consortium article
snoopydawg, your link points to a comment on the article.
The article itself is here.
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Thanks for this
for some reason my iPad has been going to the bottom of articles I link to and I have to scroll up to read it.
Did you have a chance to read the article?
The Reagan and Thatcher wonder twins were two other cretinous critters.
People saw what Reagan did to California, but voted for him anyway.
Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.
the article
punctuation adjusted due to format change (semicolon added)
Any time I can help, snoopy!
I did indeed! Damn fine article, too!
"Forget about it, Jake. It's Chinatown." Except that the whole effing country was now Chinatown! Gak!!
To this second I fail miserably to understand how any non-filthy-rich person could ever vote for Reagan, Thatcher, or anyone like them.
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Heh, that's what my mom used to say to her friends
Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.
I basically said the same thing once
to my Tea Bagging mother - what makes you identify with these people? Are you going to win lotto and become one of them? And just what are the odds of that happening?
I like your mom's better though - you aren't rich enough to be Republican. I should use that one on my stepmother and I would if we were still on speaking terms.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
Temporarily Embarrassed Millionaires
Though this quote is talking specifically about socialism, I first heard it as an explanation as to why the other 99% became Republicans:
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
― Ronald Wright (paraphrasing John Steinbeck), A Short History of Progress
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
Democratic Party Dead End
Outstanding!
Thanks for the link. It also points out my biggest problem with Bernie being a warmonger and ties in global neoliberalism to Thatcher & Blair. Awesome summary.
"They'll say we're disturbing the peace, but there is no peace. What really bothers them is that we are disturbing the war." Howard Zinn
I had problems with his foreign policies viewpoints too
@ during Israel's mowing the lawn assault on Gaza, they used so many bombs they ran out and petitioned congress to get more.
Both Bernie and Warren voted to get them more.,
I thought that he was against the Iraq wars because of how often he went after Hillary for her Iraq war vote or more specifically, her warmongering history. So imagine my surprise when I looked at how he voted when it came to wars and regime change.
Blood Traces: Bernie’s Iraq War Hypocrisy
This is a very good question!
This should permanently settle the notion of whether Bernie is a real Democrat, indeed.
Maybe I should let the people who continue to say that Bernie isn't a Democrat know about his bloody history of voting with the Democratic Party since they love to point out that he isn't one.
A person wrote a diary on this at the GOS and either people didn't bother to read this article or they just can't admit what this article is about is true.
Link to the diary on the GOS website
For some reason, Your diary is completely phony.
Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.
Vermont Is Home For Military Manufacturing
https://manufacturedinvt.com/manufacturing-for-defense-and-space/name/re...
Vermont MilitaryCollege: https://militaryschoolusa.com/vermont/norwich-university-military-college/
Bernie likes him some military spending.
"They'll say we're disturbing the peace, but there is no peace. What really bothers them is that we are disturbing the war." Howard Zinn
@snoopydawg The article in Consortium
The article in Consortium News is incredibly comprehensive and complete in its narrative. What a keeper for the files! Thanks for the link. After looking up some background and ratings on Consortium News as a source, I have signed up for their email notifications
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
I agree, Consortium News is a great website
joe usually has one or more links to an article there in his weekly evening blues.
Robert Parry is one of my favorite authors on the site.
Many of the commenters are just as informed and they often provide additional links to other websites that I bookmark.
Unfortunately, my bookmarks are getting so full I have a hard time finding the time to read them all.
I am going to invite them to check out our lovely home.
Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.
Yes, except the day
of leaders was killed off in 1968. I find it hard to credit that any threat to the established order would have a long life.
Our test today is how to implement, for the first time, real democracy.
We've got the tools but the way the game is set up is to pit people against each other; ramp up factionalism to the max.
The logical thing is to create an All-Citizen coalition; breaking into, and breaking up, the Mass Media's narrative creation. But such a coalition will need the "Decartoonization" of the left and right as we have those definitions and identities broadcast to us. The danger threatens us all alike at this point.
Orwell: Where's the omelette?
Decentralized Leadership
For a while, I thought it was a weird feature, then it became the endless disappointments. I hoped it was a bug to be self-corrected after flushing the core dumps with new data. Centralized leadership is the latest problem, as clear as spittle.
One more vote: over the cliffs, well beyond the depths of any rescue vehicle. Fools will suffer errors with ease. Bless their heart and their soul, wherever each is being
pocketdkept this evening.It must be some universal law, that the more dumb shits you have in a room, at some point integrity goes to 0 and Dumbass Ideas IQ goes off the scale. There is more than one major party that follows that belief and demonstrates their adherence at each moment daily.
Fighting for democratic principles,... well, since forever
Of the few, by the few, for the few
I agree that observing today's Democratic Party
For me, this is it in a nutshell. Money and/or greed has won the day with the Democrats. I do not even need all the fingers of one hand to count the number of Congress members attempting to do good for We the People. So, yes, today's Democrats are nothing but a subset of the Republican Party. As they cash the checks from their corporate overlords, they slash their own throats.
Harry Truman had it exactly right: The people don't want a phony Democrat. If it's a choice between a genuine Republican, and a Republican in Democratic clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Republican before they will a phony Democrat.
1000 lost state legislative seats in the past eight years is all the proof you need. Want more? Both houses of Congress - lost. More? The Presidency - lost ... the Supreme Court - lost. And yet they continue down the same sad road.
Personally, I feel we need a strong opposition party. That opposition isn't the Democrats and doesn't look as though it ever will be the Democrats.
The Dems are banking on a 2006 repeat in 2018.
They think we'll get so sick of the Repigs that we'll accept their watered down Repig bullshit when they're in charge.
Honestly, after the shit they pulled last year I'm willing to bet they'll never win an election ever again. They lost every special election this year because they keep running and governing against their constituencies.
Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.
Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.
@The Aspie Corner The worst part of that
The worst part of that is neoliberalism will be redeemed if it works. If they win a lot of elections in 2018 because of backlash against Trump that will prove to them that running Hillary again in 2020 (or Corey Booker or some other corporatist hack) is the way to go.
This is similar to the "but she won the popular vote" hill they are all happy to die on. Most of those votes were against Trump, not for Her.
I know it's purely aneqdotal, but as a side note, through that whole primary and election I never met a single real life person who liked Hillary. I encountered plenty of them online obviously, but not one single flesh and blood person. Not in my (mostly Dem) family, not among friends, not at work, not anywhere. Everyone I know personally who voted for her in the general did so to stop Trump.
Lesser evil is what Dems are counting on for 2018 and any success they have with it in 2018 will be used to rationalize doing the same thing in 2020. Sad.
Agreed and agreed.
If FEAR TRUMP and RussiaRussiaRussia work, you're 100% correct that TPTB will take it confirmation that as they were right all along and the Democrat's conversion to the JV Republican team will be complete. And I couldn't find an actual flesh and blood Hillary supporter, as opposed to a Trump opposer, either. Even the people around me who were all but claiming I wanted Trump elected because I was voting third party couldn't come up with a single reason to vote for HER that didn't amount to FEAR TRUMP. Not one! Given the amount of "record correcting" going on during the election, I'll always be highly skeptical about the numbers of enthusiastic Her supporters I saw online.
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
It is possible however,
that neoliberalism could fail, and disintegrate of its own accord. Another major banking collapse might just do the trick. Or perhaps a war with one or another of America's purported "enemies". There are any number of potential scenarios wherein the current US political configuration could change rapidly and radically, almost overnight. Ever since Trump was elected, my motto has been to expect the unexpected.
native
I think that only applies in GA-06
And maybe in Montana, because the DCCC spammed everyone with their nauseating "WE'RE DOOMED!" emails. The KS and SC races came close in way red districts, and Rob Quist ran as a Bernie guy in MT. The question becomes, does "support" from the DNC and DCCC help or hinder? They can spend obscene amounts of money on consultants and uninspiring TV ads but lose by a bigger margin than Archie Parnell in SC with no support.
Kshama Sawant said it best.
The Democratic Party is where movements for real social and economic change go to die.
Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.
Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.
Re: Which "Democrats" are puppets of the wealthy
I think Tom Perez is definitely one of those puppets. I like this "Puppets of the Wealthy" description. It's meme-worthy.
And don't you just love it when Establishment Dems cry "Think of the children?" Remember that ad Hillary ran where the little kids were watching TV and Donald Trump came on and started saying all kinds of hateful things? Parents were all like "I don't want my children to grow up in an atmosphere like this."
Of course when it comes to the children growing up in poverty, not having safe water to drink, not being able to get proper medical care because their parents can't afford the insurance premiums and going into insurmountable debt just to try and get a higher education,the Establishment Democrats offer nothing more than platitudes and lip service.
Truth is, the Establishment Democrats are the children. Selfish, greedy, spoiled rich children.
Good Essay!
In case anyone is interested
This is a damn fine article about why Hillary lost the election.
How Hillary Clinton’s Goldman Sachs Speeches Cost Her the 2016 Election
It's no wonder that she wanted Assange' s head on a platter...
Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.
@C99p and EB, I feel so lost here - this identity
thing is making me tired. I also realize that I start to self-censor myself here, more because the probability that I didn't understand some of your snarky, sarcastic or humorous lingo in your comment threads is higher than the probability that you didn't understand mine. So, I redact stuff that I see was not approved by anyone, cause ... who knows I might not have understood something correctly, so cowardly I feel better safe than sorry and redact stuff which I think wasn't worth redacting, but helas ... I did.
I observed lots of "bad feelings" towards Obama, Clinton, and Denise Oliver Velez from the Black Kos Community here. It's about this race and gender identity thingy. We can't look through the obvious, race and gender, no matter what our brain is trying to make out of it, our guts and eyes don't shut up.
Denise Oliver Velez and the Daily Black Kos community group have written tons of article and comments that help in learning the truth about the gender and race related history in the US. I tried to read as much as I could handle to absorb and I loved that this group existed and wrote first class essays about a history I had no clue about before. They triggered me to buy a lot of books which I intended to read when I am "retired and had time and a clear head" to do so.(ha.ha. fat chance...)
I tried to search for a diary by Denise Oliver Velez in which she described a law or an attitude in the housing market that prevented black Americans to move into certain neighborhoods. As my memory is fading really badly, I think, it was calles something with "sun down laws". Of course I couldn't find it. But I remember that her diary about this issue triggered me to look at those practices in the past in my own coop community in Greenbelt, MD, in a cooperative community that was built and founded at Roosevelt's times. Eleanor Roosevelt is celebrated like a hero in the many displays among that community's facilities. The community has even a "New Deal Cafe" and kind people make a lot of music there. It's a nice, friendly, well intentioned group of people, wanting to do the right thing. You could say the community was a model any progressive Democrat could be fully in support of.
Yet in a surrounding neighborhood of the most affluent blacks in the US, this cooperative was a middle class white one, with over 90 percent white owners at least. So, her article made me think that though one of the most progressive communities way back in the days of the early fifties to the late eighties, didn't overcome the "identity" thingy. How else to explain the lack of Afro-Americans among the coop-owners of this community?
I mention this whole thing only to explain why I feel lost. You can't get over the fact that your eyes see something, your guts feel something and your brains think something and all the three don't fit together and that's what makes it so difficult to read the same things over and over for over 13 years (I joined dailykos in 2004 - and realize that many of the Black Kos writers and editors joined in 2008). Yeah, the identity history is killing my hopey, fighting spirits.
So, while I searched on dailykos for that particular diary of Denise Oliver Perez, I ran into this one from 2013. I think it's reasonable to read it again.
*Update: Statement of Opposition to Racist Labels Used by Kossacks to Criticize President Obama - By Black Kos - Tuesday Apr 16, 2013 · 4:05 PM EDT - 2524 Comments (2482 New)
I forced myself to read that again and admit I didn't make it to the end. But here is something that I think is somehow NOT consistant:
Then read through the list of signatories of that message statement that follows in that articles.
Many, many writers I had read, respected and would have never wanted to miss, way before
2008.
There is imo just one inconsistency in it. How can you claim you write and select opinions from the "black perspective" and at the same moment say you have stayed out of taking "sides"?
I mean I am way less bothered about it than many of you here. I think it's because I was used to those discrepancies my whole life as a little person with little life stories that still can cause pain despite them being long by-gone.
So one sentence out of that diary I think one should remember:
I try to remember that. I came over here to C99p the day Denise called the EB "Dreck". I can't for the life of me understand why the EB is "dreckiger" than the "Black Kos community article collection". I met in person some of the people who signed. I remember trying to explain to them that - in the German usage of the word "Dreck" - it is a highly inappropriate insult to call someone's writings "Dreck". The EB is not "Dreck". To call it such is. But I think it was the
Ministry of TruthorOlliegarkeywho told me that in the American usage the word "Dreck" is harmless. Ok, I thought, so it's all a word thingy and not everyone uses and interprets words the same way. (I remember the words of Ojibwa, who reminded us in his calm ways that words matter. Indeed they do). In the end I came to believe that those, who use words the least, are the more honest people among political activists.My bad. I am Sorry. I am tired of that stuff and don't want to read it. It's the pain that matters, not the identity.
PS. this is a great essay.
PS2.I realize with myself that the gut's reactions are the ones that are the most self-censored, because it's hard to explain them, hard to argue in support of them. It's always very tiny, itsy bit of things that gave me the "clues" of someone or something, that turned out to be right ones after decades. Someone said somewhere, two things are the most lied about, money and sexual activities, whereby to reveal the truth about the money you have is the number one issue to be lied about and the sexual activties the second one. I guess the second issue is lied about to prevent to cause pain to someone you love. The first one is lied about, because you don't want to reveal what kind of hidden power you have because of the money you have.
That's all folks from a little lost US-homesick, expat German woman. You know everything about me. Are you happy now?
Sundown laws
just said (in not so many words), if you are Black, best be out of town by sundown. Several towns here in Oregon used to have them, if not written officially.
Other methods of housing discrimination include minimum lot size zoning (aimed at class and, so coincidentally, race); redlining (to keep nonwhites from owning property); and Codes, Covenants and Restrictions, often set up by developers, some of which still on the books (but no longer enforced) actually said "No Negroes, Mexicans, Chinese, etc etc etc."
I always liked Denise's diaries on DailyKos. Kelly Macias posts some great stuff too. That primary campaign grew so vicious that I stopped visiting as often; it improved somewhat after the election but again has begun a toxic slide. I pop in and read some of the front page diaries and a few on the recent list if the title looks interesting, but I avoid the Rec List. Once you have seen one pie fight you have seen them all.
thank you, that's the one I was looking for,
I remember having had searched if those Sundown laws had been used in my particular community after reading that specific diary from Denise. And I found one little comment and link from someone who lived there long ago who confirmed that practice. So ... that's why I think lots of essays are very helpful. I tend to avoid to read too many comments. They get somehow under the skin more often than not and that's ... painful.
Great comment. Thank You. Let's not cause pain - would be a motto ... that most people could get behind, I think.
@mimi Well, I'm happy you are
Well, I'm happy you are here and posting.
I hear you on the gut reactions part. I don't post much because I don't know what words to use - especially strong feelings - without being insultingly blunt. I don't (usually) want to insult anyone, I'd rather be understood. So I often don't bother to type anything.
The US (bipartisan) political establishment
not only encourages, but in many ways mandates a kind of binary thinking. There are two and only two "teams" strong enough to have any effective control over national policy. If prospective voters happen to disapprove of both teams, well that is just too bad for them. They may as well stay home and forget about playing, because they haven't a hope of ever winning any major contest. Such is the nature of America's duopoly, and the stranglehold it maintains on the levers of political power.
You dance with who they tell you to, or you don't dance at all.
You want to play? Then you better pick a side. Line up at either one ticket booth or the other, and don't give us any of your Third Party nonsense. You try that, and we'll get both Parties on board to kick your ass for good.
native
This actually happened:
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/340732-dems-try-new-slo...
Compensated Spokes Model for Big Poor.
That one is kind of clever
It did make me chuckle, but it needs following up with a serious campaign, not "the other side sucks worse."
It made me chuckle too but
in exactly the "other side sucks worse" kinda way. The Dems have no other play.
Compensated Spokes Model for Big Poor.
Bill Maher came up with some good ones
"Democrats. One of the top two political parties for over a hundred years."
Scary thing though: that one sounds better than anything the party of the Ten Percent has come up with.