• Bernie Sanders: Democrats must move beyond 'identity politics'
    142 replies, posted
[url]http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/307014-sanders-dems-must-move-beyond-identity-politics[/url] [quote]Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said Sunday that the Democratic Party must move beyond “identity politics” in order to connect with a larger share of the voting public. "It is not good enough for somebody to say, 'I'm a woman, vote for me.' That is not good enough," Sanders told a crowd at the Berklee Performance Center in Boston, according to WBUR. "What we need is a woman who has the guts to stand up to Wall Street, to the insurance companies, to the drug companies, to the fossil fuel industries.” Sanders, who come in second place to Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination this year, has repeatedly voiced his concerns with the party’s lack of support in middle America. "The working class of this country is being decimated — that's why Donald Trump won," the senator said. "And what we need now are candidates who stand with those working people, who understand that real median family income has gone down."[/quote] Here's his full response, which was to an audience member who asked him for advice on becoming the second Latina to be elected to the U.S. Senate: [img]http://i.imgur.com/UxVwTW5.jpg[/img] [img]http://i.imgur.com/Cqx2NcR.jpg[/img]
no fucking shit since half the nation hates each other because of the political division. I hope we get to a point someday that we all just refer to "Human" and nothing else.
Sanders once again being the voice of reason that we desperately need. It's great to see more diversity in politics but you can't just be voting for someone because of their gender or race.
Fucking christ not running him is the mistake if the century for the dems.
He's going to be abandoned by a huge number of progressive SJWs for this. He'll probably lose much of the political capital that he had if this becomes big news. The Democratic Party is a nightmare shitshow right now. No message, no leaders, no platform, no government control. Practically no party at all.
This misleading title has been making its way around all day, and Bernie's message is different than what it implies, but his message is great. What's the point of electing a marginalized representative if they won't work for lower class interests, and the interests of other marginalized people.
[QUOTE=King Tiger;51407189]He's going to be abandoned by a huge number of progressive SJWs for this. He'll probably lose much of the political capital that he had if this becomes big news. The Democratic Party is a nightmare shitshow right now. No message, no leaders, no platform, no government control. Practically no party at all.[/QUOTE] If being reasonable means he'll lose his party's support, the party loses the reasonable people's support.
This is the one lesson democrats take to heart if we ever are to regain control by 2020
[QUOTE=King Tiger;51407189]He's going to be abandoned by a huge number of progressive SJWs for this. He'll probably lose much of the political capital that he had if this becomes big news. The Democratic Party is a nightmare shitshow right now. No message, no leaders, no platform, no government control. Practically no party at all.[/QUOTE] I'm fucking confused as shit, why are they not even beginning to rile up supporters for the midterm in two years. Why haven't I heard anything about what we're going to do to take on trump in the next general. This was obviously unexpected for them, but it's been weeks, where's the fucking plan?
[QUOTE=King Tiger;51407189]He's going to be abandoned by a huge number of progressive SJWs for this. He'll probably lose much of the political capital that he had if this becomes big news. The Democratic Party is a nightmare shitshow right now. No message, no leaders, no platform, no government control. Practically no party at all.[/QUOTE] Those extreme "sjws" that you always hear about are actually really small in number. But to be frank, its good that we shove those ideals out, its poisonous
[QUOTE=Deathtrooper2;51407163]no fucking shit since half the nation hates each other because of the political division. I hope we get to a point someday that we all just refer to "Human" and nothing else.[/QUOTE] That isn't realistic. People yearn for belonging and identity and it is one of the greatest failures of liberalism to try to futilely deny it to everyone. [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/opinion/sunday/the-crisis-for-liberalism.html[/url] I rather like this piece, though I don't think all of it is accurate. [QUOTE]Much of post-1960s liberal politics, by contrast, has been an experiment in cutting Western societies loose from those foundations, set to the tune of John Lennon’s “Imagine.” No heaven or religion, no countries or borders or parochial loyalties of any kind — these are often the values of the center-left and the far left alike, of neoliberals hoping to manage global capitalism and neo-Marxists hoping to transcend it. Unfortunately the values of “Imagine” are simply not sufficient to the needs of human life. People have a desire for solidarity that cosmopolitanism does not satisfy, immaterial interests that redistribution cannot meet, a yearning for the sacred that secularism cannot answer. So where religion atrophies, family weakens and patriotism ebbs, other forms of group identity inevitably assert themselves. It is not a coincidence that identity politics are particularly potent on elite college campuses, the most self-consciously post-religious and post-nationalist of institutions; nor is it a coincidence that recent outpourings of campus protest and activism and speech policing and sexual moralizing so often resemble religious revivalism. The contemporary college student lives most fully in the Lennonist utopia that post-’60s liberalism sought to build, and often finds it unconsoling: She wants a sense of belonging, a ground for personal morality, and a higher horizon of justice than either a purely procedural or a strictly material politics supplies.[/QUOTE] Bernie can talk about economics all he likes, but race and culture will ultimately transcend it. It is an immensely powerful force.
[QUOTE=King Tiger;51407189]He's going to be abandoned by a huge number of progressive SJWs for this. He'll probably lose much of the political capital that he had if this becomes big news. The Democratic Party is a nightmare shitshow right now. No message, no leaders, no platform, no government control. Practically no party at all.[/QUOTE] I don't know if this is true. I think this is more likely to appeal somewhat to 'progressive SJWs' since it doesn't really antagonize their beliefs.
I mean after Obama got elected I swear I remember the republicans coming together to fight him, and I didn't like it at the time but where's the same from the dems? Why does it feel like they're prepared to sit with their thumbs up their asses and let this happen again?
[QUOTE=froztshock;51407208]I'm fucking confused as shit, why are they not even beginning to rile up supporters for the midterm in two years. Why haven't I heard anything about what we're going to do to take on trump in the next general. This was obviously unexpected for them, but it's been weeks, where's the fucking plan?[/QUOTE] This country's left-leaning people are organized and agitated, but the democratic party has no fucking clue what to do with that. They're out of touch and spineless.
[QUOTE=da space core;51407218]Those extreme "sjws" that you always hear about are actually really small in number. But to be frank, its good with we shove those ideals out, its poisonous[/QUOTE] Small in number, but they've been growing rapidly in the last few years and especially with this election. So yeah, agreed - the sooner we reject those ideals as a society the better.
Two things I can't understand: that what he just wrote needs to be spelled out to the party and that this man lost the popular vote in primaries.
[QUOTE=froztshock;51407232]I mean after Obama got elected I swear I remember the republicans coming together to fight him, and I didn't like it at the time but where's the same from the dems? Why does it feel like they're prepared to sit with their thumbs up their asses and let this happen again?[/QUOTE] There's an establishment vs. Bernie-type supporter civil war Basically everyone who's fault it was for the Democrats losing are blaming everything else and believe they are perfect so why would they need to do anything:hiddendowns:
[QUOTE=Vlevs;51407243]Two things I can't understand: that what he just wrote needs to be spelled out to the party and that this man lost the popular vote in primaries.[/QUOTE] Can't answer the first one for you but it's not that surprising that an unknown senator from a small state lost to a Clinton. Add on the DNC and media collusion to shut him down and it's a bloody miracle he's gotten as far as he has
In general I've been concerned with (part of) the left turning away from the traditional economic definition of classes to one defined by race. Yes, blacks make up a disproportionate amount of the poor people in the US, and that's a major problem - but it's not good enough to help "blacks" or "Latinos" because they face many obstacles that whites don't; you need to help people get out of poverty. There need to be more CEOs that aren't white men in their 50's, but first and foremost the US needs better access to higher education, much cheaper healthcare and a minimum wage that doesn't force people to work two jobs. Identity politics has so far left Denmark alone, but I fear it's coming.
Frankly elections/general politics need to be run with less or without a basis on party loyalties and more a basis on issues along with capability if we're to move beyond identity politics. "Red vs. Blue Vs. Others" plagues politics with the conflict of Democrats versus Republicans versus Independents. Such conflicts make irrational fear based on the great "Other".
Bernie, yet again, hitting the nail on the head. The failure was based on pure focus on identity politics this election, and not enough of supporting the average working class Americans. You can't base an entire platform on trying to organize people into these groups, or forcing X group into Y position for "progressiveness", you have to appeal to everyone and not just minority groups. There's nothing wrong with diversity, but focusing on that alone when you have a broader spectum of much more important issues facing a country is a horrible, narrow-minded, short term gain which will fail the nation as a whole.
[QUOTE=Baboo00;51407194]This misleading title has been making its way around all day, and Bernie's message is different than what it implies, but his message is great. What's the point of electing a marginalized representative if they won't work for middle and lower class interests.[/QUOTE] Because modern progressive SJWs don't care about working class people and they never did. Most will argue that talking about economic inequality is a distraction unless it's couched in terms of how rich whites abuse poor minorities. Talking about poor whites or even poor people generally is seen as a Trojan Horse or just avoided altogether. Maybe this move will be successful and the progressives will become further marginalized (they're already suffering massive defeats and setbacks). But I have my doubts.
ironically identity politics is a large part of the movement in favor of trump. what should and shouldn't be discussed, what words are used, what meanings are given, who we are and who we definitely are not were probably more important questions compared to the economic ones regarding which a layman probably will just put his faith in the candidate who already appeals to him otherwise. edit: it becomes even more evident when you realise the difference between right and left wing has come down to entirely cultural conservatism vs liberalism.
[QUOTE=King Tiger;51407278]Because modern progressive SJWs don't care about working class people and they never did. Most will argue that talking about economic inequality is a distraction unless it's couched in terms of how rich whites abuse poor minorities. Talking about poor whites or even poor people generally is seen as a Trojan Horse or just avoided altogether. Maybe this move will be successful and the progressives will become further marginalized (they're already suffering massive defeats and setbacks). But I have my doubts.[/QUOTE] god damn would you stop misrepresenting the left already lol considering the right wingers on here are so adamant about not wanting to label people with broad strokes you sure do love demonizing those darn SJWs
why the fuck did the dems have to be so fucking stupid to go with clinton enjoy laying in the Trump bed you made
[QUOTE=King Tiger;51407278]Because modern progressive SJWs don't care about working class people and they never did. Most will argue that talking about economic inequality is a distraction unless it's couched in terms of how rich whites abuse poor minorities. Talking about poor whites or even poor people generally is seen as a Trojan Horse or just avoided altogether. Maybe this move will be successful and the progressives will become further marginalized (they're already suffering massive defeats and setbacks). But I have my doubts.[/QUOTE] Not really, though. Intersectionality is a pretty important thing for feminists and "SJWs." I agree that they tend to underemphasize class and overemphasize gender and race when it comes to inequality, but most progressives I know are very class-conscious - way more than the conservatives I know. Bernie's just saying that people need to recognize that self-identity (through gender identity, racial identity, and so on) are important, but that they shouldn't overshadow class identity. Pigeonholing and generalizing "white people" as oppressors of PoC is an oversimplification if you're talking about intersectionality, since it's only addressing one section rather than looking at the interaction of those sections. Are minorities more likely to be of a lower economic class? Yes. Why? Is it 100% race? Clearly not, because it's an intersection of race and class, and the "SJWs" who think that it's 100% racial have a worldview that I think is damaging left-wing politics. Bernie wants to shift emphasis back towards class identity and away from other forms of self-identity, whether gender, racial, sexual, national, ethnic, religious, whatever else. Class identity is fucking tragically weak in the United States - as evidenced by a bunch of struggling undereducated lower-class rust belt voters thinking that a literal millionaire can identify with them. He can identify with them - on racial and national identity. Not on class identity. Not on economics. Just skin color and being American. Both sides [I]vastly[/I] underemphasize class identity. Republicans tend to favor religious identity and national identity - Democrats tend to favor gender identity and racial identity. Class keeps being forgotten, and Bernie's trying to shift at least some focus back on it. No need to eliminate other forms of self-identity - just get Americans to give a shit about economic classes and identify along class lines to mobilize against the ultra-wealthy who are exploiting them.
[QUOTE=King Tiger;51407278]Because modern progressive SJWs don't care about working class people and they never did. Most will argue that talking about economic inequality is a distraction unless it's couched in terms of how rich whites abuse poor minorities. Talking about poor whites or even poor people generally is seen as a Trojan Horse or just avoided altogether. Maybe this move will be successful and the progressives will become further marginalized (they're already suffering massive defeats and setbacks). But I have my doubts.[/QUOTE] Since when has the left been marginalized?
[QUOTE=King Tiger;51407278]Because modern progressive SJWs don't care about working class people and they never did. Most will argue that talking about economic inequality is a distraction unless it's couched in terms of how rich whites abuse poor minorities. Talking about poor whites or even poor people generally is seen as a Trojan Horse or just avoided altogether. Maybe this move will be successful and the progressives will become further marginalized (they're already suffering massive defeats and setbacks). But I have my doubts.[/QUOTE] The apathy for the working class is largely a problem of the (economic) liberal viewpoint. It's not exclusive to "SJWs" at all.
It's not so much identity politics, as it is basing your entire movement around calling anyone who disagrees with you a bigot, homophobic, islamophobic, racist, neonazi, ect. Seriously, the worst thing Hillary did to herself was the "deplorable" comment. It became a rallying cry for those who supported Trump, and most of the people whom were on the fence ended up voting Trump simply because it was unbelievable that a politician would try to make anyone who didn't agree with her a lesser person. [editline]21st November 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Sam Za Nemesis;51407366][t]http://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2016/47/1479760530-untitled.png[/t][/QUOTE] Stuff like this is why the Democrat party is not making any new friends. They constantly betray decent people in their movement, and see anyone who disagrees with them as being a lesser person.
[QUOTE=King Tiger;51407189]He's going to be abandoned by a huge number of progressive SJWs for this. He'll probably lose much of the political capital that he had if this becomes big news. The Democratic Party is a nightmare shitshow right now. No message, no leaders, no platform, no government control. Practically no party at all.[/QUOTE] In this day and age, it is incredibly regrettable that speaking the truth/ speaking common sense gets you accosted.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.