3 ms·

You make valid points. Still, what happens when someone brings up some of the most important issues of the moment i.e. Black Lives Matters or Islamic Terrorism?

You make valid points. Still, what happens when someone brings up some of the most important issues of the moment i.e. Black Lives Matters or Islamic Terrorism? Surely, the Democratic Party should not refuse to listen or engage at all?

pessimizer 10y ago
Those are not the most important issues of the moment to anyone but white fanatics. The idea that one of the most important issues is black people marching, and that it it is on a par with Islamic terrorism (although the chances of even that affecting any particular citizen in any way are infinitesimal) is absurd. Bridges are falling apart, health care costs are rising out of control, with the loss of the manufacturing sector there are no jobs for people who haven't gone to college, the country is out of its mind on oxycodone, and you're worried about black people walking. Unbelievably elitist attitude.
- jfaucett 10y ago
  Why are you criticizing a straw man, getting upset at him, and then calling him me? If you read my comment I never said those issues where the most important issues of the moment. I never said that black people marching is equivalent to islamic terrorism. I never even said I was worried about black people walking. Then you say I have an elitist attitude when you didn't even take the time to hear what I had to say. I think that attitude is rather elitist.
  - socialist_coder 10y ago
    It's elitist because a huge amount of people in the Democratic party are upper class white people. They are not working class and they are not minorities. And yet they still care about the issues very much. But, it's hard for them to know which issues to focus on since none of them actually personally affect them. So when they focus on racism, instead of the basics like jobs, it is a bit elitist. I think a better answer to your original question is that, of course, if a democratic candidate is asked specifically about something like black lives matter or lgbt rights, they should talk about how they support the cause and what policies they are pushing that will help out. But, they should primarily stick with the the basic issues of security (financial security, national security). That is what the working class wants to hear about, and that is who the Democrats need to win back. People who are more concerned with black lives matter or lgbt rights are going to vote Democrat no matter what, so it's not like we're going to lose those votes.
eli_gottlieb 10y ago
Ok, so I'm actually gonna have to kinda-sorta agree with pessimizer here. Black people are 13% of the population. They are not all poor, and only mostly under attack by the police. They certainly don't all agree with BLM, even if I personally do. This means BLM represents, generously, a good deal less than 10% of the population. As to "Islamic terrorism", well, what Islamic terrorism? The most mature thing we can do is to admit that Islamic terorrism is mostly a European problem rather than an American one, and that homegrown mass shooters are a much larger problem, one which can easily be addressed by ameliorating or solving many of our other absolutely dreadful social problems. So when you put BLM and Islamic terror together, how much of the population have you got in your coalition? 10%? Let's throw in LGBT for another ten. The most outspokenly neoliberal-feminist women. Uhhhh, maybe another 15? Millenials? How many millenials are there? Except that your coalition strength in this "movement of movement" strategy is constantly being undermined by your own embrace of neoliberalism. Remember the whole #NotHereForTheBoys debacle? Feminists, LGBT people, black people, and Middle Eastern human-rights activists all need food to eat and a roof over their head, and neoliberalism keeps pushing the Professional Achievement Waterline necessary to have that basic standard of living higher and higher. You can't go around shaming people for supporting Bread and Peace and expect to have a coalition left. "I'm a queer black survivor, and I'm starting at Goldman Sachs next year!" is the most morally dishonest and repulsive platform I've ever seen, but it's exactly what Hillary ran on. A workers' movement, on the other hand, represents that lovely fabled percentage we heard about in 2011: 99% of the population. You want to see a Democratic Party that can work? It was called the Rent is Too Damned High Party.

pessimizer 10y ago

Those are not the most important issues of the moment to anyone but white fanatics. The idea that one of the most important issues is black people marching, and that it it is on a par with Islamic terrorism (although the chances of even that affecting any particular citizen in any way are infinitesimal) is absurd. Bridges are falling apart, health care costs are rising out of control, with the loss of the manufacturing sector there are no jobs for people who haven't gone to college, the country is out of its mind on oxycodone, and you're worried about black people walking. Unbelievably elitist attitude.

jfaucett 10y ago
Why are you criticizing a straw man, getting upset at him, and then calling him me? If you read my comment I never said those issues where the most important issues of the moment. I never said that black people marching is equivalent to islamic terrorism. I never even said I was worried about black people walking. Then you say I have an elitist attitude when you didn't even take the time to hear what I had to say. I think that attitude is rather elitist.
- socialist_coder 10y ago
  It's elitist because a huge amount of people in the Democratic party are upper class white people. They are not working class and they are not minorities. And yet they still care about the issues very much. But, it's hard for them to know which issues to focus on since none of them actually personally affect them. So when they focus on racism, instead of the basics like jobs, it is a bit elitist. I think a better answer to your original question is that, of course, if a democratic candidate is asked specifically about something like black lives matter or lgbt rights, they should talk about how they support the cause and what policies they are pushing that will help out. But, they should primarily stick with the the basic issues of security (financial security, national security). That is what the working class wants to hear about, and that is who the Democrats need to win back. People who are more concerned with black lives matter or lgbt rights are going to vote Democrat no matter what, so it's not like we're going to lose those votes.

eli_gottlieb 10y ago

Ok, so I'm actually gonna have to kinda-sorta agree with pessimizer here. Black people are 13% of the population. They are not all poor, and only mostly under attack by the police. They certainly don't all agree with BLM, even if I personally do. This means BLM represents, generously, a good deal less than 10% of the population. As to "Islamic terrorism", well, what Islamic terrorism? The most mature thing we can do is to admit that Islamic terorrism is mostly a European problem rather than an American one, and that homegrown mass shooters are a much larger problem, one which can easily be addressed by ameliorating or solving many of our other absolutely dreadful social problems. So when you put BLM and Islamic terror together, how much of the population have you got in your coalition? 10%? Let's throw in LGBT for another ten. The most outspokenly neoliberal-feminist women. Uhhhh, maybe another 15? Millenials? How many millenials are there? Except that your coalition strength in this "movement of movement" strategy is constantly being undermined by your own embrace of neoliberalism. Remember the whole #NotHereForTheBoys debacle? Feminists, LGBT people, black people, and Middle Eastern human-rights activists all need food to eat and a roof over their head, and neoliberalism keeps pushing the Professional Achievement Waterline necessary to have that basic standard of living higher and higher. You can't go around shaming people for supporting Bread and Peace and expect to have a coalition left. "I'm a queer black survivor, and I'm starting at Goldman Sachs next year!" is the most morally dishonest and repulsive platform I've ever seen, but it's exactly what Hillary ran on. A workers' movement, on the other hand, represents that lovely fabled percentage we heard about in 2011: 99% of the population. You want to see a Democratic Party that can work? It was called the Rent is Too Damned High Party.