5 ms·

And to have the public discourse continue to separate people into groups based on race or gender or nationality is just a continuation of the problem. If you he

And to have the public discourse continue to separate people into groups based on race or gender or nationality is just a continuation of the problem. If you hear outcry against the plight of white americans in rural areas you make policies that effect white americans in rural areas. The race baiting continues and those who want to court the minority population start to show how one side only cares about the majority citizens. This is everyone's problem and the solution needs to be for all Americans not just ones who live in a select region or have higher amounts of melanin

okreallywtf 9y ago
I think you describe well the perception but not at all the reality. Rural Americans have not been served well at all by the "one side that cares about the majority", its the total opposite. This is not a policy problem, this is all a perception problem. First off, the majority of all people understand that there are poor white people, especially in rural areas that have had similar economic issues to minority groups for a long time. There is no economic issue (that I know of) that entirely effects any one group. Long standing race-based discrimination however has caused the left to focus more on minority groups however because they have generally been worse off (especially when compared against non-minorities as a whole). This doesn't mean we don't care about rural white Americans, its possible to care about many different things but also take into consideration that caring about minorities has been a great way to lose the votes and support of rural whites (welfare queens anyone?). It shouldn't be mutually exclusive but effective marketing has made it so. As many people have pointed out, the problems working class white people are facing at increased rates (its not new, but its getting noticeably worse) have been a reality for minority groups for a long time and generally they are in fact worse off in every measurable metric as a group. The kinds of policies that the left propose that benefit people of color generally benefit poor and working class people in general (healthcare, education), but the left hasn't found a way to market itself to rural white Americans while also being the only major party to support minorities in general. Also, I can't personally take offense at this but I've been seeing a LOT of statements like yours lately (race fatigue I'll call it) so I feel the need to address it. I'm quite sure that all people of color would be more than happy for race to no longer be an issue, and to make it out as if minorities are playing the race card when "the majority" are simply trying to move past race is ignorant if not downright insulting (my optimistic nature makes me want to think that it is accidental). Does that make sense? I understand where it comes from - you like I probably don't directly experience or observe overt racism or discrimination in our daily lives. We might see more occurrences of the opposite but that doesn't mean its not there and that our experiences are Representative of the country as a whole. If it weren't for good journalism and educational resources I wouldn't be really aware either.

okreallywtf 9y ago

I think you describe well the perception but not at all the reality. Rural Americans have not been served well at all by the "one side that cares about the majority", its the total opposite. This is not a policy problem, this is all a perception problem. First off, the majority of all people understand that there are poor white people, especially in rural areas that have had similar economic issues to minority groups for a long time. There is no economic issue (that I know of) that entirely effects any one group. Long standing race-based discrimination however has caused the left to focus more on minority groups however because they have generally been worse off (especially when compared against non-minorities as a whole). This doesn't mean we don't care about rural white Americans, its possible to care about many different things but also take into consideration that caring about minorities has been a great way to lose the votes and support of rural whites (welfare queens anyone?). It shouldn't be mutually exclusive but effective marketing has made it so. As many people have pointed out, the problems working class white people are facing at increased rates (its not new, but its getting noticeably worse) have been a reality for minority groups for a long time and generally they are in fact worse off in every measurable metric as a group. The kinds of policies that the left propose that benefit people of color generally benefit poor and working class people in general (healthcare, education), but the left hasn't found a way to market itself to rural white Americans while also being the only major party to support minorities in general. Also, I can't personally take offense at this but I've been seeing a LOT of statements like yours lately (race fatigue I'll call it) so I feel the need to address it. I'm quite sure that all people of color would be more than happy for race to no longer be an issue, and to make it out as if minorities are playing the race card when "the majority" are simply trying to move past race is ignorant if not downright insulting (my optimistic nature makes me want to think that it is accidental). Does that make sense? I understand where it comes from - you like I probably don't directly experience or observe overt racism or discrimination in our daily lives. We might see more occurrences of the opposite but that doesn't mean its not there and that our experiences are Representative of the country as a whole. If it weren't for good journalism and educational resources I wouldn't be really aware either.