3 ms·

I haven't seen anyone on the left (in fact, anyone aside from Ron Paul [1]) being critical and calling for the end of Affirmative Action and similar practices,

I haven't seen anyone on the left (in fact, anyone aside from Ron Paul [1]) being critical and calling for the end of Affirmative Action and similar practices, which does not surprise me due to to the "no enemies to the left" formula [2]. I invite you to show me a few examples. [1] http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/161217-paul-says-he-would-have-opposed-civil-rights-act http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/161217-paul... [2] http://www.newoxfordreview.org/article.jsp?did=0701-whitehead http://www.newoxfordreview.org/article.jsp?did=0701-whitehea...

croon 9y ago
> due to to the "no enemies to the left" formula [2] If that was (still) a thing Hillary would've won in a landslide. There's a lot more dissent in the left than the right.
- vedranm 9y ago
  Well, Bernie, the supposed candidate of the people, did endorse her, no? At the same time, Ron Paul refused to endorse Trump.
  - croon 9y ago
    I'm not sure I understand your point. Are you saying that Bernie endorsing Hillary is proof that there aren't conflicting views within the Democratic party? Are you saying that Ron endorsing Trump would've been equal to Bernie supporting Hillary? Qualifications and platform doesn't factor in? Here's an example of GOP acting as a herd and DNC acting on policy: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2017/04/11/daily-202-reflexive-partisanship-drives-polling-lurch-on-syria-strikes/58ec27d4e9b69b3a72331e6e/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-2...
    - vedranm 9y ago
      >Are you saying that Bernie endorsing Hillary is proof that there aren't conflicting views within the Democratic party? It is a proof that that the Democrats knows where their real opponents are, and that is in the Republican party. >Are you saying that Ron endorsing Trump would've been equal to Bernie supporting Hillary? Pretty much, yes. Both have a non-mainstream and dedicated following. Both were screwed by their respective parties when they tried to get the nomination. >Qualifications and platform doesn't factor in? I'm not sure what do you mean by that, unless you are trying to imply that Ron Paul has a serious ideological foundation deriving from the Mises Institute and based largely on Murray Rothbard's 20th century interpretation of classical liberalism upon which the United States were founded in the 18th century, while Bernie Sanders is pushing USA towards the fate of USSR and other similar implementations of socialist ideas that always end in a disaster. >Here's an example of GOP acting as a herd and DNC acting on policy: I knew it's war-related even before I clicked the link. Unfortunately, the same doesn't apply in other areas.
onli 9y ago
Thanks for the links. I can't offer examples, you seem to be right in that there are mostly no public statements from the left against it. In Germany, with which politics I'm more familiar, it is similar: The political organized left (which is marginal) is for affirmative actions (in the form of quotas for women). The only organization speaking out against them which has some left traits is the (sadly mostly neo-)liberal party. Interestingly, and that is maybe a good description of my point, the parties implementing quotas for women over here are not left nor progressive. It's the SPD, which is a conservative central party, and the greens, which is a conservative party which fought for environmental protection in the eighties. However, the one remaining left party is also for them. My point may be weak when applied to organized political parties, but I stand behind the ideological argumentation that it is an affront to left values.

croon 9y ago

> due to to the "no enemies to the left" formula [2] If that was (still) a thing Hillary would've won in a landslide. There's a lot more dissent in the left than the right.

vedranm 9y ago
Well, Bernie, the supposed candidate of the people, did endorse her, no? At the same time, Ron Paul refused to endorse Trump.
- croon 9y ago
  I'm not sure I understand your point. Are you saying that Bernie endorsing Hillary is proof that there aren't conflicting views within the Democratic party? Are you saying that Ron endorsing Trump would've been equal to Bernie supporting Hillary? Qualifications and platform doesn't factor in? Here's an example of GOP acting as a herd and DNC acting on policy: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2017/04/11/daily-202-reflexive-partisanship-drives-polling-lurch-on-syria-strikes/58ec27d4e9b69b3a72331e6e/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-2...
  - vedranm 9y ago
    >Are you saying that Bernie endorsing Hillary is proof that there aren't conflicting views within the Democratic party? It is a proof that that the Democrats knows where their real opponents are, and that is in the Republican party. >Are you saying that Ron endorsing Trump would've been equal to Bernie supporting Hillary? Pretty much, yes. Both have a non-mainstream and dedicated following. Both were screwed by their respective parties when they tried to get the nomination. >Qualifications and platform doesn't factor in? I'm not sure what do you mean by that, unless you are trying to imply that Ron Paul has a serious ideological foundation deriving from the Mises Institute and based largely on Murray Rothbard's 20th century interpretation of classical liberalism upon which the United States were founded in the 18th century, while Bernie Sanders is pushing USA towards the fate of USSR and other similar implementations of socialist ideas that always end in a disaster. >Here's an example of GOP acting as a herd and DNC acting on policy: I knew it's war-related even before I clicked the link. Unfortunately, the same doesn't apply in other areas.

onli 9y ago

Thanks for the links. I can't offer examples, you seem to be right in that there are mostly no public statements from the left against it. In Germany, with which politics I'm more familiar, it is similar: The political organized left (which is marginal) is for affirmative actions (in the form of quotas for women). The only organization speaking out against them which has some left traits is the (sadly mostly neo-)liberal party. Interestingly, and that is maybe a good description of my point, the parties implementing quotas for women over here are not left nor progressive. It's the SPD, which is a conservative central party, and the greens, which is a conservative party which fought for environmental protection in the eighties. However, the one remaining left party is also for them. My point may be weak when applied to organized political parties, but I stand behind the ideological argumentation that it is an affront to left values.