General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThis, and not economic anxiety, is what elected Trump.
NPR Politics? @nprpolitics
Majority Of White Americans Think They're Discriminated Against
https://t.co/LXRxb6Vtte
...according to a poll released Tuesday from NPR, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.
More than half of whites — 55 percent — surveyed say that, generally speaking, they believe there is discrimination against white people in America today. Hershman's view is similar to what was heard on the campaign trail at Trump rally after Trump rally. Donald Trump catered to white grievance during the 2016 presidential campaign and has done so as president as well.
Notable, however, is that while a majority of whites in the poll say discrimination against them exists, a much smaller percentage say that they have actually experienced it. Also important to note is that 84 percent of whites believe discrimination exists against racial and ethnic minorities in America today.
read more: http://www.npr.org/2017/10/24/559604836/majority-of-white-americans-think-theyre-discriminated-against?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=politics&utm_medium=social&utm_term=nprnews
Joy Reid? @JoyAnnReid 18h18 hours ago
This, and not “economic anxiety,” is what elected Trump.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
FSogol
(45,488 posts)else is around.
if needed.
MuseRider
(34,111 posts)Really? The only discrimination I have ever experienced was because I am female, it was obvious and there was no recourse. Never because I was white. People are nuts.
maxrandb
(15,331 posts)that's what passes for "discrimination" against whites.
It's the same attitude that believes that men are discriminated against because they can't grab whatever woman's pussy they want to.
Fucking SNOWFLAKES
LeftInTX
(25,364 posts)Just like the "war on Christmas"
mountain grammy
(26,623 posts)Neighbor called my mom a dirty Jew once. I'm standing there thinking, dirty? Are you kidding? We clean our house all the time.
People are nuts.
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)The concerns about race are connected to their economic fears. They have been building for a couple of decades. Race and nationalism are just expressions, or justifications, for their fears which are economically based.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,112 posts)no ...
Just no ...
mythology
(9,527 posts)Between economic anxiety and then the rise of far right nativist parties. Just because you're invested in your beliefs doesn't make them accurate.
Cosmocat
(14,565 posts)The prototype 45 supporter drives a 45,000 pickup, has thousands of dollars in firearms, hunting camo, etc, has a hitch to haul around his 5,500 ATV ...
Yeah, it is about "economic anxiety" when they vote for assholes who deregulate big financial institutions, pass legislation limiting consumer protections, pass massive tax cuts for the wealthy, etc.
Its bullshit the beltway media jerks off to in order to rationalize right wing fuck wittery.
It is what it is - the politics of division based on "cultural" lines.
I live in a conservative area, my inlaws are all prototype rural conservatives.
In my 15 years of marriage they have NEVER ONCE brought up economic concerns relative to politics. They talk about the dems wanting to take their guns, they rail on about Kaep ...
Sorry, it isn't my "beliefs" cause I would WANT to believe these people would put their pocketbook first, but they don't.
It is 101% culture war bullshit.
HughBeaumont
(24,461 posts)The wife's side of the family contains a handful of Trumpkins. With them it's ALWAYS "imm'grunts" and "gun grabbers"
The only economic ANYthing they spew are "Makers & Takers" . . . "takers", of course, being codespeak for (insert racial slur here)s.
Cosmocat
(14,565 posts)they are overall good people, and knowing I am a "liberal" have been nothing but good to me.
I am venting a bit overall, just want to note that.
But, as good of people as they are, there is next to no consideration of their financial well being when they vote, it is all cultural.
Here is something. Prior to his coming down the escalator I know that these people had no appreciation for 45 at all. He is too NYC and too gaudy for them. And, they aren't big out and out 45 people.
But, while they don't talk him up at all, because he is an R, they don't question him. They mostly just ignore him.
LeftInTX
(25,364 posts)He is Mexican-American
Doesn't own a single firearm or ATV
Or a pick up
He owns his own business and does well financially.
He thinks that Democrats are about "sharing the wealth", raising taxes and endless spending on social programs.
(Never mind that Republicans support endless spending on the military)
He feels that if Democrats are unchecked, we will become a socialist society.
He listens to AM talk radio.
He voted for McCain and Romney.
Also a lot Republicans voted for Trump also voted for Romney.
I have conservative suburban neighbors who don't drive pickups. My next door neighbor are Mexican-American and very strict religious conservatives. They voted for Trump and Republicans in previous elections.
I think the difference between Trump and other Republicans is that he brought out new voters from rednecks that have not voted in the past. (I heard that from someone) So, we now have a new voting bloc that wasn't there prior to Trump.
So, it isn't all culture war...it is traditional Republicans that are merged with this new voting bloc.
Cosmocat
(14,565 posts)A different flavor from what I see in the North East, but everything you note, "sharing the wealth," "spending on social programs" is us vs "them" code.
Strict religious conservatives are the holy grail of "culture" based voting.
Conservative good, liberal bad!
I take heart in being a progressive because we are right on pretty much all issues, and advocate for the rights of others.
BUT, my primary reason for being a progressive is our own financial well being.
I see the necessity for social security, and in fact that is should be expanded.
I see how jacked up our health care system is and the need for a single payer system.
I see how people with money and influence, individually and corporations, are able to compromise high level politicians and funnel tax payer dollars into their interests, and work to tilt taxation to put more of the burden on the average tax payer so they can have more money than they know what to do with.
These things are not some mystery, they are clear as day.
And, peoples ACTIONS speak louder than their words.
They can spew all the senseless canned talking points that put a veneer on their views and actions possible. They can even not be honest about themselves about it.
But, when they crawl over glass to vote for politicians who, today more than ever, out and out fuck them every possible way from an economic and financial standpoint, they are NOT voting for their economic best interest.
KY_EnviroGuy
(14,492 posts)Question 1: So, you don't feel any social responsibility to help your fellow man in need, the sick, or those in retirement?
Conservative Answer: No.
Question 2: Well, do you drive on public highways and use public schools?
Conservative Answer: Yes.
Response: Then keep you ass of my part of the highways and pull your kids out of my section of the school. 
bigtree
(85,998 posts)...is in response to primarily black and Latino Americans seeking their fair share of economic opportunity and benefit.
The only way to sympathize with these folks is to accept their argument that they're losing economic ground because of a focus on those in these minority communities and elsewhere who've lagged behind them economically.
It's a specious argument and it's not credible to disassociate race from those 'fears.'
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Racism can't be ended by just demanding that people let go of it.
If it was ever that simple, wouldn't we have become a permanently non-racist society somewhere around August of 1965?
Orrex
(63,214 posts)As a member at the lower economic level of that grossly over-privileged group, I have no sympathy for the poor honky who feels that he isn't getting a fair shake because Miguel has access to healthcare.
"Economic inequality" is the rallying cry of someone who doesn't have to suffer actual bigotry or actual discrimination. It is a distraction allowing the believer (and the proselytizer) to pretend that racism is a lesser issue.
I'm tired arguing this, and you did it better than I could.
ismnotwasm
(41,986 posts)
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)++++++++++++++++++
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)MUST be intersectional.
And obviously racism won't end simply by focusing on economic inequality.
I've always felt that creating an economic model in which nobody is devalued, in which nobody is just discarded, is a major part(not the totality, but a part)of getting white people, working-class whites in particular, to move past white supremacist/white tribalist thinking.
It is not a matter of dispute on the Left that racism is the original sin of this country.
Are you prepared to argue that nobody is harmed by the way our economic system is set up? That it doesn't matter that, since 1981, most American working people, of ALL races, have been openly treated by capitalism as though we are of no value? That that plays no role in how anybody sees things?
Because capitalism is based on individual competition, on having to see life as yourself against everybody else in a battle for survival, It's not possible to have a non-racist "free market" country. The fact that no such country exists on the planet pretty much proves that.
Yes, fight racism...center that fight...but don't assume that, were it not for racism, this country would be a paradise.
Orrex
(63,214 posts)For further reference, see Failed Presidential Bids 2017, Sanders, Bernie. By all means let us discuss economic inequality, but it is imperative that the speaker be aware of the concerns of her audience; if they prioritize other issues, then the speaker should address those issues. Otherwise the speaker is preaching, and the audience will tune her out.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)The speaker should always be attuned to what the audience centers. Everything needs to be intersectional. The language needs to be the language of "Justice, for all, by ending all injustices".
And, to clarify, I don't think Bernie SHOULD run again...instead, we should nominate someone who can find the inclusive synthesis...who can center what needs to be centered in each different situation...that addresses all that needs to be addressed.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)those forces, they will continue to win. You cannot tackle racism without tackling economic inequality. Good luck ignoring the machinery behind it as it continues to feed that sickness. Besides that, if you tackle economic inequality, you will empower those least empowered, because money IS still power. And you cannot tackle income inequality unless you are addressing it not just for poor white men, but for women and people of color, not to mention addressing protections for undocumented immigrants.
If you see it differently, I'd love to hear your reasoning.
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)There is a relationship between the ability to make progress on social/civil right issues, and the economic condition of the majority. Improving the economic condition of the privileged majority won't automatically bring improvements in the social issues. It will however provide an opportunity to make progress in those areas. The ruling majority will often be much more receptive to reducing the oppression of minority populations, when their own economic conditions are at their current peak. Alternately, setbacks in economic situations are sure to amplify and expose the underlying bigotries that are otherwise hidden below the surface, at least politically.
Orrex
(63,214 posts)It's simple to rail about dollars and cents while wagging a finger at hedge fund managers. It allows for terrific soundbytes, and the speaker can easily make grand declarations and anti-establishment broadsides. Other subjects tend to get left in the dust, giving the impression (right or wrong) that the speaker is out of touch or cares about nothing else. For further reference, see Failed Presidential Bids 2017, Sanders, Bernie.
It is much less easy, and much less readily soundbyted, for a speaker to say "you are daily punished in every aspect of your life and at every level because of the color of your skin and/or your gender."
But it is absolutely true, and a primary concern for much of the country.
n/t.
brer cat
(24,572 posts)Well said, Orrex.
mountain grammy
(26,623 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)And that economic justice cannot IN AND OF ITSELF solve racism-all I've ever argued was that it's PART of solving it.
Cosmocat
(14,565 posts)The same assholes who 9 months ago were gleefully screaming, SNOWFLAKES WHO JUST NEED SAFE SPACES, get to ball around and say, "gee, we voted for a maniacal, incompetent racists jackass because mean liberal say things that hurt our feelings!"
I am a white male and I have had my absolute fill of everyone tip toeing around it, and enabling this poor me, I am angry bullshit.
Yes, we can't make people stop being biased and stupid. Most assuredly, as proven by where we are now, not by kissing their asses and tap dancing around it.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)I'm in the school of thought on that that the way to do that is to say, when someone says a racist thing "did you know that that could be taken as a racist thing to say?" rather than "YOU are a racist"-that it's more effective to call out the words than to denounce the person as a person, because if you focus on denouncing the person they are pretty much just going to tune you out and not ever be changed.
My point is that we can't put down ALL Trump support to personal racism(a lot, yes, obviously but not ALL)
Among other things, that can't possibly account for the voters who switched from Obama to Trump-would we be saying those people weren't racist in 2008 or 2012 but they suddenly turned racist in 2016?
It is fair to say that they didn't see the racial demagogy in the Trump campaign as a deal breaker, and that should be called out.
My question is-how can we be anywhere close to sure of winning a mandate victor-a victory by a large enough margin that we can actually do something with it and create a sustainable long-term progressive coalition-if we work from the assumption that everybody who voted for Trump did so solely out of hate and that all of them are irredeemable? I'd say probably 90% or them are irredeemable...but what chance do we have if we assume that the smaller, but significant number of Trump people who voted for that ticket primarily out of economic despair are not people we can ever win over no matter what?
We shouldn't pander to the worst of anyone, ever-but what is the harm of trying to find a way to connect with people by acknowledging that some of them may have voted as they did out of motivations we could find a constructive way to address, that we could address without betraying any of our base? That we can't bring the old factory jobs back, but we can work to create an economy in places like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania that treats EVERYONE with dignity and respect, that provides some sort of long-term security for everyone?
I find it especially confusing that some of the people who say we can't address the needs of these voters on economic issues will, in other threads, argue that we need to nominate centrist or even somewhat conservative Dems-which is a strategy based on appeasing the SAME voters in other, far more betraying-to-the-base ways.
VermontKevin
(1,473 posts)is not asked for?
I mean, if you really are interested in ending racism, why don't you take a backseat and listen to those who actually experience it?
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Last edited Sat Oct 28, 2017, 10:07 PM - Edit history (1)
I'd be interested to hear why they think dealing with it in this way works, but I agree that it is their call
(on edit) I used the term "they" there simply to designate that African-American people would naturally see things differently than I would.
VermontKevin
(1,473 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)In saying it, I was simply acknowledging that the views of black leadership on this matter more than my views. It was said out of respect.
Why are you responding to a post like that with a call out?
And would be your suggestion of a better way to say what I was trying to say there?
bigtree
(85,998 posts)...I'm not buying it.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)That would be a truly foolish thing to say or even think.
And it was never something I ever believed.
There is no one thing that will defeat hate.
But it would be easier to get people to move beyond "zero-sum" thinking(the idea that a gain for one group has to be a loss for another)if we had some sort of a system where there was some basic level of long-time economic security for everybody.
This wouldn't change the hardcore haters-not sure if anything would reach people like that at all-it would be aimed at those who had been drawn into an "us v them" mindset due to hard times and the sense of being cast off by life.
And it would never mean NOT calling out expressions of hatred and acts of oppression.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Do you want a plan that addresses things as they are or a plan that has no hope of succeeding because it is built on delusion?
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Never disagreed with that.
What, as you see it, is "a plan that addresses things as they are", rather than "a plan that has no hope of succeeding"?
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)vote for our candidates. Obviously something else is going on here.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Last edited Sun Oct 29, 2017, 01:05 AM - Edit history (1)
were all that were needed.
It's about working for social AND economic justice...they are distinct, but there are connections.
And it's absolutely true that economic justice should never be allowed to take over the conversation.
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)You have a situation where the middle class, especially the lower middle class has been taking it on the chin for 30 years. The typical reaction isn't to actually blame it on the larger global forces at work against them, but to focus on the change they see around them. So they see societal changes around them and correlate it to the problem. So they see a population that is less white, a political system that focuses less on their demographic, an entertainment system that caters less to their demographic, and a whole host of other changing features of their social environment, and they connect that to their changing economic situation. It's a logical fallacy, it's the "correlation isn't causation" issue. But these aren't people who even understand correlation coefficients, much less use them in any kind of rational analysis. They are reacting to economic realities that they are experiencing, and that their children are experiencing. That's where populism comes from.
Change the economic reality, and you work on these perceptions. That's not to say that underlying issues like racism and misogyny don't exist, they always do. Bernie got trapped by this fallacy, believing that social problems can be fixed by improving the economic situation. Alternately though, one cannot escape that progress in civil rights is often connected to improving economic conditions. It isn't automatic, but it provides the opportunity to make progress in those areas.
The current "blue collar backlash" which we've seen before, is born out of a reaction to their economic reality.
bigtree
(85,998 posts)...when the last race was rife with open demagoguery and racebaiting.
Trump appealed to the insecurity of some white Americans who have been convinced their share of the nation's economic benefits are being unfairly threatened by blacks, immigrants, and anyone else who dare assert their rightful role in our country's economy. The often-bigoted, demagogue left no dog-whistle behind as he promised to restore these psychologically-displaced souls to their assumed place of prominence in society.
Take the issue of race in the election, for example. If there was one message the white working-class got from Hillary in that campaign, it almost certainly was that black lives were going to matter in her presidency. Hillary challenged white Americans to acknowledge their economic successes and take heed of those who have been left behind in the recovering economy. More importantly, Hillary insisted that white Americans should recognize and appreciate the role race plays in the failure of the black community to fully benefit from the economic recovery.
Hillary took a leap ahead of her opponents (and history) and offered a full and unapologetic voice to the needs and concerns of the black community. Most notably, in a historic speech in Harlem, the first for any presidential candidate, Hillary directly challenged the white community to accept that a majority of black lives and livelihoods have consistently lagged far behind white American's opportunities, successes, and well-being, and that white economic gains had often come at the expense of their black counterparts.
If there was one message the white working-class got from Hillary in this campaign, it almost certainly was that black lives were going to matter in her presidency. Hillary challenged white Americans to acknowledge their economic successes and take heed of those who have been left behind in the recovering economy. More importantly, Hillary insisted that white Americans should recognize and appreciate the role race plays in the failure of the black community to fully benefit from the economic recovery.
That seemingly obvious reasoning should be commonplace in our political debate, but these truths have been overlooked throughout our nation's history. Black economic gains have always lagged behind those of white Americans, certainly not just during the Obama administration. In the present economy, blacks have experienced the slowest economic recovery of any group of Americans.
In 2014, a Pew Research Center report found that only whites had seen their wealth rise during the Obama economic recovery:
"White households' median wealth ticked up to $141,900 in 2013, up 2.4% from three years earlier... Net worth for black households dropped by a third during that time to $11,000. Hispanic families experienced a 14% decline in wealth to $13,700.
Whites have 13 times the net worth of blacks, the largest wealth gap that's existed since George H.W. Bush was president in 1989. The ratio of net worth between whites and Hispanics now stands at more than 10, the widest it has been since 2001."
Arguably, black Americans are deserving of the most attention when considering the effects of 'economic anxiety' over the pace of recovery, but some politicians and others have reverted at the end of this election to handwringing over the economic condition of folks who have, overall, reaped the lion-share of any vestiges of recovery from the record lows that marked the Bush recession. It's not hard to imagine whose needs, interests, and concerns will struggle to take precedence in the next economic debate.
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)I'm not speaking so much in "abstracts" as I am in perception. You are making the case that the white majority shouldn't see their problem as being rooted in minority "success". I don't disagree. The point I am making is that their perception exists DESPITE the presence of evidence to support it. Populations are far more likely to respond to their perceptions, and far more likely to connect it to changes they see going on in their communities.
It's the Harold Hill phenomenon. "It's the pool tables". They can more quickly understand and accept what they see going on right in front of them, than some abstract concept of globalism. If they are comfortable and doing relatively well, they can accept certain changes going on in their social environment. Let that comfort slip, and they quickly will be UNcomfortable with changes going on around them that they do not understand and that they do not feel includes or benefits them. And bigotry is a very easy one to tap into by a populist.
NCDem777
(458 posts)is because they voted for the people punching them.
No more tiptoeing around that fact. They wanted financial deregulation. They got defrauded. They wanted the environmentalists to get out of their business. Many rural wells are now giving their kids cancer. They wanted low/no taxes. Their communities now have no infrastructure.
Cosmocat
(14,565 posts)"They" need to fuck off and get off the tax payer teet!
While the entire country needs to kiss their ass and find a way to give them jobs.
Who has gotten it worse from an economic standpoint, the folks living in the rural areas or the folks living in urban areas?
But, the discussion is always that the "they need to just do the shit jobs we don't do and live on a pittance" while we have to find a way to go out into these rural areas and build factories with jobs that are not beneath them and pay them the kind of money with the kind of benefits to have nice homes, two cars, put their kids through college, etc.
That is not even getting into the absurdity of how they feel so victimized but crawl over glass to vote for the assholes who at this point out and out, gleefully fuck them economically.
They voted for the mother fuckers who spent the last year trying to outdo themselves in how horrible of a health care bill they could get passed, which would have fucked MANY of their voters. They voted for the assholes who want to further limit the cap on the tax savings for their retirement accounts, which already are too fucking low, in order to eliminate the estate tax, give corporatio and the ultra rich massive tax breaks.
They literally could give a fuck about that, they are too busy being offended by NFL players taking knees.
HOW THE FUCK DOES VOTING R ADVANCE THEIR ECONOMIC INTERESTS?
It doesn't, not one bit.
You can't vote for a POS con man developer who has lived a life off of not making good on debts, defaulting on loans so bad he can't get them from anywhere in his country, who spews the tag line, Make America Great again while refusing to have his MAGA hats actually made in the USA, etc, etc., ect, etc, etc, and say you are interested in your economic well being.
These assholes are going pass a tax cuts to the ultra rich and the mother fucker who signs that bill STILL WON'T HAVE RELEASED HIS FUCKING TAXES.
Actions speak louder than words. When you crawl over class go vote for 45, senators like Toomey, House members like Ryan, local POS Rs ... You simply don't give a fuck about policies that benefit YOU.
NCDem777
(458 posts)their issue is that policies that would benefit them would also benefit "those people."
We all know what "those people" means
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)data because it conflicts with how they want to view things.
There is a part of me that wants to disbelieve some of the data there but one has to be reality based.
There was no way for a Democratic candidate to appeal to those voters described in your OP. They wanted a candidate who was going to push back on equal rights for non white people. They believed Trump was that person. He likely is that person.
The people fighting against what the data you posted are invested in believing those folks simply want a candidate with an ultra progressive economic message. The evidence for that is just not there.
Coventina
(27,121 posts)
elleng
(130,956 posts)Thanks.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,112 posts)in River City or DU we will be told the reason Hillary lost is'
wait, I am not allowed to bring that up
Onward and upward to REPEAT the mistake since we are NOT allowed to TALK about it!
Thomas Hurt
(13,903 posts)The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,721 posts)If you're used to privilege, equality looks like oppression.
pandr32
(11,586 posts)
Cosmocat
(14,565 posts)since the day after ...
It's a bullshit rationalization for the dipshit press to justify it...
delisen
(6,044 posts)against racial and ethnic minorities is a positive.
brush
(53,784 posts)like discrimination.
Vinca
(50,276 posts)
Tobin S.
(10,418 posts)We all saw that with his racist dog whistles and even overt racism at times right from the get-go, and none more clearly than his supporters. Many who supported him voted on that and that alone without any other consideration. Now we are all paying the price including his supporters.
Hate makes a person dumb. Letting go of hate instantly improves intelligence. A good friend of mine from a long time ago said that he tried to learn from everyone he met. That is an excellent policy. I have seen white power guys who have recovered from the hate they once held in their hearts. The difference is like night and day, not only emotionally, but also in the level of intellectual improvement in these guys.
dalton99a
(81,513 posts)To Improve Their Lot in Life
JHan
(10,173 posts)However the economic shifts are real - but everyone has experienced it, not just them. Those who make up the 55% on the other hand, hang on to "we're really the most oppressed" when every metric shows otherwise.
Thanks bigtree
JCanete
(5,272 posts)ignorance, but it is a take of the world that people are more likely to latch onto if they are looking for a reason for their own insecurity. They are being fed that reason on a silver platter by the media and the GOP. Its the illegal immigrants their tax dollars are going to, or its affirmative action that is keeping them out of the job they went to school for...
The thing about fear is that it easily tips into hatred and people who are fearful are more likely to be governed by their limbic brain than their reasoning.
and then there's the fact that we aren't talking about the GOP base here when it comes to who elected trump. We are talking about the margins. We are talking about a message that might have gotten some of those who ultimately went for Trump or abstained, to vote for us. Our mistake was not that we were championing issues of people of color and people of different religions and orientations. Our mistake was that we failed to couple that battle with the plight of the middle class and the poor. Had we incorporated a message that clearly showed we weren't leaving these people out in the cold or building a better world by cutting into their little slice of the pie...that we all had common cause that would elevate all of our lives, maybe we could have shaved off some of those Trump votes.
uponit7771
(90,346 posts)JCanete
(5,272 posts)think about others.When people think others are doing harm to them(as ridiculous as it is- and it is totally ridiculous) they find reasons to hate those others. And then there is the tried and true reason for perpetuating racism, which is to strip people down to barely livable conditions and say, "but hey, at least you aren't those guys." That IS absolutely a consequence of economics and hardship. Sure, there's also the people who simply need to justify the fact that they are continuing to win, and racism is fed by that need. That's its own phenomenon, but I've laid out to you how nothing about these "revelations" disproves economics as an element, and you came back with...well not really a refutation of any of it.
Girard442
(6,075 posts)Oddly enough, a person I knew who had been booted around by circumstances in that time period was a Hillary supporter. Go figure.
Tom Rinaldo
(22,913 posts)In an election tight enough that people on DU still routinely blame Stein voters for Hillary losing, any factors that may have determined how less than 200 thousand people in the rust belt voted can share in the distinction of delivering the presidency to Trump. So if 10 million white folk voted for Trump primarily out of racist fears, and half a million voted for Trump primarily out of economic fears, it can be argued that both groups delivered the presidency to Trump.
Racial influences on white voting is not exactly a brand new phenomena. Obama would have won by bigger margins also were it not for inherent racism.
peggysue2
(10,829 posts)And who has been pushing this for years?
Right-wing radio and Fox News. Stay on a steady diet of propaganda and trash talk, add a pinch of racial and economic anxiety and even your sweet little grandmother can start harping all the right notes.
Doesn't matter all the videos we've watched of unlawful, ghastly police shootings, Nana will be convinced that that man (the one shot) must have done some bad. Black Lives Matter? A Commie Front, bent on violence. Pro-Choice feminists? A Lesbian Conspiracy. Slavery or any other inconvenient historical detail? Ancient history and why bring all that up? Or even worse, the comment one former hedge fund manager wrote about the Confederate Monument controversy (paraphrasing here):
Those monuments are a way of honoring our people, fine men and women whose only crime was slavery, a human condition that had existed for 5000 years.
In other words--Why blame us? Everyone did it.
Bill O'Reilly recently epitomized the whole white, male victimhood schtick. After paying out 32 million dollars on a sexual harrassment case, he claims he's the victim. He's the one treated oh so unfairly. Even by God.
Yeah, it sounds nuts but there is a swath of the American public that has consumed this garbage. They believe it and will swear by it. Black people are a bunch of whiners; white people are the true victims.
Of what I cannot tell you. I suspect it's fear of modernity, not unlike what we hear from many religous radicals, a desire, a nostalgia for the 'good ole days.' When women, people of color, gays etc. knew their place and kept their mouths shut.
Sorry grandma, that's not going to happen.
Initech
(100,079 posts)And when they started watching Fox, they became stark raving lunatics. Convinced that liberals are the devil and that the billionaires deserve their tax breaks. And that snowflakes need to crawl back to their safe spaces. There's something about that channel that is designed to just make people go batshit fucking crazy.
Remember the Glenn Beck era? How crazy he was? He is the epitome of your typical Fox watcher - he's crazy, senile, rude, fantasizes about an era where white supremacy was king, made bullshit up about "the left", and a male dominated culture. And he used more Nazi imagery than the History Channel does.
Now multiply that by several million and you've got today's white supremacists. The Richard Spencers and Based Stick Mans of the world. The "alt right". The people who worship Pepe The Frog and carry tiki torches through our streets. And remember - it's not the elderly who the alt right is targeting. It's the youth.
We saw this in Charlottesville. The people who we thought were going to be the racist privileged weren't elderly shut ins who were watching Fox News 24/7. They were 18 - 25 year old white males who were convinced they were the superior race by people like Alex Jones and Mike Cernovich. They were fast food employees, service workers, community college students. Not middle managers or the retired. And that's why they are targeting universities.
We are in for some dark times if the new generation coming up worship Hitler and fly swastika flags. 
uponit7771
(90,346 posts)
Motley13
(3,867 posts)A nun gets to the truth
Initech
(100,079 posts)A truly toxic combination. 
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)It's both. White people were told that black people would take their jobs if they weren't slaves. Racism is perpetuated via economic arguments. White people had no problem with welfare, FHA, Gi bill, and other government assistance until people of color became eligible. Then the GOP, which hated those programs to begin with took advantage of the situation and manipulated perceptions to claim that people of color were receiving a disproportionate amount of tax payers' money. "They're stealing from you" "They're taking your jobs" works. Did you ever stop to consider why transgender bigotry was also tied to economics with the argument that they required excess medical care that would drain the VA?
Joe941
(2,848 posts)Honestly I don't know how wide spread it is, but some black people have yelled racial remarks towards me. They did not physically harm me but I did not feel safe either.
Racism exists as black on white, white on black, Mexican towards African Americans. Its all needs to be called out when seen.
bigtree
(85,998 posts)...which is the subject of the poll?
Generally speaking, do you believe there is discrimination against white people in America today?
Have you experienced discrimination?
Joe941
(2,848 posts)discrimination - the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex.
I think being verbally abused qualifies. But I don't think I've ever been lost a job because of being white.
My point is racism is rampant and even white people experience. It should all be eliminated.
ck4829
(35,077 posts)LeftInTX
(25,364 posts)According to the article only 19% of whites feel that they have been personally discriminated against.
While 55% believe that "whites are discriminated against". The only explanation is that they see it on Fox or hear it on the radio. Remember Shirley Sherrod and the Breitbart tape? How many people believe Brietbart's heavily edited version?
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)If you worried about your economic position, whether you've lost your job, or your paycheck doesn't go as far as it used to, you are more likely to blame an easy target - like minorities or immigrants. This was a big part of the Nazis rise to power, and, on a smaller less sucessful scale, the same dynamic played out in the USA during the 30s.
bigtree
(85,998 posts)...I think you need to be predisposed to such scapegoating and demagoguery.
That's deeper than some economic fix.
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)Some people have a greater tendency to do it than others. But environment and perceptions have a strong influence on our behavior. When people feel threatened, those with the tendency to scapegoat are more likely to manifest the behavior.
bigtree
(85,998 posts)...the nation's 'leadership' right now came to power by exploiting and aggravating those racial fears.
I was watching a PBS special about school desegregation, and there was a scene where three women who had been the first in their state/town to integrate a public school went back and walked up the hill where there had been a gauntlet of troopers, reporters, and folks yelling epithets and slurs as they walked up to the school back in those awful days.
One of the things which struck me was the point where they had made it up to the school, surprised how long the driveway seemed today; and the one question that was on all of their minds was, 'why?'
Why would folks act that way toward children seeking to learn at the same school as their white counterparts?
The most revealing thing was found in their recollection of how they had eventually succeeded in establishing themselves at the school - the first school year after integration found these 20 or so black kids with this formerly all-white school all to themselves because the majority of the white kids had been pulled out by their parents.
In fact, most of the white parents and legislators who had been invested in segregated public education in their southern state were willing to just shut the entire system down to avoid integrating and sending their children to school with black kids.
Turns out, the following year, most of the white kids were allowed by their parents and the community establishment to come back to the school(s) in overwhelming numbers and the process of integration that we take for granted today was allowed to proceed.
I remember how, in my town in the early 1980's, how employers were already wary about hiring because of a recession, but there seemed to be a lot of lingering racism which was institutionalized in the remaining imbalance in the levels of power and control of businesses and institutions hadn't yet caught up with the population changes. About 4 or five years later, as my own children's generation was graduating from high school with their fully integrated and opportune class, employers opened the floodgates and allowed this educated and motivated community to fill the much needed slots in a rapidly expanding economy.
In many ways we never looked back; never looked back. In about a blink of an eye, the barriers which seemed so impenetrable in the recent past seemed to evaporate overnight as the truths of integration outstripped all of the hype and conjecture about racial relationships which had so gripped our community for decades. It was like that in the past, on a different degree of transformation with the schools and in employment after the passage of equal employment laws and school desegregation efforts. All of the sudden the barriers in folks' minds just fell (for most, it seemed).
At the end of it all, we're just left to wonder -- reflecting on all of the anxiety and angst we'd felt about crossing those artificial barriers to our successes -- just, why? Why did this happen, if it was all so possible to just let it go? Why was all of this perpetrated on a people? Opportunism? Evil? Hysteria?
I don't know. I do know that it took leadership to turn most Americans away from their antipathies and allow progress.
Cosmocat
(14,565 posts)drives a 45,000 pickup truck with a hitch to tow their 7,500 ATV, has thousands of dollars in firearms and hunting camo, etc.
Yeah, there are folks who aren't doing as well who get sucked into it, but it is primarily cultural.
And, why the F does not this not cut both ways?
Are POC and other minorities all doing super well?
Why do white people get this, "gee, they are just economically anxious so we need to understand where they are coming from in being hateful, selfish pricks" treatment while non-whites simply need to strap the boots up, take the shit jobs the people screaming about them getting off the tax payer tits are too good to do and shut up mindset?
JCanete
(5,272 posts)racial and gendered lines as well right? Who is saying that non-whites need to just take the shit jobs and keep their traps shut? Who? Economic equality/fairness has to be built upon that kind of equity. What it doesn't need to be built on is taking from people and making their lives shabbier when there are a handful of people sitting on all of the wealth in this nation. That mentality from both sides of this issue, that the whites have had it good and now its their turn to pay, or that the immigrants and those needing economic assistance are the ones taking money out of our wallets.
Yes, if the white middle class were the source of the deprivation experienced by communities of color, that first fix would make perfect sense. But why do we keep ignoring those at the top who actually have the resources to improve lives across the spectrum, but are instead hoarding them...becoming defacto, multi-generational aristocracy?
Cosmocat
(14,565 posts)I did not post or imply in any way that all "whites have it good."
That is dishonest republican like deflection.
Point stands.
The bulk of the national discussion consists of kissing the white rural voters asses and making it out like poc and other minority groups are shiftless bums living off welfare.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)is doing the job its paid to do. All that one is talking about is white rural jobs that represent small pockets of people. It certainly isn't talking about the absurd consolidation of wealth in the hands of the 1%. But the left-wing argument about economic disparity is entirely different than that, and it absolutely does not characterize people of color the way you have laid out.
This is what you said that I'm addressing.
"And, why the F does not this not cut both ways?
Are POC and other minorities all doing super well?
Why do white people get this, "gee, they are just economically anxious so we need to understand where they are coming from in being hateful, selfish pricks" treatment while non-whites simply need to strap the boots up, take the shit jobs the people screaming about them getting off the tax payer tits are too good to do and shut up mindset? "
I have no idea what you're talking about that I'm deflecting, nor did I put words in your mouth about all whites having it good. My point was that nobody on the left is trying to make it about white pain at the expense of people of color, nor is the point about addressing economic distress to coddle white people and their bigotries, or even to privilege their concerns over the concerns of the rest of the 99%.
It is about addressing an issue that affects us all. There is power in doing that, because it puts us all on the same side for once.
Cosmocat
(14,565 posts)they are selfish, hateful people who believe in their very core that you, me and all our other america and god hating liberals are the spawn of satan.
There is literally nothing us anti-christs can say that they will hear.
I have 1,000s of fact based, reasoned discussions with them, and they reject everything out of hand that does not support what they want to believe.
LIBERAL LIES!
SOCIALISM!
SOMETHING FOR NOTHING!
YOU LIBERALS JUST WANT THESE PEOPLE ON THE GOVERNMENT TEET FOR VOTES!
There is no "putting us all on the same side."
These people will vote R until they they bled dry, and even then will blame us for it.
It is about addressing an issue that affects us all. There is power in doing that, because it puts us all on the same side for once.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)percentage if we did this, and it would slowly eat away at the hold-outs, at least over time. We could get the next generation before they do.
JI7
(89,251 posts)where are black women compared to others economically ?
the fact they blame black women and not the groups who do far better financially says a lot.
Trump is ripping off the country openly and they don't care because he is an ignorant bigoted white man .
J_William_Ryan
(1,753 posts)“ Notable, however, is that while a majority of whites in the poll say discrimination against them exists, a much smaller percentage say that they have actually experienced it. Also important to note is that 84 percent of whites believe discrimination exists against racial and ethnic minorities in America today.”
So everyone is ‘discriminating’ against everyone else – a truly ridiculous notion.
Just as ridiculous is the notion that whites are being ‘discriminated against.’
Trump supporters, conservatives, and Republicans have contrived this inane myth that they’ve somehow become ‘victims’ – when in fact there exists no entity in American society seeking to disadvantage white Americans.
Tatiana
(14,167 posts)And having minorities share in upward mobility. It kills them. My husband is still mistaken for a field worker, when he actually owns the business and goes to the work sites to supervise the work being done. Why? Because he's brown, of course! And people always seem to have the attitude of surprise that he is the one that owns the business.
That is why the attitude of "a rising tide lifts all ships" should be incorporated into our messaging. That was the Clinton/Gore selling point: don't we ALL want to do better? But these evil creatures would rather drag everyone else down into the swamp instead of finding solutions to uplift people. (And it's not just white people -- it's self-hating latinos and African-Americans like Marco Rubio and Clarence Thomas).
lunasun
(21,646 posts)to do. Trump they hoped will make America white again
Garrett78
(10,721 posts)If I were to ask you, “Do you believe that folks of color had equal opportunity and were treated equally in 1963, or whether or not black children were treated equally in schools and had equally educational opportunity in 1962, I know right now no one in here would say, “Well, of course, naturally they did in 1963. That was a damn good year to be black or brown in America.” Everyone regardless of your opinion in 2007 would quickly acknowledge how bad it was back in the day, because it is no sweat off your back. Forty four, forty five years later, it’s easy to talk about how bad it was, but see, here’s the trick: What do you think those white folks said when those very questions were put to them in 1963, and in 1962, in a time where the apartheid system was very much in effect? It was before the Civil Rights act, before the fair voting acts, before the fair housing act. In retrospect, we can all look back and say how profoundly unequal it was, and yet when white folks were asked, some of them our parents, our grandparents, great uncles great aunts. These ancestors of ours were asked the very same question in 1963. “Do you think people of color” – they didn’t use that term, they said racial minorities – “Do you think that racial minorities are treated equally in your community?” And 80% of white folks said yes. In 1962, when Gallup asked, “Do you think that black children receive equal educational opportunities in your community?” 90% of white folks said yes. Nothing to see here. What is all this complaining? What is this march on Washington? I don’t get it. I don’t understand it. In fact, the very month of that march, which now it seems every white liberal wants you to think they were at. The very month of that march, white folks were asked by Newsweek what they thought about it. They said, 2/3 of whites said, that Dr. King and the Movement were pushing too far too fast, asking for too much and too soon. The idea that this country was ready to hear this even at this time when we know how vicious it was, is a lie. What does it mean that white folks were in denial in 1962 and 63?
mountain grammy
(26,623 posts)Excellent piece of writing here, and those of us who lived it, awake, know every word is true.
Garrett78
(10,721 posts)mountain grammy
(26,623 posts)I'm 70 this year. You are absolutely right about the 60's.. There's been progress, but, like Chris Rock says, "white people used to be crazy. Now they're not as crazy. It's not black progress, it's white progress," and I fear it's coming to a dead stop.
TheFrenchRazor
(2,116 posts)
question everything
(47,485 posts)mean what they do not like the Democrats' "identity politics." That they don't like how blacks, Latinos, women, gays, immigrants - take your pick - have been getting special attention, protected against discrimination, while white males were left to fend for themselves.
And, of course, there are white men who don't like it that immigrants and all the "protected groups" are working hard and succeeding, while they are still waiting for their rewards to show up.
bigtree
(85,998 posts)"...against discrimination."
question everything
(47,485 posts)
L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)voter suppression and outright stealing of votes. And the blame goes to ALEC and the Republican Elephant they rode in on.
Awsi Dooger
(14,565 posts)That's what it was. I don't know how anyone pretended otherwise.
