Politico: What’s a Class Revolution Without Black People?

[brooklynite]

As the campaign lurches forward, some Sanders supporters are grudgingly getting behind Hillary Clinton, but others are clinging to the movement, hoping that there’s a way—through the Green Party, which officially nominates Jill Stein this weekend at its convention in Houston, or just refusing to vote at all—to keep fighting for their revolution.

But their willingness to shout down one of the most iconic figures in modern civil rights raises a question: Just what revolution are they talking about? And for whom?

A look at the Sanders rooting section, or a Green Party rally, is a striking picture: They are every bit as white as the typical Trump rally. Susan Sarandon, writer and activist Naomi Klein, novelist Jonathan Lethem. Black people? Aside from a few high-profile Sanders supporters—author Ta-Nehisi Coates and former NAACP president Ben Jealous, to name two—they overwhelmingly voted for Hillary Clinton.

Black people’s absence raises an important—and uncomfortable question for the uber-progressives who see themselves at the heart of Sanders’ movement, which continues to march on. If you look at who’s really on the bottom of the American economic hierarchy, you realize that any genuine revolution is going to have to be a campaign to lift up people of color. This isn’t just a critique of the Sanders movement for not being diverse enough (though that’s a problem, too). The absence of black and brown people is a genuine impediment to their movement. It’s black Americans, not would-be white revolutionaries, who’ve led a successful movement to claim power and rights in this country. And it’s black people who are going to be the beneficiaries. If they're missing—which they are—it suggests both that the movement is getting something wrong, and isn’t long for the political world.


http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/08/bernie-sanders-jill-stein-holdouts-214135

[Gothmog]

1. Very interesting article

Thanks for posting

[Armstead]

3. This should be alerted as refighting the primary and insulting Sanders

I won't do it, but fair is fair.

If actual discussion and debate were still allowed it'd be one thing. But if nothing remotely critical of Clinton and Democrats can be stated here, neither should Bernie's campaign and supporters be subjected to a replay of the most divisive issues from the primaries....It's painting "the left" with a very broad and unfair brush.

[brooklynite]

4. Disagree...this is looking forward during an ongoing political campaign....

...now expressed through the Stein campaign, rather than the Sanders primary.

[Armstead]

5. It is opening up wounds ....not in the spirit of looking forward

unless it has been decided that looking forward means throwing everything related to "the left" into the trashcan.

[CajunBlazer]

59. If you want "old wounds" to be healed - here is what you should do

Publicly disavow the Green Party and its candidate who is unqualified to be mayor of her small town of Lexington, Mass., much less President of the United States and who's very candidacy makes it more likely that Donald Trump will live in the White House for the next four years. Do it right here on DU.

Urge all Democrats and left leaning independents to support Hillary Clinton, the only viable Presidential candidate who remotely represents their ideological positions, who has the best chance of actualizing their professed goals for a fairer America, and who will almost certainly reset the direction of the Supreme Court for the next 20 years.

By all means continue your REVOLUTION to the extent you are able - if it proves viable over more than one primary campaign, there will be other opportunities. However, in the mean time the future of our country for the next four years hangs in the balance. True progressives would not sacrifice the fates of those defenseless people we are sworn to protect to the leadership of Donald Trump and a Republican Congress. None of us can afford to can be so selfish as to engage in meaningless protest voting when the future of our country is at stake.

When "perfect" is no longer a real possibility and the only real choices are "bad" and "better", rational people put off the pursuit of perfection for another day and chose the better option, especially if their current pursuit of perfection will prove counter productive to their goals.

[Demsrule86]

79. Your post is great. nt

[CajunBlazer]

82. Thanks much

I don't expect a reply from the poster to home I replied.

[Demsrule86]

84. What could he say? They don't reply

when you make complete sense but they don't want to believe it.

[Ken Burch]

95. 90% or more of Sanders supporters are already backing HRC.

Can you honestly tell me 90% or more of HRC supporters would be backing Bernie at this stage if he had won the nominee? I think we both know the answer to that.

Sanders people are already doing our part to beat Trump. We don't NEED to sign any loyalty oaths.

[Ken Burch]

94. Almost no Sanders people are backing Stein.

She's at 2%. She'll stay at 2%.

[DesertRat]

6. I was just on the jury

I disagreed that it was refighting the primary. This is now about the general election as Jill Stein is about to be nominated as the Green Party candidate.

[Armstead]

7. Then can we talk about other issues that were raised? I think not.

P.S. I didn't alert on this.

[Demsrule86]

80. As you know I am a Hillary supporter

but I am one who wants a progressive movement to succeed . It is why I tried to support Occupy. However, you have to consider that we need POC in any movement and in order to get their support we must address their concerns which are not just about income inequality or banks. While economic issues are important to all, there are other issues that must be addressed in order to get this country back on track.

[Snotcicles]

20. How Ironic. I posted a link to a very well explain position in opposition by an African American

writer today shortly after noon and it was scrubbed within minutes. I don't think they even took time to read it.

[JustAnotherGen]

9. I take this as

Where do we go from here.

The issues Sanders brought up our critical to us moving forward - they can't be dropped.

We are going to have to pick off a few of the bastards in the House though. He inspired a few candidates with his message to run. We have got to support those people in their elections.

Fair wages in an environment focused economy is not asking for anything "radical".

[Armstead]

11. Certain views are prevented from asking "Where do we go?"

Either issues that are debatable are put on hold until after the election or not.

It's not a discussion if the can of worms of alleged racism among Bernie supporters is opened up now, but other opinions about that are not allowed...and otehr cans of worms on otehr issues are required to be ignored until after the election.

[CajunBlazer]

60. No one is accusing those pursuing a REVELOTION of being racist

The OP is simply pointing out that black and brown people by and large not are part of the movement by choice since they are more pragmatic about the conditions and way forward to improve them.

I am not even sure that young people are totally behind the REVOLUTION. While it very true that many tend to be more idealistic, but consistently illustrate that by and large millennials are actually are less liberal than typical Democrats. There is little doubt of this. Never underestimate the lure of free college and the reduction of burden of college debt on the typical millennial. Rather than acting like selfless progressives, many were more interested in their economic self interests.

Without black and brown people and many millennials, the REVOLUTION basically consist of middle class or upper middle class white people who can afford to participate. And Armstead, I would be willing to bet that you fit into that demographic.

[Armstead]

63. I'm white but you have no clue as to my level of financial comfort

That's a straw man argument on so many levels, both regarding people like myself and the larger progressive movement.

But I won't respond further because of the limitations on expression of contrary ideas on DU.

[CajunBlazer]

64. The limitation of experession on DU do not...

... do not prohibit you from disclosing personal information, though I understand perfectly if do not wish to disclose such information as your general income status. However, would still be willing to wager that you consider yourself middle class or even upper middle class or above.

In addition, I would also be willing to wager that none of the people you know personally who are probably going to vote for Jill Stein, except possibility a few idealistic young people who certainly will not be poor their entire lives, are what we could commonly refer to as poor in this country.

All indications are that the REVOLUTION consists of mostly of white people who are middle class or above. As pointed out in the OP, how can economic revolution be successful if it consist mostly of individuals who have already benefiting from the system?

[Armstead]

87. Like I said, you have no clue to my or any of my friends financial status

I'll just say your assumptions are incorrect

[Gothmog]

83. There are a host of reasons why several demographic groups refused to back the so-called revolution

None of these reasons had anything with Sanders supporters being racists but more with how one viewed issues such as the legacy of President Obama. I am an Obama supporter and though that he did a great job and disagreed strongly with attacks on the Obama legacy. I am not a POC but I found a great deal in common with members of the AA group on this board.

One cannot have a revolution that is limited to a very narrow demographic group.

[forjusticethunders]

12. No, this isn't refighting the primary.

If you really cared about the Sanders movement you would look at what went wrong and how to fix it because it wasn't supposed to be about one election, right? But a lot of lefties simply do not want to face the fact that their political instincts are in dire need of recalibration, and that a lot of their political tactics are more about grandstanding and asserting their purity than about achieving change. I don't know where this crap came from, maybe it was picked up from Republicans because that's how they approach defeat, it's never them, it's the voters or some other outside factor.

The sooner you admit that "the left" is a fucking shitshow the sooner we can get to work on fucking fixing it. Hillary won EVERY marginalized group, and she actually won people making under 30k after the first few states. Instead of blaming other people and then whining whenever people point out why it happened, start thinking about why it happened and how it can improve for future campaigns and movements.

[tralala]

26. She won *EVERY* marginalized group?

You sure about that?

[kcr]

81. Don't keep us in suspense. Which one do you mean? n/t

[MADem]

13. Well, someone did it, and I was just on a jury for it. I voted to leave.

This isn't refighting the primary; this is discussing a REAL political issue going forward into the general.


Look at the first sentence--it isn't looking back, it is going forward:

As the campaign lurches forward....

The context IS that there WAS a primary, but this is not "refighting" it.


We're going to need all hands on deck, and this examines the nuts-and-bolts behind it. Right wing operatives are giving money hand over fist to Jill Stein (how else can someone who doesn't get any votes be able to afford a national ad buy?) in an attempt to pull votes away from our party.

I think it was a pretty low move to alert on this (and I am not accusing you of so doing, let me make that clear, FWIW) --we are adults, we can discuss real things that are happening in a realistic and mature manner. Black and brown people ARE absent from the "left of left" -- both the Sanders campaign and the Stein campaign--in STRIKING and obvious numbers--the polls do not lie, notwithstanding highly visible talking heads and celebutantes on the television....hell, if you looked at the people repping the GOP, you'd think they had a black and brown constituency too, but they don't EITHER.

It's worth talking about WHY these movements do not appeal to people of color and people of minority ethnicity in USA. I have a few ideas about it, but I like to hear what others have to say, too.

[Armstead]

14. It's worth talking but it can't be talked about except from one side

You want to talk about the Green Party as spoilers? Fine. Have at it. I agree with you to a large extent in a political context.

But this is going much bigger than the Bernie or Busters and Green defectors.

As a Sanders supporter who is now supporting Clinton, I still find the context of articles like that offensive and insulting and marginalizing a much larger swath of progressives. It's insulting me too. Attacking white progressives as racially insensitive and even as as racist is not conducive to kumbaya.

But honest opinions (like the one I am stating) stand a good chance of getting banned on DU.

My point is that if views are being confined to a narrow spectrum of "supportiveness," , then bashing and insulting Bernie's campaign, his supporters and the larger efforts to advanceprogressives issues should not be allowed either.

Sauce for the goose and all that.

[forjusticethunders]

15. You're making it personal

Nobody is calling you a racist. But you are being overly defensive when we should both be concerned about why the most marginalized people in society are not getting behind far left movements.

[Armstead]

16. It is personal to millions of people.

It is a legitimate topic of discussion.

But in the aftermath of this primary, and what went on, and the current narrow parameters of discussion here, it is poking the eyes of many people like myself, who have every intention of voting Democratic, but still feel the party needs major reform and still believe that economic justice is a valid issue to pursue.

[forjusticethunders]

17. And you want to build a movement for economic justice

without addressing the reluctance of black people to join that movement?

[Armstead]

18. You're missing the point

[forjusticethunders]

22. No, YOU are missing the point.

I'm talking about how the left can better incorporate marginalized groups into its movement and message so as to create a stronger, more broad based movement for social change.
You're talking about...your feelings because you don't like being criticized?

[Armstead]

34. Have you been here during the primaries?

You are not necessarily incorrect. But there are other dimensions to any discussion. However at present such discussions have to be one sided because nothing critical is to be said regarding the candidate or party during the election.

Therefore, it is not a "discussion" if people can bash "the left" but those who identify with "the left" but also support Clinton in the election cannot express themselves equally.

That's the point.

[EffieBlack]

35. I black people don't want to join the movement, it's the black people's fault, not the movement's

[GeorgeGist]

19. You did a pretty thorough job of bashing lefties upthread.

I can see why some might take that personally.

[forjusticethunders]

21. criticism = / = bashing

If you refuse to admit there's a problem and spin everyone telling you're there is a problem into someone "bashing" you then how does the problem get fixed?

[MADem]

25. If the shoe does not fit you, I urge you to not try to force your foot into it.

If you are a Sanders primary backer who is not racially insensitive, don't assume that it's you the article is speaking about--but be realistic, and don't deny that these people DO exist. A lot of 'em, I suspect, were Trumpeteers with a goal to disrupt and divide those on the left of the dividing line. But some of them are clueless people who have this sugary-sweet kumbayah attitude, believing everything can be fixed with a rising economic tide (never mind last hired/first fired, to say nothing of education gaps in both quality and availability) and they'd shit bricks if they had to spend a night, never mind an afternoon, in what they charmingly call an "underserved" neighborhood. They just don't understand how tough it is out there. They don't understand how HARD it is for a little kid to even get a decent grammar school education--just going to school involves RISK. Too many people have NO idea. They get mad and bullying, these few (no one here, of course), when the black and brown people don't just shut up and go along/get along. HOW DARE they, is kinda the vibe--and it gets your back up.

If you are a Sanders supporter who is voting for HRC, then you, by definition, are not a "Buster" or a Sour Grapes Greenie, or what-have-you. Those people have their own website where they can rail and scream and lash out.

Our job here is to elect more Dems and fewer Republicans. Any analysis and discussion should, in the spirit of the website, have the intent of furthering that particular goal.


People who want to rail about unfairness, rigged systems, hurt feelings or whatever can do that in LOTS of places on the internet. No one is stopping them. This place just ain't one of 'em.

But we do need to figure out WHY there's this weird divide--and it is a weird divide. I won't deny I am disturbed by the number of people I've seen lashing out at black and brown people while attempting to claim some kind of lefty mantle--I am not feeling that whole attitude one bit, and it's clear that there are millions of people who agree with me on that score. To me, a person cannot be a bigot and be a lefty--they are incompatible. Susan Sarandon spit-screaming at Dolores Huerta just blew my mind--that was probably the most famous (to my view) representation of really clueless, stupid white privilege I've ever seen. I was stunned. To me, anyone knowing Dolores' history would say "Sarandon was stupid and wrong." But a lot of people DEFENDED her--and I just had to smh. It seemed so obvious to me that she'd kicked herself in her own ass, but a scary number of (white) people did not see it that way. I would like to know WHY, not about that specific fight, mind you, but the overarching ATTITUDE-- why she and they can't empathize with the struggle of minorities, and want to impose her/their world view upon them, etc., and that whole We Know What's Best For You attitude--it really does get my back up. And I don't understand why they can't SEE that. I would like to know what makes them tick, and where their understanding is at, that they can claim to be worker-supportive and ignore/denigrate Huerta's UFW work.

I think that kind of exercise is helpful and I don't view it as refighting the primary so long as we stick to exploration of attitudes as opposed to "You did this/well, YOU did that." Sanders ran a vigorous campaign and he got a lot of people interested in his ideas and politics--but we need to get a handle on that scary side piece that came out of his movement. I do not for a second think Sanders wants that track to continue, the whole "white working man" thing, and how can he and you and me and others make it clear that we're not going to have success if that POV continues to have any currency is a topic worth exploring. IMO anyway....

[EffieBlack]

36. Exactly what MaDem said

[Armstead]

37. I can't respond. It is not a discussion that's allowed here anymore.

If you want to see DU become a "bash the left" site that's your right.

I disagree with the Greens and the hard core "it doesn't matter who is elected" group. But I don't think, considering the stated goal here is trying to unite Democrats and independents in the election, that it is appropriate or constructive to be bashing many of us who do have mixed feelings..

We have not abandoned our views and do not appreciate seeing the movement that Bernie represented in the primary -- and the whole progressive movement -- being insulted at this point. It does not further unity or "enthusiastic support."

If criticism is not allowed here, then don't claim to have a discussion about "moving forward" couched in the derogatory terms of the OP.

Aim your fire at Trump and the GOP instead.

[MADem]

49. Way to surgically miss the point I was making. I don't know how I could have clarified it more.

Anyone with racist/racially insensitive attitudes, I said, is NOT a lefty. That POV is incompatible with being an actual "lefty." We on the left are inclusive--not exclusive. We have a big tent. We don't push out minority actors, or try to impose "solutions" on them. People who are part of the "problems" are the best equipped to understand what it's going to take to solve them. It helps, in fixing it, to have lived it.

I am unashamedly very much in favor of bashing people who are racially insensitive or flat-out bigots--they deserve that criticism. Some of these players, I suggested, are "Trumpeteers," eager to divide the left (that would be the REAL left, not the fronting left).

Have you read Bernie Sanders' OP ED? It's quite good. He makes some great points.

Maybe that will help.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-sanders-message-bernie-bros-20160805-snap-story.html


Donald Trump would be a disaster and an embarrassment for our country if he were elected president. His campaign is not based on anything of substance — improving the economy, our education system, healthcare or the environment. It is based on bigotry. He is attempting to win this election by fomenting hatred against Mexicans and Muslims. He has crudely insulted women. And as a leader of the “birther movement,” he tried to undermine the legitimacy of our first African American president. That is not just my point of view. That’s the perspective of a number of conservative Republicans.

...

Clinton understands that Citizens United has undermined our democracy. She will nominate justices who are prepared to overturn that Supreme Court decision, which made it possible for billionaires to buy elections. Her court appointees also would protect a woman’s right to choose, workers’ rights, the rights of the LGBT community, the needs of minorities and immigrants and the government’s ability to protect the environment.


...


During the primaries, my supporters and I began a political revolution to transform America. That revolution continues as Hillary Clinton seeks the White House. It will continue after the election. It will continue until we create a government which represents all of us and not just the 1 percent – a government based on the principle of economic, social, racial and environmental justice.

...

[Armstead]

51. I know the point -- But the OP painted with a very broad brush...

and it is also being used elsewhere on DU. Too often it is NOT separating the closet Trumpsters from actual progressives. And, while I disagree with the progressive "spoilers" in the election, many of them are sincere in their commitment to progressive goals, and should not be demonized.

I did read Bernie's OP Ed. That's why I supported him all along, and long before the primary. And why I defended him here in the weeks when he was bashed for holding out on his endorsement. Bernie's a smart cookie, a 3D thinker and is totally dedicated to what he says he is for the long game.

[MADem]

54. The OP is just an article. It's a valid gripe, too.

And I don't think the article is indicting anyone who doesn't deserve it.

Wanting the white guys to have that good paying job is not "progressive" unless you want the black women and those young Latinos to have those good paying jobs, too. And unfortunately, there are a few "Me Firsters" out there, who think they enjoy First In Line privileges based solely on their complexions. Those people are NOT lefties--they just aren't. They're bigots who share one particular attitude about one particular issue , but they don't belong in our club--we don't do bigotry.

[Armstead]

57. I don't have an objection to posting an article like that under normal circumstances

But those of us who see it differently are restrained for commenting in the present environment here, lest we get banned.

I totally understand the importance of toning down the divisiveness during the election.

But the OP is divisive and insulting to many people who do not deserved to be characterized that way -- and there is no opportunity to state contrary opinions that might be construed as "refighting the primaries" or not being 100 percent supportive of Clinton and the Democratic Party institutionally.

That just doesn't sit right.

[MADem]

58. We will just have to agree to disagree.

I don't see anything wrong with learning from mistakes, though.

[bettyellen]

100. You still have not realized you're putting your ego way above doing the right thing and learning

To actually BE more open and inclusive? What happened to doing the right thing- you might benefit from it more than all this myopic navel gazing.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

66. Nicely done. So many were tone deaf during the primaries, and trying to shut down people of color

when we trying to explain where we stood.

Perhaps now they're ready to listen? Or, maybe not.

But if they truly agreed with what Bernie was trying to do, they'd at least be willing to listen and keep fighting the good fight.

[KMOD]

32. Well how do you deal with the vocal group of the supporters

who not only boo a National Icon like John Lewis, but claim that Congressman Lewis swiftboated Senator Sanders campaign?

I have no interest in re-fighting the primary battles, but to deny that these incidents happened, and are still happening, is not exactly helpful to any future progress the movement hopes to achieve.

[Armstead]

41. Discussion here is not allowed in a 3 dimensional way

So why stir the pot?

The hard core "Clinton haters" are already gone from here. It is not helpful to go after those who are supporting Clinton and dems in the election but have mixed feelings. If you want unity, don't be bashing on a side of the issue that is not presently allowed to respond from a different perspective.

[KMOD]

43. You have every right to respond.

I would sincerely like to hear your perspective regarding what I posted.

I'm not bashing, but I would like to know how do you reach out to those who bash a wonderful, National Icon and Treasure like John Lewis?

If the movement is to grow, that certainly needs to be addressed, and I'm not sure why you aren't comfortable addressing that.

[bettyellen]

101. a different perspective on why Stein and Sanders failed with black votes would be most welcome!

Why would you say that is?

Not sure why you think an answer to that would not be allowed here?

[Demsrule86]

50. I can see why you find this insulting.

However, I would like to see Bernie's movement continue...and we need all hands on deck for that to happen: including POC and yes the those Democrats who may be a bit towards the center. consider how occupy has been marginalized. I tried to work with them in Ohio...during the mortgage crisis and I could not get anywhere...no leaders, no plans and didn't help the people they needed to help. I was so disappointed. I really had hope for Occupy...but it is all in the follow-up , and it takes hard work too. I did the spring movement which was supposed to unleash a big wave of progressive activism...and we got nowhere. Bernie's movement will not continue if there is a litmus test for how far left you are...we need as I said before ...all hands on deck.

[Armstead]

52. A funny story that's a bit OT

My former girlfriend and I went to a local "Occupy" meeting during all that to support the cause. But when we walked into the room, they were about to have an enforced group circle, New Age hand-holding ritual. My GF and I looked at each otehr, rolled our eyes, and circled right out the door.

[Demsrule86]

77. I was there for one of those.

And everything had to be done by committee...no leaders at least where I was. They made me want to tear my hair out...when one of them suggested something that was just plain wrong and probably illegal, I was out.

[CajunBlazer]

65. How is attacking the Green campaign insulting Sanders's campaign

Especially when Sanders himself is supporting the Democratic nominee?

And understand this, if I were to attack Bernie Sanders or his campaign, which I am not, I would be breaking DU rules. Either by attacking a Democrat or a supporter of the party and/or because I would be rehashing the primaries.

I am doing neither. Understand this, the very candidacy of Jill Stein makes it less likely that Hillary will be elected and more likely that Trump will be elected. That set of facts is not debatable. This site was established to elect Democratic candidates, not to provide safe harbor for those voting for candidates of competing parties.

[Demsrule86]

78. Excellent point

I totally agree. There is nothing like DU...best site. Some want to come back but not to support Democrats I think.

[Lil Missy]

38. But it is not refighting the Primaries. It's about the here and now. And it's true. n/t

[Armstead]

39. It is hitting on raw nerves.

You wanna do that and claim to want people to join you in supporting Clinton?

Be my guest but it's not helpful.

[Lil Missy]

40. Then such people should take a break from DU. It's not mandatory reading - don't click it open. n/t

[Armstead]

42. Many have taken a break or left altogether...I've done so about 75 percent

But having been here through thick and thin over the years...I don't like to see a new form of witch hunting going on.

[Lil Missy]

47. That's a bizzare change of subject and has nothing to do with the OP or my comments.

Perhaps you would benefit from a break. You can always take up such "perceptions" with Skinner.

[Armstead]

48. Not bizarfre or change of subject

You said people who don't like things like the OP should "take a break. " I said many have, or gone altogether, because of the limits on discussion from all sides.

I don't object to discussion of issues. I prefer it.

But if Bernie supporters who want Clinton elected, but also have alternative views on issues have to stifle our responses on accusations of alleged "racism" on "the left" and in Sanders primary campaign, then flame bait accusing us of that should also not be allowed either.

[JustAnotherGen]

8. I wrote this so many times - using different words

In the AfAm Group:

But here’s another important difference: It’s likely that people of color also disagree with the candidates’ tactics and tone. Black people have experience with actually bringing about large-scale social change in a way that no other American demographic does, and that experience has made them expert pragmatists who for decades have swallowed hard to appease the feelings of white friends and colleagues in order not to disrupt fragile coalitions they knew were required to achieve and sustain progress.

We wrote the playbook. This election is critical as it does not just secure things like - our voting rights . . . But it impacts so many other groups downstream.

The Republicans have one focus: SCOTUS. That's why they picked Pence. That's why they refuse Obama appointing another Justice.

I think Clinton is going to win. I think the Senate is going to flip. I think we are going to end up with a great Supreme Court that can smack down judicial activism in the lower courts. A few smacks down and we can get down to the business of an inclusive economy with a focus on green and energy efficient production and infrastructure development and maintenance.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

67. Always brilliant! Thank you!

[forjusticethunders]

10. The problem with "leftism" is

for a movement to liberate the working class, I sure don't see many working class people in it. The socioeconomic base of the American "Far Left" is largely the children of the wealthy white bourgeoisie who are just repeating the ideas of long-dead thinkers without having the social roots to really understand. In retrospect, I don't know how the idea that doing all your organizing work in a demographic space that is among the MOST privileged in American society (aka college campuses full of middle class white kids) wasn't laughed out of the room.

This is the core issue, and until that strategy gets fixed, we're going to see these clashes between POC and the "activist left" for some time to come.

[runaway hero]

30. This is true about the campus left.

But the plurality of BLM is suburban blacks, so you can say the exact same thing about them as well. The campus - both black and white - are out of touch with the rest of the world.


This is people supporting the establishment because of a familiar face. Sometimes, the vote own it. This is one of those times.

[MADem]

53. +1. Nicely laid out.

It's not even the old "Limousine Liberals" complaint (the stinking rich swooping in to tell us all what's wrong with us) --it's college kids who have never missed a meal, don't have to struggle to pay tuition (though some may have killer loans they don't quite 'appreciate' yet) and haven't been in a "Hands Up Don't Shoot" situation in their lives, ever. Kids from comfortable suburban enclaves who were driven to school in a mini-van or SUV, who have helicopter parents who made sure they got that "Participation Award" when they went to any scheduled, after school event. And, by and large, kids who don't come from a working class tradition--they never saw that kind of thing at home, either (unless they were watching a sitcom like Roseanne, or something).

They're on their own for the first time ever (well, not counting the helicoptering from a distance) and they are stretching their psyches. They are cut off from the roots of the issues they purport to champion, and some of them tout those "Father Knows Best" style solutions. "If only they would JUST..... (fill in behavior change)" is always a warning sign. So's "THEY just need to get their priorities straight and (fill in 'solution')" -- living life from birth forward in an environment of deprivation in essential areas makes it tough to 'just' do anything, or have the skills to simply buckle down and apply an easy solution. It's a rather clueless 'blame the victim' approach, unfortunately.

If it were that easy, it would have already been fixed--people in economic straits are nothing if not resourceful.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

68. ^^^^ THIS!!!! ^^^^^^

[forjusticethunders]

76. Speaking of the socioeconomic base

That base is why I'm optimistic that Hillary won't go all neoliberal on us. Politicians are creatures of their base, this is basic Marxist theory. Hillary, even in a worst case scenario, is beholden to a base that is both socially AND economically progressive (despite not being explicitly socialist, though is certainly sympathetic), and needs that base to win the next election and secure a political legacy. So even in the worst nightmares of the Bernie or Busters, Hillary has major incentive to hew to the progressive path she has clearly carved out. Of course, all the better if you DO think she is a progressive deep down, as I and many others do.

[JCanete]

92. What? The far left is the children of the wealthy, really? The very wealthy

that represent the Establishment left? Ideas start and gain traction where they can. If others find them threatening, and the establishment will always find non-status quo thinking threatening, they will do their best to make sure those ideas are discredited, usually by not talking about the ideas themselves, but by demonizing or mocking the movement or its leaders. Thank goodness we never see any evidence of that on DU.

[geek tragedy]

23. Sanders supporters are lining up behind Clinton overwhelmingly.

It's only the die-hard Hillary Haterz and perennial special third party snowflakes who are voting Stein.

And, yeah, the Stein crowd shares skin color and overall temperament with their counterparts supporting Trump.

[Gothmog]

33. I also saw this at the DNC in Philadelphia

Things were rocky on Monday but after the roll call vote and the endorsement of Clinton by Sanders, things calmed down to a large degree. The Sanders supporters who left the convention were less than 150 delegates out of almost 1900. The vast bulk of the Sanders delegates were supporting Clinton by the end of the Convention. I sat next to a very nice young Sanders delegate on the last night and he was getting into supporting Clinton and collected a number of signs and swag.

[Starry Messenger]

24. Hopefully the next socialist to run will be looking forward and not trying to rerun the New Deal

coalition.

[JCanete]

90. uh okay, and what would that look like? You saying we don't need infrastructure or

to start fighting back against long-standing class warfare?

[Starry Messenger]

99. I'm pretty sure you misread.

[runaway hero]

27. black people didn't want any part of it.

I'm black. Black voters didn't want bernie. Especially the older ones who drive our community and vote the most. They wanted Hillary because they new her.

Sanders didn't reach out enough, but how do you reach people that were voting for Hillary no matter what?

This speaks more to the fact there is a professional establishment that is okay with the status quo, regardless of race. Incidentally, these are the biggest anti trumpers, without knowing why Trump can even run at all, or get this far.

[Snotcicles]

28. I have gotten a lot of good insight from "African-Americans For Bernie Sanders" Facebook Page. nt

[runaway hero]

29. Exactly.

Part of it is the elders. YOU WILL SUPPORT CLINTON, OR ELSE, or "this is a Clinton family!"



He had no chance.

[glennward]

45. What many black people know and understand is that it was the so-called "establishment"

that fought for and ushered in the civil rights progress that was made for them. Those who we negatively label as "establishment" have been in the trenches long before millennials were even born. There are many things about the establishment that blacks do not necessarily agree with or support but they do remember the history that they lived through. And they are loyal to those who fought for them and remained in the trenches to steadily refine the gains made during that era. They particularly do not like folks who berate or disrespect those they see as civil rights icons.

[runaway hero]

46. Exactly.

And the establishment still sucks.


Why does someone like myself have to support something just because my parents and grandparents did? Why is black politics always decided by old people (BLM aside?)

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

71. You have a mind of your own. Who was demanding that you to support HRC during the primaries?

You should have told those people to hell and support whoever you wanted.

[runaway hero]

73. I'm supporting HRC now.

But in the primary I said some nice things about Bernie and my grandmother just went on this huge tangent about the Clintons and the black community. My mom is the same. They literally said "this is an HRC household."


I'm young, admittedly I don't get it, but the support was so strong among them I stopped making my point.

[DemonGoddess]

97. I'm sorry to hear that you went through that

but in their defense, it's BECAUSE HRC has been in the trenches FOR them for her entire adult life.

Take my household as an example. We're weird though, so...

hubs is R, was raised R, but voted for Bill Clinton twice, for Al Gore, and John Kerry. He refused to vote for President Obama, and is still on the fence where Hillary Clinton is concerned. I actually find this kind of funny, because I'm 1/4 Filipino, a strong woman, and come from a family of strong women. His mother was a strong woman, divorced when it was still not "the thing" to do, and did a helluva job raising her kids. So, as we can see with him, some attitudes are simply "baked in".

Oldest son and youngest daughter both live with me. They both profess to be "independent". Funny thing there, is as I pointed out to my oldest, the independent thing as a young adult is often an affectation. They've both always voted DEMOCRAT. I went through my phase with this as a young adult as well, until I found out that for the party I always supported, I couldn't vote in primaries where the primaries were closed, and had to wait until the GE to cast my vote. That brought me OFF the fence and I registered as a Democrat, even though I'd always VOTED Dem and identified as Dem before.

Oldest son was a staunch Bernie supporter until the primary in NY. At that point, he flipped. We used to have discussions prior to his flip, and what I asked for him to do, was instead of listening to the campaign rhetoric, was to actually LOOK at Hillary's actual public record of service, and that he would be pleasantly surprised. He was, and quite surprised at how liberal she's always been.

Youngest daughter is gay, and in a union. She started out a Bernie supporter in 2015, by early 2016, before any primaries, she had flipped. She also did as I asked her to. Took a good, hard look at my candidate, to see why I supported her. What flipped her was the transgender identification rules she instituted at the State Department. No fanfare, no asking for recognition, she just DID it.

But like I said, my family is weird!

[glennward]

98. Nice.

Few young people want to do their own research. Just to easy to rely on news apps on their cell phones, Twitter and FB.

[MADem]

56. +1,000! nt

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

69. Because "black people know her" is *NOT* the only reason for supporting Clinton over Bernie!

Many of us have valid and legitimate concerns about Bernie's stance on race and public policy in general.

[runaway hero]

70. and many of us don't to just go along with our parents and the chruch class.

why is it this community position is always decided by the over 60's in public discourse. If not for BLM it would be the same old guys as always. why should I or anyone else have to support Hillary just because my parents, or their parents do?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

72. Again, you don't have to. It's still a free country. Just be mindful of the rules here at DU.

We are supposed to support the Democratic Party nominee.

During the primaries, you support whomever you want.

[runaway hero]

74. Of course

I support HRC now and intend to follow the rules.

[JCanete]

91. thanks! definitely the way it looks to me too. nt

[Gothmog]

31. I really liked this article and agree with the analysis

I saw some of this first hand at the Democratic national convention. There was a great deal of diversity in the Clinton delegates and far less in the Sanders delegates

[bravenak]

44. Glad they said it. I got tired of saying it.

[Gothmog]

55. I knew that you would like this analysis

[Orsino]

61. A nascent one.

As the civil-rights movement of the Sixties failed to include women, so the Occupy/American Spring movement has yet to cross over into African-American demographics. People are talking about this as though it's a fatal flaw, or a reason not to sign on.

It's not. Inequality didn't disappear when we nominated Clinton, and it will only have grown by Inauguration Day. I think we'll do more bridge-building in years to come, but it is up to us to decide the breadth and depth of the movement. Someone wise once said, "To go far, go together."

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

75. I think this message. Again, just because the Occupy movement failed and Bernie wasn't the

nominee doesn't mean the fight is over.

If we really care about inequality, then people of color MUST be included in that fight.

Thank you!

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

85. I unequivocally reject Sanders and find his supporters insufferable but...

casting racial aspersions upon them is ridiculous. Their greatest sin is naivete and I don't perceive malice or indifference for African Americans. African Americans have a seat at the table that the Bernie Bros don't, their presence or absence from a gathering of the disgruntled cultural left doesn't mean anything either way.

[Vattel]

86. More armchair social science.

[Blasphemer]

88. Indeed... there can be no class revolution without a race revolution

Capitalism feeds on race. Thanks for posting. There have been many good analyses of race and class as it applies to the 2016 election cycle but little of it has been heard.

[JCanete]

89. Susan Sarandon and Naomi Klein did not shout down John Louis.

Sarandon publicly engaged with Huerta,(oh the horror) but that is hardly the same thing. Lumping everybody who was pro Bernie and still has reservations about Clinton, into the same category because it sells a narrative is irritating, even if its only done vaguely.

No shit the lack of black people in the movement is a problem, and one that the democratic party establishment worked very hard to ensure, and something Brock and the media is still all too gleeful about. But its not like the Sanders campaign operated in a vacuum. People who want to write the narrative a certain way will say that the movement failed to attract black voters, and even better, that because it hasn't attracted black voters, (or enough of them), then there must be something broken in the movement, entirely pretending like they haven't had and don't continue to have influence over public opinion about what the Sanders movement is about.

And what's more frustrating, is they like to talk so superficially about the matter instead of delving into whether or not Bernie's policies would have actually been really really good for black Americans, because talking about those details undermines what they are actually selling. If people start hearing those things, maybe they will start giving his message a look. Instead they love obsessing about deficiencies based on public response alone. It's like saying "if you're movie was so good then how come nobody saw it," versus "people saw the preview, thus nobody saw the movie." Well what most people saw about the Bernie campaign, was the caricature of the preview, which successfully painted him as an old-white-man who only attracted middle class white voters, thus enough people, particularly people of color, didn't buy a ticket to the movie. And that is a perfectly understandable response to me. Superficially he looks like more of the same. I'm being told he is more of the same. I have only so much bandwidth, so why am I going to give this fucker my time of day?

This makes sense to me because to this day I still haven't listened or read a damn thing about Kasich or Cruz's platforms. I was fairly confident that they were more of the same, so taking a look didn't seem like the best use of my time. If a couple voices I respected had told me I should take a second look though, maybe I would have. But if they'd only confirmed my assumptions, then its more likely that I'd just accept my own assumptions at face value.

Anyway, to sum up: Yes, a class movement needs everybody in order to be successful. So yes, ops like this are there to help to make sure that doesn't happen by trying to remind us not of why a movement should have certain support, but only that it doesn't, so it must be shitty.

[Ken Burch]

93. No one should vote for Jill Stein. No one should have shouted down any AA speakers at the DNC.

Agreed.

At the same time, it was never fair to say that those who supported Bernie in the primaries didn't WANT people of color to be part of the economic justice movement. We did. We still do. It's just that we weren't able to get enough POC support.

To say we didn't want that support and didn't care about racism was and is bullshit.

And there's no reason to keep attacking the Sanders campaign on that now that the Sanders campaign is over.

[aikoaiko]

96. Throw in some "liberal white supremacy" and we can relive August 2015.

fight on