Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

gobears10

(310 posts)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 04:50 AM Jul 2015

What the heck!? Why are people viewing systemic racism and economic inequality as separate issues?

They are distinct issues, and can happen independently of each other. But they are also inextricably linked, and mutually reinforce each other.

On one hand, you have class-reductionists who say racism is merely an outgrowth of broader economic oppression. On the other hand, you have identity politics radicals who say systemic racism is THE fundamental problem is society, and everything should be viewed from a race-conscious perspective.

Both perspectives are stupid, naive, and short-sighted. We cannot address one without the other. Martin Luther King Jr. articulated this very well, saying, “Now our struggle is for genuine equality, which means economic equality. For we know that it isn’t enough to integrate lunch counters. What does it profit a man to be able to eat at an integrated lunch counter if he doesn’t earn enough money to buy a hamburger and a cup of coffee?”

Martin Luther King Jr. argued that the current economic system was rigged, and that we should move toward a "democratic socialism." In the weeks leading up to his assassination, MLK Jr. made it clear that economic issues became the central focus of his advocacy. MLK Jr. gave an excellent speech about the "other America," and was about to launch a "Poor People's Campaign," seeking to completely eradicate poverty for everyone, not only for blacks, but also for latinos, native americans, and poor appalachian whites. MLK Jr. hit the nail on the head when he said, "This country has socialism for the rich, rugged individualism for the poor.” MLK Jr. advocated for a government jobs guarantee and a guaranteed minimum income (or basic income). When poverty, economic inequality, low social mobility, poorly funded schools, city zoning regulations, poor healthcare, unemployment, lack of affordable housing, and predatory lending disproportionately marginalize people of color, when the youth African-American unemployment rate is 51%, of course economics matter a lot if we're aiming to uplift PoC. When you poll PoC on what issues they care about most, the economy and jobs are almost always at top.

It is largely useless to address systemic anti-black racism without taking on economic inequality. Similarly, it is useless to address economic inequality without addressing anti-black structural racism. Making college tuition-free won't change the fact employers both consciously and unconsciously discriminate against people with "black-sounding" names, even if they are equally qualified as whites. And Sandra Bland had a college degree, yet she still was assaulted by a cop. Economic reforms won't stop racial profiling by police in stop-and-frisk, or police being 21 times more likely to kill black teens than white teens. It won't change the fact that whites and blacks use drugs at the same rates, but blacks are arrested 4-6 times as much. Economics alone won't fix segregated schooling and housing. We need booth economic and racial justice, and it is important for progressives to not view these issues as mutually exclusive, but intimately intertwined. A particularly grotesque example of racism and unfettered capitalism mixing is the existence of private, for-profit prisons.

The progressive movement will honestly die if it breaks off into an "economic reform" faction and a "racial justice faction." If that happens, progressives can't accomplish anything, and we'll be divided while a unified GOP comes to power and screws us all over.

As Robert Reich said, "But it would be a terrible mistake for the progressive movement to split into a “Black lives matter” movement and an “economic justice” movement. This would only play into the hands of the right. For decades Republicans have exploited the economic frustrations of the white working and middle class to drive a wedge between races, channeling those frustrations into bigotry and resentment. In short, the Republican strategy has been to divide-and-conquer. They want to prevent the majority of Americans – poor, working class, and middle-class, blacks, Latinos, and whites -- from uniting in common cause against the moneyed interests. We must not let them."

45 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
What the heck!? Why are people viewing systemic racism and economic inequality as separate issues? (Original Post) gobears10 Jul 2015 OP
This was all done to give that smug turd Chuck Todd a reason to ask stupid questions. gordianot Jul 2015 #1
two sides of the same coin noiretextatique Jul 2015 #2
strategic divide and conquer by some candidates and their supporters. nt magical thyme Jul 2015 #5
indeed noiretextatique Jul 2015 #23
It has to be a part of the plan/modus operandi Android3.14 Jul 2015 #3
Then we should get united over race. gollygee Jul 2015 #40
divide and conquer magical thyme Jul 2015 #4
Hey…. MrMickeysMom Jul 2015 #6
+1 n/t Bonhomme Richard Jul 2015 #7
because it's a wedge issue on which Hillary can get the upper hand Doctor_J Jul 2015 #8
Social Justice is a wedge issue? JoePhilly Jul 2015 #14
there is a group that is making it one Doctor_J Jul 2015 #16
it's much easier for party centrists to focus on identity politics nashville_brook Jul 2015 #20
Your response demonstrates that you still don't get it ... JoePhilly Jul 2015 #25
{Sighhh} ... How many times does this need to be said and in how many different ways ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2015 #27
I'm going to tell you .... JoePhilly Jul 2015 #28
Now see? ... There you go ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2015 #32
Here? zappaman Jul 2015 #31
K&R blackspade Jul 2015 #9
It may not be as big a mystery as you describe...but it's certainly complex. Sancho Jul 2015 #10
Cotton and polyester are very distinct things but once those fibers are blended TheKentuckian Jul 2015 #11
bernie called them parallel issues restorefreedom Jul 2015 #12
There is a great deal of overlap, but they are separate gollygee Jul 2015 #13
There is a very long history.... Adrahil Jul 2015 #15
The richest black man in town is still pulled over more often, incarerated more often Sheepshank Jul 2015 #17
I agree artislife Jul 2015 #22
Systemic racism and income inequality do reinforce each other Baitball Blogger Jul 2015 #18
Because it allows marginalization of one of the candidates n/t whatchamacallit Jul 2015 #19
This has been ongoing for several years AgingAmerican Jul 2015 #21
Who benefits from this false dichotomy? Comrade Grumpy Jul 2015 #24
Right Wing Dems Teamster Jeff Jul 2015 #29
This tells some of the horrors far too many face AuntPatsy Jul 2015 #26
I invite you to read (re-read) Dr. King's ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2015 #30
He didn't say it in Other America because it's a different speech. jeff47 Jul 2015 #33
Well. I went to the speech that the OP cited ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2015 #35
IMO, he was speaking of the need for both fights. jeff47 Jul 2015 #36
True ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2015 #37
And whether those previous words were the totality of his plans jeff47 Jul 2015 #38
I think it's significant that earlier in the speech you cited ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2015 #39
Yep, they are two fights. Somewhat complimentary, but two fights. (nt) jeff47 Jul 2015 #42
And, though it cuts against the dominant DU 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2015 #43
We seem to have two pools of people talking past each other. jeff47 Jul 2015 #44
I see it a little differently ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2015 #45
Bernie Sanders and his supporters... malokvale77 Jul 2015 #34
I quit arguing they shouldn't be separated days ago. Just do what is right on both issues. mmonk Jul 2015 #41

gordianot

(15,240 posts)
1. This was all done to give that smug turd Chuck Todd a reason to ask stupid questions.
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 05:11 AM
Jul 2015

This is one of the more clever media marketing scams.

noiretextatique

(27,275 posts)
2. two sides of the same coin
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 05:30 AM
Jul 2015

and i really don't understand why this is even an issue, as your OP states so well.

 

Android3.14

(5,402 posts)
3. It has to be a part of the plan/modus operandi
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 06:40 AM
Jul 2015

Divide and conquer.

The ubiquitous "they" have Democrats fighting each other over race.

gollygee

(22,336 posts)
40. Then we should get united over race.
Tue Jul 28, 2015, 07:26 AM
Jul 2015

We don't have to be divided. We can all work together to eliminate racism.

 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
4. divide and conquer
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 07:02 AM
Jul 2015

It's to some candidates' advantage(s) -- particularly those with strong Wall Street/Bankster ties -- to make them appear like separate issues.

So those candidate(s) "friends" will do what they can to keep them looking like separate issues.

 

Doctor_J

(36,392 posts)
16. there is a group that is making it one
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 11:01 AM
Jul 2015

I guess interesting is one word for it. Especially since the candidates who want to elevate all of the poor are being targeted. But such is the modern day democratic party.

nashville_brook

(20,958 posts)
20. it's much easier for party centrists to focus on identity politics
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 11:51 AM
Jul 2015

than to have to continue to duck and cover whenever wages and Wall Street are mentioned.

JoePhilly

(27,787 posts)
25. Your response demonstrates that you still don't get it ...
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 05:45 PM
Jul 2015

... even if you "elevate all of the poor", including every black perosn ... middle class and wealthy black people will still be scared every time their teen is 5 minutes late. They'll still be at a much higher risk of being stopped and killed by the police. And then having the police get away with it.

This discussion is about that distinction. I think Bernie gets it. I think some of his loudest supporters on DU, do not.

And they do Bernie no favors by dismissing the social justice piece of this as if the economic inequality part ("elevate all of the poor") is the real issue.

Which is what you just did.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
27. {Sighhh} ... How many times does this need to be said and in how many different ways ...
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 06:22 PM
Jul 2015

before it sinks in?

JoePhilly

(27,787 posts)
28. I'm going to tell you ....
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 06:53 PM
Jul 2015

... as a middle aged white guy ... If you asked me to make this same distinction a month ago, I'd have failed.

I have a 22 yr old son. I've never feared for his safety.

Ive tried to look for these blind spots.

Only after reading many many threads on DU when the NRN stuff happened, and not commenting, and just listening to you, bravenak, others, did I have an "ah-ha" moment. I had understood on an abstract intellectull level.

This is about that emotional level. It's not about Bernie or any candidate.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
32. Now see? ... There you go ...
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 07:59 PM
Jul 2015

I had pledged to myself I wouldn't engage this topic ever again ... You was going to limit my participation to the historical stuff in the AA Group and the Cute Animal thread.

Then, you go a credit/blame me, and others, for your new understanding!

blackspade

(10,056 posts)
9. K&R
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 07:59 AM
Jul 2015

Although, I would have left the part about MLK out of it.
That part comes off as lecturing about MLK's legacy.

Sancho

(9,070 posts)
10. It may not be as big a mystery as you describe...but it's certainly complex.
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 08:07 AM
Jul 2015

Last edited Mon Jul 27, 2015, 08:39 AM - Edit history (1)

if you study the broader topic of social justice, you can see it might include economic parts like distributive justice and retributive justice. Bernie tends to take the socialist position and concentrate on the economic problems and fixes. The world is so complex that other issues can become most important in the eyes of some groups with less focus on the economic piece.

Almost any inequity can become a cause that people will refer to as social justice. Racism, gender bias, age discrimination, health care, perceptions of "class", educational opportunity, voting rights, legal/criminal fairness, power, child protection/advocacy, and disability/special education rights have all become common topics. Even the right to "bear arms" is an issue of "justice" to some people, while some think gun control is "right" to be safe. Certainly, birth control and choice has entered the women's rights stage. Do you have a right to die with dignity? Do we have a "right" to protect the environment?

The progressive movement could be said to have started with women's right to vote, labor rights, and political reform. There was an economic effect, but that was not the original focus. There certainly is a socialist component to progressives, but the modern progressive movement covers a lot of ground!

Socialism, where Bernie comes from, is mostly focused on economic issues and fair distribution of wealth.

Liberalism usually concentrates on "freedoms" like speech, religion, or even free markets.

All these ideas, as you point out, interact with each other and overlap. I think it's fair to say that Bernie comes from the socialist perspective and puts less emphasis on other ideas. It's also fair to point out that Bernie comes at issues from a different view than others who perceive economic justice as less important than some other problem that they face.

There are LOTS of examples, but here in Florida you may be undocumented. Your child was born in the US. You have a job, money, and family. The child is a citizen and goes to school. You can't vote, drive, participate in SS, or anything else because if you are deported - what happens to the child?? Go with you back to a foreign land? Break up the family? That is the exact thing that happened to two employees I know the last year here. You could care less about TPP, Wall Street, or minimum wage. Half your family is here and are citizens. You only vote on one issue: path to citizenship!

Another real example. You are a black physician. You move to Florida and immediately find segregated schools. The real estate agents "steer" you into black neighborhoods. The country club and yacht club can't find anyone to endorse you for membership! You even get pulled over on the main road into the neighborhood. I'm talking about a black doctor who lives in my neighborhood TODAY! You don't care about economic inequity!! You are very interested that the University of Florida is 95% white, the school board is 95% white, and voting districts are gerrymandered! You want legal and political justice.

In other words, Bernie speaks to a segment of America, but he needs to broaden his message as he moves to the sunbelt states. Frankly, Hillary tends to be less dynamic, but fits a larger set of issues in the eyes of many people. I think the Democratic party problem is that it's hard to put all the ideas in one basket.

Labels (like progressive, liberal, and social justice) don't help if they become a reason for name calling. I'm sure Bernie will face GOP attacks as a "socialist" or even "communist" if he gets to a general election. The recent criticisms of Bernie's platform as "missing the boat on my issue" were predictable (and some on DU mentioned it long before Netroots). If Bernie adapts, he will do better - but it will be tough because he has been labeled already by his own history. All candidates have to live with the past even if it's not fair.

It's interesting that Obama avoided a lot of criticism because he had a short and limited history, so the GOP had to resort to making up stuff (like birth certificates). It helped Obama that people could not find a reason to vote against him. As an economist, Obama has been moderate at best, but that was not clear going into his original election.





TheKentuckian

(25,026 posts)
11. Cotton and polyester are very distinct things but once those fibers are blended
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 09:02 AM
Jul 2015

I cannot pull at a thread and get one or the other but rather the blended fabric, this blend though can fray and can appear separate but if you tug it a bit the blend soon re - presents it's self, because it is all knotted together from the source.

Fixing one will not fix the other and if you don't fix both neither will actually be righted, they are bound up long before the country was founded and work in concert to control, to dominate, to repress, to extract from, to misuse, to cruelly abuse, to diminsish, to break down, and to destroy physically, spiritually, mentally, emotionally, and mentally at turn after bitter turn to aquire and as close to forever as possible wealth, power, and dominion for them and their's.

restorefreedom

(12,655 posts)
12. bernie called them parallel issues
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 09:26 AM
Jul 2015

but he did explain how they are related. it was in response to a question from chuck toaster pastries trying to trip him up on press the meat

gollygee

(22,336 posts)
13. There is a great deal of overlap, but they are separate
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 09:40 AM
Jul 2015

Wealthy people suffer from racism. Also, racism is the cause of quite a bit of wealth inequality. Focusing on economics alone will not get rid of racism. It won't even get rid of wealth inequality, as racism will still cause issues in hiring, home purchase and rental, banking, criminal justice, education, etc., which will cause people of color to not benefit from economic action that does not keep racism on the radar.

We need to work on both economic issues AND racism. We can't ignore racism, or assume it will go away if we focus on economic issues alone. No one has said there is no relationship between the two. No one says that we shouldn't focus on economics, or that economics is not a huge issue in the US. Only that racism is its own issue and deserves separate attention.

 

Adrahil

(13,340 posts)
15. There is a very long history....
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 10:17 AM
Jul 2015

in socialist thinking about racism being a symptom of class inequality.

Those who believe that think that much racism is based on economic competition between the majority and minority working classes.

There is SOME truth in that, for sure. For example, much racism pointed at immigrants in based on economic fears (they're taking our jobs!), and some is based on the idea of the undeserving poor (my taxes are paying for those black welfare queens!).

But in the case of AA's the problem is MUCH deeper than that. The economic disadvantage of AA's is HEAVILY based on the concept of white supremacy, which is not simply economic in it's character.

Sanders has often emphasized economic symptoms like unemployment as being an important race issue, and it is. But a broad-based plan to address income inequality is unlikely to fix unemployment concentrations in minority communities, because racism WILL drive how such policies affect distribution of benefits and opportunity. Race needs to be addressed EXPLICITLY.

Yes, the issues are linked. But race deserves, and NEEDS special attention. I do not doubt Sanders understands that, at least at some level, but I think he is inexperienced to relating his message to an AA audience, and he hasn't quite figured out how to connect with them. He's never had to before.

 

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)
17. The richest black man in town is still pulled over more often, incarerated more often
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 11:06 AM
Jul 2015

His kids have a more difficult time finding jobs, they are more likely to be arrested or shot when wearing a hoodie, and are denigrated more often that his poorer counterpart who is white.

Social justice isn't fixed merely because someone says there should be no more job descrimination.

 

artislife

(9,497 posts)
22. I agree
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 03:18 PM
Jul 2015

Racism exists and it needs to be dealt with as a single issue.


Sure, the outcome of racism is usually lack of economic choices, inability to gain access to the abundance that the wealthy get. This is what I think is tripping up the white progressives. They see what happens as the same, they just don't know the journey is not the same.

And what an effing journey it is.

Baitball Blogger

(46,736 posts)
18. Systemic racism and income inequality do reinforce each other
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 11:31 AM
Jul 2015

Last edited Mon Jul 27, 2015, 01:08 PM - Edit history (1)

This is a battle that will be fought on two fronts.

On one side, we're working with the ever hidden hand of the status quo. The status quo consists of the most economically and politically-connected individuals. Currently, that means rules for the police, school programs and job opportunities are gamed to improve the lot for a white demographic, because that is the composition of our status quo in America.

This is a no brainer. Even Sandra Bland mentioned it in her video that to be successful, you have to learn to work alongside of the white culture. That means learning how to fit into their culture, at least, if you want to earn an income. And that's how it will be until minorities can make it in great numbers into the status quo equation, where they can make the rules more equal, so they can retain more of their self without being penalized for it.

And that's where the second front comes in. The one where organizations like BLM will make a huge difference. BLM is creating an urgency and building a groundswell that will put minority issues where they need to be for any change to even be considered by the current status quo.

That's the only way that this country has ever made concessions to minorities. And let me tell you, the first Civil Rights movement did a magnificent job, but it was only the beginning. Affirmative Action did a great job to help minorities overcome obstacles that once kept them from gathering the kind of training and experiences that would help them climb the ladder. But I can tell you that once you get up that ladder and take two steps away from any Federally mandated occupation or environment, you'll find yourself in the same backwater hole, where the old style status quo has been allowed to thrive, undeterred by any effort to diversify.

No question that some of those Federal programs need to be updated. Introducing minorities into any small town environment where the system is gamed in favor of white residents is fool-hardy. It's insanity to think that we can offset the existing political networks in these established communities by building multi-family communities on the outskirts of town. The reasoning behind these programs is that multi-family homes are more affordable, hence, minorities will be able to move in and change the political demographics. But that isn't what happens. We are essentially recreating the very segregated style of communities that the Civil Rights movement tried to put an end to.

The only right way to break through, is to raise the economic well being for minorities, so they can afford to move into the high priced gated communities where the power is pooled. But we have to do it in numbers because these communities have further pitfalls to consider.

You can see the edges of social engineering wherever covenant restricted communities are selectively enforcing their documents. Business Associates and cronies are allowed to do whatever they want to do on their property, infringing on the rights of neighbors. To someone who is victimized by the process, it does look like a concerted effort to push you out of the community, because the HOA is reinforcing a hostile atmosphere.

To add to the tumultuous environment, the HOA board members can pile it on by increasing the Association fees. This will not have a negative impact on residents who are connected to one another through the poli-economic networks that small towns are known for. These residents won't even bat an eyelash when those fees keep climbing because the cost can be mitigated through business opportunities that will spring up through their business associations. Everyone else is on their own.

This will be particularly daunting for minorities, wherever racism is an issue.

Those fees become a challenge because they must be paid, or you lose your house. It's simple mathematics. It is a major pitfall to home ownership, especially for minorities who finally make it to the top to discover a society where the rules are unlike any other that they have experienced before. You pay for a dream home, just to discover that you're on the outside of an entitled, insular society. And if you look around, it is not much different any where else.

So you will continue to pay those fees, and unwittingly feed the system, because your house can be sold right from under you if you don't. This will not change until the demographics of a community change, to make it harder for insular societies to set in.

 

AgingAmerican

(12,958 posts)
21. This has been ongoing for several years
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 03:08 PM
Jul 2015

Third Way® supporters do not wish to talk about economic issues at all. They have been deflecting by putting out strawman arguments on social issues. This is just the latest version of it. It has now reached the point where it is beginning to damage the party.

Hillary's camp has jumped on this bandwagon and is actively attempting to divide the party along racial lines.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
30. I invite you to read (re-read) Dr. King's ...
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 07:53 PM
Jul 2015
Other America, as your characterization of it conflicts with Dr. King's words.

http://www.gphistorical.org/mlk/mlkspeech/mlk-gp-speech.pdf

Nowhere in his speech did he say anything approaching what you have claimed. In fact, he began the speech with:

need not pause to say how very delighted I am to be here tonight and to have the great privilege of discussing
with you some of the vital issues confronting our nation and confronting the world
. It is always a very rich and
rewarding experience when I can take a brief break from the day-to-day demands of our struggle for freedom
and human dignity and discuss the issues involved in that struggle with concerned people of good will all over
our nation and all over the world, and I certainly want to express my deep personal appreciation to you for
inviting me to occupy this significant platform.

I want to discuss the race problem tonight and I want to discuss it very honestly. I still believe that freedom is
the bonus you receive for telling the truth. Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free. And I do not
see how we will ever solve the turbulent problem of race confronting our nation until there is an honest
confrontation with it and a willing search for the truth and a willingness to admit the truth when we discover it.
And so I want to use as a title for my lecture tonight, "The Other America."


The vast majority of the rest of the speech cited the disparities in the white and Black condition, including economic conditions ... so, arguably, even with the Poor Peoples' Campaign, Dr. Martin L. King very much separated social/racial justice from economic justice ... and even then, the economic justice and "rigged system" (related to economic justice), he was talking about is wholly different from what is/has, and how, it has been argued by those re-inventing/re-interpreting his legacy.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
33. He didn't say it in Other America because it's a different speech.
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 09:19 PM
Jul 2015

The "Can't afford a hamburger" quote is from a speech 4 days after Other America. (March 14th 1968 versus March 18th 1968)

http://nowcrj.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/King-Speech-Excerpts-1968-03-18-FINAL.pdf

“Now, you’re doing something else here. You are highlighting the economic issue. You are
going beyond purely civil rights to questions of human rights. That is distinct. . . . Now our
struggle is for genuine equality, which means economic equality. For we know, that it isn’t
enough to integrate lunch counters. What does it profit a man to be able to eat at an integrated
lunch counter if he doesn’t have enough money to buy a hamburger? What does it profit a man to
be able to eat at the swankest integrated restaurant when he doesn’t even earn enough money to
take his wife out to dine? What does it profit one to have access to the hotels of our cities, and
the hotels of our highways, when we don’t earn enough money to take our family on a vacation?

What does it profit one to be able to attend an integrated school when he doesn’t earn enough
money to buy his children school clothes?”

“So we assemble here tonight. . . . to say, ‘We are tired. We are tired of being at the bottom. We
are tired of being trampled over by the iron feet of oppression. We are tired of our children
having to attend overcrowded, inferior, qualityless schools. We are tired of having to live in
dilapidated, substandard housing conditions where we don’t have wall to wall carpet, but so
often end up with wall to wall rats and roaches. We are tired…smothering in an air-tight cage of
poverty in the midst of an affluent society. We are tired of walking the streets in search for jobs
that do not exist. We are tired of working our hands off and laboring every day and not even
making a wage adequate with the daily basic necessities of life . . . . We are tired.’”
 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
35. Well. I went to the speech that the OP cited ...
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 11:07 PM
Jul 2015

I am very familiar with it; but, did not read the larger point that the OP was attempting to make.

And, even in this speech, MLK still wasn't making the point the OP was attempting to make. Dr. King's focus NEVER shifted to economics over racial justice. And when he spoke of economic justice he was speaking from the frame of racial justice.

And yes ... Dr. King gave several speeches around the Other America theme ... and I am aware of one, his speech at Stanford, in which he included "Mexican-Americans, Puerto Ricans, 'Indians' and Appalachian whites", in the impoverished class. However, and again, he started that speech by saying there were a lot of things he could talk about but he "was there to talk about race" ... and he ended the inclusive portion (above) with "but the negro is by far the worst victim" (not a quote).

In other words, when he was speaking of economics, he was talking about Black folks and in terms of intra-class economic justice; rather than, some fight against the 1%, as it is being re-interpreted on these boards.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
36. IMO, he was speaking of the need for both fights.
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 11:15 PM
Jul 2015

That they are two battles that have to be fought for actual equality. It was an era where his subjects were broadening some, like the other ethic groups you mention. Yes, they were (are) all racially oppressed. They were (are) all economically oppressed too, and it seemed like he was gearing up to fight the economic battle too - not diminishing the battle for racial justice, but adding a "second front".

But that's my interpretation, and we can't exactly ask him about his plans for 1969.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
37. True ...
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 11:21 PM
Jul 2015
But that's my interpretation, and we can't exactly ask him about his plans for 1969.


But we DO have the words he wrote and spoke, in the context it was written and spoken, prior to his death ... rather than, interpreting what he "implied.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
38. And whether those previous words were the totality of his plans
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 11:26 PM
Jul 2015

is not something we can assume.

Why start talking about affording hamburgers at now-desegregated lunchcounters if he was only fighting for racial justice? It was a significant addition, IMO.

We're left with arguing how significant, which isn't something we can figure out.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
39. I think it's significant that earlier in the speech you cited ...
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 11:37 PM
Jul 2015

he spoke of the slaves being freed, without proving provided the means to survive (other than their wit, drive, initiative and industriousness) AND without the protections of the law to keep whatever they accumulated ... that is the "rigged system" he was speaking of.

And the "affording hamburgers at now-desegregated lunch counters" is a direct result of that primary economic injustice ... that is unrelated to a/the fight against the oligarchy.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
43. And, though it cuts against the dominant DU
Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:55 PM
Jul 2015

Narrative/Thought, there is no crime in acknowledging this and pledging/committing to fighting both fights ... at the same time!

And, that is not done by employing DU's dominant frame of "one (typically, economics) will bring the other" or, "one must be addressed first (again, typically, economics)."

And, can we stow the raising racial/social justice issues is "divisive" dreck? ... because whenever I /we hear that, it screams to me, the speaker has no intention of joining me in my my fight; but, expects me to join his.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
44. We seem to have two pools of people talking past each other.
Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:16 PM
Jul 2015

There's a small "it's all economic" contingent. There's a small "it's all social/racial justice" contingent.

There's a larger "it's both" pool that then argues about how both it is - Each "side" trying to remind the other about the other fight. Sometimes with disagreement on emphasis.

malokvale77

(4,879 posts)
34. Bernie Sanders and his supporters...
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 10:08 PM
Jul 2015

have always understood this.

I find it laughable that certain suspect democrats feel the need to educate us.

"poor, working class, and middle-class, blacks, Latinos, and whites"


That perfectly describes my community. I'm here to say, we are not going to take it anymore.

I'm almost sorry Bernie didn't run Independent. People in my community have lost faith in both major parties. They are however showing some interest in Bernie Sanders. I will do all I can to encourage that interest.

mmonk

(52,589 posts)
41. I quit arguing they shouldn't be separated days ago. Just do what is right on both issues.
Tue Jul 28, 2015, 07:43 AM
Jul 2015

Make the case both are urgent to those that seek separateness and division over our current horrible circumstances.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»What the heck!? Why are p...