Donald trump. what is your take on him?

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Gold said:
The heroin epidemic in the late 1960's and early 1970's was centered in cities and predominantly affected brown and black people. That was a law enforcement problem that led to the Rockefeller drug laws in New York State. The crack epidemic of the 1980's was also centered in cities and was a law enforcement problem.

The current heroin epidemic is mostly rural and white. This time it's a public health crisis.

This is a great point.  It was even called "the war on drugs".  Prison sentences for drugs found in poor minority communities (crack) were much stiffer than sentences for drugs found more at wealthy, white communities (powder cocaine)
Imagine if law enforcement went out to rural communities and instituted stop and frisk.Pulled people over regularly for no reason, just to check for narcotics or any other excuse to get an arrest. The amount of painkiller prescriptions outnumbers the population in many rural communities.
 
DaveP said:
I could have written that about parts of London where the same thing applies.  The only difference is that the gangs do not have the access to guns that you have in the US.  So instead gangs of youths ride into each others territory on mopeds and spray each other with acid drain cleaner causing terrible disfigurement.  This is something they picked up from the Pakistani community who throw acid at girls who refuse to marry who their family tells them too.  What a lovely world we live in now :(

The thread is about Trump and recently we engaged in talking about him calling people who marched in a crowd chanting anti-semitic slogans "very nice people". And we commented on how it's an odd juxtaposition to then call people taking a knee during the anthem sons of *****es.

And here you are talking about the negatives of brown people in London, partially because of the bad habits picked up from brown Pakistanis.

I mean... what do you want us to think about your line of reasoning now?
 
I think your head is still in the PC era, but that has long gone now.

Now we are allowed to talk about real things that are happening even if they are about racial issues and we are not racist to debate it.

You are free to talk about white racism and institutional racism fine, I actually agree with you that it happens and I want it to die out with the sad gits who practice it.

I want to see Trump do something for the Black community and I'm watching him very closely on that score.

Here is a table very similar to the one you posted but far easier to understand.
http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/107-children-in-single-parent-families-by#detailed/1/any/false/573,869,36,868,867/10,11,9,12,1,185,13/432,431

Kids in single parent families:
Asian 16%
White 25%
Hispanic 42%
Black African 66%

Clearly something is amiss here but it won't be addressed if we don't talk about it.

DaveP
 
I think it is likely that Trump brought up this NFL thing to distract from the impending failure of the latest health care bill and his general failure as President to accomplish what he promise.
I think it is amazing that people think politically correctness / identity politics is something reasonable liberal people are bringing up. It is obviously brought up by Trump to rile up his base and distract.  Steve Bannon recently commented on how successful it has been as an issue for the populist right wing. Reasonable people who believe in liberty and opportunity for people regardless of their race, sex, orientation, etc etc object to bigotry.
 
I think it is likely that Trump brought up this NFL thing to distract from the impending failure of the latest health care bill and his general failure as President to accomplish what he promise
Or because the focus is moving to the flag and military with the NK issue?

I think it is amazing that people think politically correctness / identity politics is something reasonable liberal people are bringing up
The US exported PC to the UK, so please don't think everything revolves around the US, we are working through it all over here too.
The police and town council in Rochdale looked the other way when gangs of Asian men drugged and raped children who were in care, they were scared S***less of being branded as racists.  As a result nearly 50 girls were damaged by their cowardice.

DaveP
 
DaveP said:
Or because the focus is moving to the flag and military with the NK issue?
The US exported PC to the UK, so please don't think everything revolves around the US, we are working through it all over here too.
The police and town council in Rochdale looked the other way when gangs of Asian men drugged and raped children who were in care, they were scared S***less of being branded as racists.  As a result nearly 50 girls were damaged by their cowardice.

DaveP

Don't blame evil behavior on liberals who simply believe people should be treated fairly, regardless of their race, sex, or other characteristics. Defending or turning a blind eye to violent people because their asian, black, or white is obviously wrong.
 
The police and town council in Rochdale looked the other way when gangs of Asian men drugged and raped children who were in care, they were scared S***less of being branded as racists.

They're just saying that to cover up that they we're too chickensh*t in general.

Maybe some Eminem would be nice about now guys?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JY88w01FA8E nsfw

.
 
DaveP said:
I think that there are some things that the Black population could do to help themselves
1.    Avoid getting into gangs.
2.  Avoid getting into drugs.
3.  Realising that being a man starts with raising a child, not just the conception.
4.  Going as far as possible with their education, we don't need any more rap artists.
5.  Get out of the car when the police ask you to.

Hey Dave, its really not this simple.  I went to inner city schools in the 80's while growing up in Ohio. The crack epidemic was devastating to my generation. I remember some of the kids on my bus would get on in the clothes they had been wearing the whole week, with the same food stains on them. More than once a particular girl would smell like urine. this was 6th grade. When your parents are alcoholics and drug addicts you grow up scared, embarrassed, hungry, demoralized. As you get older anger and resentment take over. Me and my friends would get jumped after high school for no other reason than we were white. 

Some were able to rise above. I had a friend who was an amazing artist in 9th grade. He was very put together. One day I accidentally stepped on his white shoe and he punched me.  Later he apologized and explained how hard it was to get the shoes and he HAD to keep them white. It is extremely stressful to live in poverty like that.  I know you spent time in Africa with impoverished people, but this is a little different because of the proximity of the "haves". Because of the commercials on television telling you that your worthless. Because of the normal peer pressure of American high school being amplified 100 times. Its the contrast of culture staring you right in the face.

Rapping about nice cars, jewelry, money...getting mine, isn't quite what you think it is.  Its an artistic expression. The feeling of poverty, being pushed into a corner when you have no resources, barley making it everyday, makes you want to EXPLODE.  Rapping about getting (TAKING) what others have and saying f**k you to society can be a tremendous release and if you came from where I come from, you would love listening to it. Growing up in the inner city with no parental guidance and what seems like a whole world against you is a weight that is not easy to get out from under.  If your not being told by a loving parent that you can do anything you set your mind to, its a hard thing to imagine.
I am not making excuses for perpetrators of violent crime. I am just trying to illustrate why people can't just fix themselves or change they're behavior when it is been developing from childhood.

So in order to address your points above we have to start at the beginning of a child's development in society.  In order to break the chain of parental abuse, addiction, and absence in a child's life, as a society we have to take over and provide safe places and mentors. We have to provide after school programs, computers, sports leagues, transportation, counseling, summer job opportunity's... Humanity.  There is only the base level of these services being provided to kids from the inner city's. If at all.

Maybe this can help you understand a little more about our (inner city) culture. You should also check out this song "Juicy"  from Notorious B.I.G. (Biggie)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JZom_gVfuw

Its a rap classic from the 90's and you have probably heard it somewhere at some point. But maybe now you will understand how lyrically rich it is and where he's coming from. It may seem strange to you but I put Biggie up there with Bob Dylan, and I'm a 40 something white guy. Lol



 
Then read this, as it goes over a lot of the background you reference.

Coates is nonsense, nothing more than hired, pearl clutching neoliberal obfuscation. Brutal takedown of Coates by Adolph Reed.

It seemed to me that clearly was a response or an alternative to the possibility that a more universally, class based redistributive agenda would gain currency. Part of the problem, and I think this is a big chunk of the appeal of reparations since 1965 and into the 1970s, is that it appeals to people whose political commitments is to maintain the centrality of a racial interpretation of every form of inequality or injustice that affects black people. So the commitment is to a race politics. And so the race politics could be challenged by what they imagine to be post-racial politics (which nobody other than them has ever talked about, anyway) and by a class politics.

What the race discourse does is it forces a racial interpretation onto any manifestation of inequality or injustice to be associated with black people on the receiving end. So in that sense, the demands aren’t even that important. The discussion of the program isn’t even that important. The real objective is to maintain the dominance of the racialist interpretive frame of reference and that goes back to my contention that this is a class program because part of the material foundation of the class has been, since the class began to take shape at the end of the 19th century, a claim to be representatives of the aspirations of and of the voice of black people writ large.

DH: And not to get too conspiratorial about this, but it seems like people like Fred Hampton and Martin Luther King, people who talk about non racial analyses of capitalism and cross racial alliances against it end up dead. And people like Karenga and Assante end up doing pretty well for themselves. Is that just an accident or should I be concerned about this?

AR: Well, I’m not sure about Assante but we know that Karenga knew his way to the offices of the authorities and their phone numbers. And it’s easy to throw around charges of his being an agent because he acts like an agent-and we all know where that leads. But having said all that, that strain of nationalist-I sometimes think of it as a Duvalierist politics-has always been capable of making alliances with the most dangerous and reprehensible elements of the opposition: Garvey and the Klan, Elijah Muhammed and the Klan, Floyd McKissick and Roy Innis and other Black Power nationalists who created Black Americans for a Responsible Two Party system, or as the rest of us called it “Negros for Nixon.

And they all gave the same line: all white people are racist. It’s foolish to try to make distinctions among them based on principle and on politics, we have to be pragmatic and align ourselves with whichever ones of them are going to do something for black people and that formulation of course is an instantiation of the famous slippage between first person singular and plural that’s a characteristic of nationalist ideologies no matter where you find them.

lots more.

https://johnhalle.com/outragesandinterludes/adolph-reed-on-sanders-coates-and-reparations/
 
tands said:
Coates is nonsense, nothing more than hired, pearl clutching neoliberal obfuscation. Brutal takedown of Coates by Adolph Reed.

lots more.

https://johnhalle.com/outragesandinterludes/adolph-reed-on-sanders-coates-and-reparations/
You realized you posted a critique of an article Coates wrote 1.5 years BEFORE the article I referenced?  The article I cited had nothing to do about reparations, so I'm not sure why Reed's analysis is relevant in the slightest.

Here is a brutal takedown of Adolf Reed's brutal takedown of Coates by Jonah Birch.  Does my anti-antiracism now cancel your antiracism?  Did we move the discussion forward?

lots more.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/10/adolph-reed-blm-racism-capitalism-labor
 
DaveP said:
I think your head is still in the PC era, but that has long gone now.

Now we are allowed to talk about real things that are happening even if they are about racial issues and we are not racist to debate it.

I'm not PC in the least. I wasn't the one who brought up these specific issues, you were, and I invited you to read up on some of them. You simply dismissed what I said very harshly. Yet here we are back in the same spot.

DaveP said:
You are free to talk about white racism and institutional racism fine, I actually agree with you that it happens and I want it to die out with the sad gits who practice it.

I want to see Trump do something for the Black community and I'm watching him very closely on that score.

Ok. Calling anti-semites "very fine people" surely doesn't help. Wanting to execute young black people after having been convicted without evidence doesn't help. Then doubling down on their punishment after they're exonerated doesn't help. Calling black people who protest sons of bitches doesn't help. Appointing a staff that's more inclined to be tough on crime when we all know what that will mean doesn't help either.

DaveP said:
Here is a table very similar to the one you posted but far easier to understand.
http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/107-children-in-single-parent-families-by#detailed/1/any/false/573,869,36,868,867/10,11,9,12,1,185,13/432,431

Kids in single parent families:
Asian 16%
White 25%
Hispanic 42%
Black African 66%

Clearly something is amiss here but it won't be addressed if we don't talk about it.

DaveP

Even John addressed it. Just go backwards and you'll see what we're looking at:

- Single black mothers have a hard time raising their children
- The fathers that are in jail can't be present to help raise the children
- Black men face tougher sentences for crimes than white men

Would it at this point not be appropriate to discuss whether or not the problem is race or if it is racism?

I mean, if you want to talk about these absent fathers, do you want to stop at they're black and absent or do you want to investigate just why that is? I don't think rap music is to blame here.
 
DaveP said:
Or because the focus is moving to the flag and military with the NK issue?

The sad thing is that it was never about the flag. This criticism only serves to divide the nation because now we (others) are not discussing the actual issues that need to be discussed.

DaveP said:
The US exported PC to the UK, so please don't think everything revolves around the US, we are working through it all over here too.
The police and town council in Rochdale looked the other way when gangs of Asian men drugged and raped children who were in care, they were scared S***less of being branded as racists.  As a result nearly 50 girls were damaged by their cowardice.

DaveP

Can we talk about Caucasian Catholic priests and nuns now?

Too soon?
 
scott2000 said:
Really? What a whack job..... I have got to show this video to my buddies.....  Where is it?

I detect more than a little facetiousness. It's in the complete version of his ramblings in New York, when he went off-script. Should be all over the internet.

scott2000 said:
Poor Black men.....Just like poor White men.....

Don't trivialize a human being being sentenced more harshly than another just because of the color of his skin.

scott2000 said:
Were there any White people included?

I'm seriously asking....I don't know.....

Sure you don't. Yes there were. The cause was taking a knee to protest that which Kapernick began protesting. If you don't see why I wrote what I wrote then you probably never will.

scott2000 said:
Whatever floats your boat......Kinda weird

It doesn't float my boat, but I notice you didn't react when DaveP brought up Asian gangs raping women in London, so I'm not sure why this would be worthy of note but not his comment. Any ideas? Perhaps a semi-witty rhetorical question as a reply?

scott2000 said:
and, if it's the stereotypical choir boy disgusting stories, then I'm pretty sure everyone agrees it's disgusting????

The priests and those who hid them might not agree.

scott2000 said:
Did they get special treatment or something?

I don't know, did they?
 
DaveP said:
http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/107-children-in-single-parent-families-by#detailed/1/any/false/573,869,36,868,867/10,11,9,12,1,185,13/432,431

Kids in single parent families:
Asian 16%
White 25%
Hispanic 42%
Black African 66%

I use an example to explain to people when they make bad use of statistics. It's the following:

20% of road accidents involve drunk driving. We should get all these sober drivers off the road! They cause 80% of the accidents!

Likewise, this stat is perhaps completely skewed, as the black dads might just be in jail, or even dead. Without necessary background info, numbers mean nothing.

And, FWIW, the scientific community has finally found the guts to openly identify one of the major reasons the USA has big problems with opioids. It's big pharma that has been telling MD's for many years that their popular pain killers had no addiction danger.  We all know that to be a big lie. We've known that for almost twenty years.
 
Matador said:
You realized you posted a critique of an article Coates wrote 1.5 years BEFORE the article I referenced?  The article I cited had nothing to do about reparations, so I'm not sure why Reed's analysis is relevant in the slightest.

Here is a brutal takedown of Adolf Reed's brutal takedown of Coates by Jonah Birch.  Does my anti-antiracism now cancel your antiracism?  Did we move the discussion forward?

lots more.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/10/adolph-reed-blm-racism-capitalism-labor

Coates hasn't changed, still a good hire. I don't think my antiracism has been canceled as Coates is nowhere mentioned in your referenced article, and the dudes you linked say say Reed is correct in both his contentions, then they go on to play with semantics, logical fallacies et al until they come to the conclusion that race politics actually already is class politics, I guess without white people, then ha ha. It's weak dishonest sh*t, but that's what they've got.

    [They paraphrase Reed] The politics of antiracism results in a tendency to misinterpret class differences as manifestations of “race.” The consequence is a pervasive misunderstanding about the causes and contours of the problem. Thus, Black Lives Matter, Reed argues, ignores the non-black victims of police violence and mass incarceration, excluding big chunks of society, including groups that are part of a natural constituency for left politics. With such a narrow base for its politics, BLM can never generate the kind of coalition necessary to mount a successful challenge to the American ruling class or its policies — in fact, it is an impediment to such a movement.

    [They paraphrase Reed] The basic analytic framework put forward by Black Lives Matter, as well as by contemporary antiracists more broadly, of focusing on the disparities in things like poverty, health, or police violence between black and white Americans, forecloses class politics by implicitly endorsing inequality as long as it is fairly distributed between the races. This ensures that these movements remain limited to efforts to establish racial equality — an equal representation of racial groups across the rungs of class hierarchy. These movements thereby ignore economic inequality, and let neoliberal capitalism off the hook.



The first thrust of Reed’s critique pushes back against the attribution of practically all inequalities to that nebulous thing called racism. This effectively reduces the root of these inequalities to attitudes people hold at a given moment in history.

If people with power, like cops and employers, are personally racist, then the institutions in which they operate will produce racial disparities. For Reed, this perspective arises from “the liberal race relations ideology that took shape in postwar American political discourse precisely as articulations of a notion of racial equality that was separated from political economy and anchored in psychology and individualist notions of prejudice and intolerance.” This aspect of Reed’s critique is largely correct and valuable.

None of that is to say that universalism, grounded in a deep understanding of class, is not central to a left politics. Universalism lays the groundwork for more encompassing forms of solidarity. That’s why social-democratic welfare states — which tend to be more generous and expansive — also tend to be harder to attack. More people benefit from social protections, creating a larger constituency to block any rollback of social expenditures. Conversely, more narrowly constructed and exclusionary welfare programs, like those built in the United States during the New Deal and the Great Society, are easier to cut back.

But to say that universalism is vital in politics isn’t to insist on universalism at the exclusion of struggles framed in opposition to racial inequality. Instead, we can see fights framed in terms of racial disparities not just as a worthy struggle in their own right, but as an entrée to a broader left political agenda.



The kinds of remedies that have been proposed for equalizing this gap include things like lowering the tax-deduction cap on mortgage payments (which massively benefits the rich, who are mostly white), investing more in public education, raising the minimum wage, and making it easier for workers to join unions.

In other words, pursuing the policy implications of even the unrealistically conservative agenda that Reed imputes to contemporary antiracists leads one to precisely the kind of social-democratic policy agenda that Reed himself supports. Reed might complain that it would be possible to erase the racial disparity simply through transfers from the white poor to the black poor, leaving the rich sitting pretty.

But no one who is focused on the wealth disparity is proposing this as a remedy. Aside from all the obvious problems with such a proposal, it’s actually impossible to equalize black and white household wealth distributions without downwards redistribution, as a result of both the sheer lack of assets held by most black households, as well as the intense concentration of asset ownership among the wealthiest white Americans.

None of the policies they listed there are about race, they are univeralist class based policies, Reed's policies. Not Coates policies, and not the policies of the junior achievers who are the targets of Reed's ire. I stopped reading here, tired of being jacked off.  ::)

You can go down Sanders’s platform issue by issue and ask, “so how is this not a black issue?” How is a $15 minimum wage not a black issue. How is massive public works employment not a black issue. How is free public college higher education not a black issue. The criminal justice stuff and all the rest of it. So one head scratching aspect of this is what do people like Coates imagine is to be gained by calling the redistribution program racial and calling it “reparations”?

The charitable or benign interpretation of what he and others imagine the power of this rhetoric to be, is that there is something cathartic about it like Black Power. I’m thinking for instance of “say Black Lives Matter” or “say Sandra Bland’s name”. It’s like the demand to call it reparations which doesn’t seem to make any sense whatsoever. It doesn’t add anything to calls for redistribution if anything, it could undercut them. Since there’s nothing (less) solidaristic than demanding a designer type program that will redistribute only to one’s own group and claim that that group (especially when times are getting tougher and economic insecurity is deepening for everybody) it seems like it’s guaranteed not to get off the ground and seems almost like a police action.

https://johnhalle.com/outragesandinterludes/adolph-reed-on-sanders-coates-and-reparations/





 
cyrano said:
And, FWIW, the scientific community has finally found the guts to openly identify one of the major reasons the USA has big problems with opioids. It's big pharma that has been telling MD's for many years that their popular pain killers had no addiction danger.  We all know that to be a big lie. We've known that for almost twenty years.

Another reason this is a public health issue and not a law enforcement issue  is that we are in control of Afghanistan where the majority of the worlds opium poppy is grown. If we eradicate the poppy the country starves. If we don't the money is funneled to the Taliban and the heroin comes here. Damed if we do, damed if we don't.
 
scott2000 said:
Asian gangs???? Raping women??? Terrible...Disgusting......

Being deliberately obtuse is a taste I have yet to acquire.

scott2000 said:
You didn't respond to my earlier post  to dmp about lawyers costing a lot of money..... and, if you think a rich guy ....black ( OJ) or white (Zimmerman),,, Casey Anthony...girl......etc..., can't hire a great attorney to navigate the legal system and get the minimum possible, you are just deciding to be close minded perhaps...... I know first hand...... The jails want people to fill them..... I don't doubt there is racial profiling that ends up in more arrests but that's not what the point is.

It might not be what your point is. But you were talking to DMP so I'm not sure why you're telling me this.

scott2000 said:
Don't do the crime if you can't do the dime.....is what we're debating..... Unless I quoted you wrong???

I don't know who "we" are, but I'm guessing you're wrong.
 
scott2000 said:
Here's the We.......????

I was just saying that probably a lot of the sentencing for "real" crimes unfortunately can be minimized by having a high dollar attorney....

So saying that all black men face tougher sentences than all white men is probably not the most factual thing to say.

I didn't use the word "all" though. Statistically the former group gets sentenced more harshly than the latter. If you want to attribute that to having a better lawyer than go ahead, but I doubt that's the cause.

scott2000 said:
There's Probably another way to get your point across without remarking or using statements that are like this??? I know You didn't make this statement. You used it to prove a point you were trying to make. I made an additional point that some of these "sentences" may be because of money.... or lack there of.... I know plenty of white guys doing time because of not having enough money to hire an attorney.....

I was expecting something like, oh, that kinda makes sense but what about this or that???

But being obtuse and accusing me of it???

I want to make friends btw.... I just like sharing my insights too....

Look, the studies I've seen on this issue haven't showed a difference due to having better or worse lawyers. So at the present it's not something I think is likely. In addition to this we can also see how blacks are discriminated against before sentencing and before being charged. Stop-and-frisk is one case, and there are more. It's far more likely that racial discrimination continues as studies suggest through sentencing.

scott2000 said:
From you to me........

"It doesn't float my boat, but I notice you didn't react when DaveP brought up Asian gangs raping women in London, so I'm not sure why this would be worthy of note but not his comment. Any ideas? Perhaps a semi-witty rhetorical question as a reply?"


So I can't ask why you didn't respond to my comments to dmp???

Ok....

[sigh]... meta-discussions sometimes have a place and sometimes are just tedious digressions. This appears to be the latter.

I didn't respond to your comments to dmp because your comments to dmp were comments to dmp, not me. That's why I didn't respond.

On the other hand, you picked out my statement about Catholic priests (not addressed to you) and ignored Dave's comment about Asian gangs (also not addressed to you). My comment was a response to his comment, so if you actually cared to understand what I'm talking about then you could very simply have read his post and you would maybe have seen my point. It just looks odd when you seemingly choose to react in one instance yet not the other.

Can't tell if you're drunk or trolling-while-bored.....

Is there anything else I can clarify?
 
Guess I'll let the dude talk. (Part of) Reed's response to the two cute little fellows.

But Birch and Heideman’s narrative is also plagued by their utter innocence of the history of the last half-century of black politics, which is truly astonishing, especially in light of their profound self-assuredness, though I suspect the former may be a key enabling condition for the latter. They show no knowledge or understanding of the relation of black political development to the growth of the large national, state, and local public-private anti-discrimination and diversity apparatus, or of the broader incorporation of black people into the various distributive regimes, market-based and not, that constitute and reproduce hegemonic neoliberalism. At this moment, in one tiny illustration of this phenomenon, my mother is engaged in dealings with a black-owned or black-fronted firm – not clear whether it’s for-profit or a non-profit NGO — that is enmeshed in a web of boondoggles outsourced from the Road Home program that the state of Louisiana created and administers in concert with the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development to provide assistance to people who suffered property damage in Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

Granted, the Road Home is an extraordinary policy intervention, and this is a trivial illustration. But this instance’s trivial and quotidian character is in a way the point. This sort of public-private, outsourced, marketized or semi-marketized activity is a node in an ever-expanding and reorganizing array of opportunity structures generated through neoliberalism and that contribute to its legitimation as everyday reality. More accurately, this activity and the individuals and organizations that participate in it constitute neoliberalization as an evolving political-economic, cultural and ideological order. People reproduce their material existence, not to mention pursue the entrepreneurial dreams that attest to the extent of Thatcherite ideological victory, through such nooks and crevices in the social administrative apparatus, whose public and private extrusions become ever more difficult to disentangle.24 At the same time, those structures and processes of neoliberalization are enmeshed with evolving black politics. The fact is that black people not only have access to these opportunity structures; they also participate in the processes that generate, shape, and legitimize them. The ambiguous relations of many prominent BLM figures and other black antiracist voices to the corporate and nonprofit interests that drive the assault on public goods and working people’s living standards underscore the class contradictions that antiracist politics papers over.

The black political regime that emerged out of contestation and negotiation over the terms on which the victories of the 1960s would be consolidated institutionally was rooted from its inception in the dynamics simultaneously articulating market-driven pro-growth politics from the municipal level through national Democratic politics.25 It is not simply that the center of gravity of black politics accommodated to the regime of regressive redistribution and punitive social policy as it took shape and became hegemonic. Race-conscious black political discourse and practice, grounded on underclass ideology and a sharply class-skewed communitarian rhetoric of uplift and self-help26 and racial redistribution – anti-disparitarianism — as the crucial metric of social justice helped to define the left wing of Democratic neoliberalism over the 1980s and 1990s. Moreover, black people participate as active and committed agents in the processes of neoliberalization, public and private – charterization of public education, devolution and outsourcing of the social service sector, direct and indirect attacks on public goods and labor standards in the name of individual enterprise (e.g., Uber, which openly promotes itself as providing opportunities for black Americans) or “community development,” private contracting at all levels, including the rent-intensifying real estate development that is unhelpfully called gentrification. Any serious left critique of black politics has to take those dynamics into account and must proceed from examining the actual complexities and contradictions, including class contradictions, in contemporary black political life.

That is why my colleagues and I who authored “On the End(s) of Black Politics” singled out as problematic “the conceptual and political confusion that underwrites the very idea of a Black Freedom Movement.”27 Formulations like Black Freedom Movement and Black Liberation Struggle suffer from the circularity problem: they posit what needs to be demonstrated through historical and political analysis. This is not simply a formal flaw. Those formulations impose an idealist coherence, what is in effect a racial supra-consciousness or the teleological equivalent of a vanguard party, that obscures the history of political differentiation among black Americans and its significance for understanding both past and present. They posit a transcendent goal – empty signifiers like “freedom,” “liberation,” or “self-determination” — that most crucially unites and defines black Americans’ political aspirations. This presumption that a deeper racial truth, constant across historical and social contexts, guides black politics requires diminishing the significance, and often enough necessitates the procrustean erasure, of the historical specificity of political dynamics involving black Americans at any moment in order to sustain the teleological narrative of fundamental continuity.

'''

As a campaign minion, I found myself often asking Sanders’s antiracist critics how any of the social-democratic items on his platform would not disproportionately benefit black people. None disagreed, but too many, especially those who considered themselves radicals, insisted at least in the logical thrust of their objections that black people’s status as union members, homeowners, low-wage and unemployed workers, public sector workers, retirees, current or potential college students, veterans, people concerned with immigration policy and likely to be adversely affected by neoliberal trade policy, people likely to benefit from universal health care, and people who live within a changing climate all must be subordinate to their generic racial classification. That mindset and its inadequacy for crafting strategies to counter neoliberal capitalism is an important illustration of the problem addressed in Willie Legette’s epigraph to nonsite.org’s new black politics section: “The only thing that hasn’t changed about black politics since 1965 is how we think about it.” Moreover, no matter what bizarre sophistries the likes of Birch and Heideman put forward to counter this contention, a politics of racial redistribution is fundamentally a class politics because its focal point is, as the characteristics of actual black politics I have discussed here indicate, pursuit of racial parity in distribution of goods and bads within the framework of hegemonic neoliberalism.

more


http://nonsite.org/editorial/splendors-and-miseries-of-the-antiracist-left-2

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Did-Jonah-Birch-and-Paul-Heideman-ever-respond-to-Adolph-Reeds-response-to-their-article-in-Jacobin
 
Back
Top