Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Vlaara, Jun 18, 2020.
i think montana's representation in the house is not relevant to the point i was interested in w/ it? i was interested in social programs specifically inside of montana, not in montana's contribution to/against federal social programs
i agree racism's direct role in advocating against social programs in the US is a topic worthy of attention. i think what egg said was much stronger and less defensible than that tho
EDIT: programming -> programs. big brother gettin 2 me
aren't the lingering anti-communism/pro-capitalism feelings from the cold war probably a bigger factor in the lack of social programs in the U.S?
Not to defend Grand, but Montana has a significant history with its Native American population maybe that translated over. Rural vs Urban still seems much more likely.
it's a willful ignorance at this point
meaning, you think maybe opposition to social programs in montana could be explained out of a desire to punish native americans?
how about somewhere like west virginia? 3.6% african american, 0.6% native american (same website, which uses Census ACS as the source i think), 93.5% white. does west virginia have strong state-level social programs?
Yea, I agree with you its weak. I submit to your authority.
it's got to be bc on some level u have to admit ur own complicity in all this, me too man i swore an oath to it and violently defended it. you've been told lies for so long you've internalized them, it's the soft white supremacy that's insidious, the dudes in hoods and MAGA hats are clear and obvious.
Yep. I’m sure some of that is right. But it’s probably mostly wrong.
We know that the violence of racism doesn’t always come with the throw of a noose and the cock of a gun. Sometimes, it comes with a shrug of the shoulders, and a click of the tongue. - Dexter Thomas
Vlaara - I don’t think it’s possible for a Whitey on the internet to resolve racism for you. Maybe give me some realistic goals so at least I would know I was going in the right direction.
as a reminder, i'm supportive of substantial reparations; think there's pretty strong, systematic & quantitative evidence that family wealth is an important channel through which slavery & segregation still limit african american opportunity; and think there's strong evidence that punitive drug policy is extremely damaging to african american communities
i dont think there's very good evidence that the US "would have social programs like europe if black ppl didnt exist", or, going back a few threads, that US cops, at least in national averages, shoot people based on their race rather than on the crime they think they're committing
if you think i'm a "soft white supremacist", then i think you've got a real knack for creating enemies where there are none
You think the evidence that our healthcare system has inherently designed racist elements is tepid? That's just straight up counter-factual (there is plenty of easily accessible literature on the subject), it's also generally counter to logic and reason. You think that a primary system in the US somehow escaped all of the elements that created slavey, jim crow, segregation, and bussing? And if not, when exactly do you think it became divorced from those quite obvious pressures?
im not really sure what that means, but it isnt the statement i took issue w/ either
I'm writing that based on this comment:
> i dont mind calling things racist if they demonstrably are. i just think the evidence presented is tepid at best
> im not really sure what that means
I don't think it's unclear what I mean by inherently designed racist elements. Healthcare policy was negotiated by racists for the purpose of damaging or restricting healthcare from blacks.
> but it isnt the statement i took issue w/ either
Obviously I don't have a crystal ball that can determine what would have happened if the US didn't have black people. I'll take it back! However, it's not a stretch in the slightest to think that our healthcare system would be extremely different if it didn't, because race was explicitly part of the equation.
At that point, we can leave it up to the imagination. Weird how we're one of the only non-homogenous advanced countries in the world that doesn't have a universal healthcare system.
that comment was about the social programs claim you made, not about healthcare specifically; when you said that, i was mostly thinking of welfare, unemployment insurance, job retraining, etc
that's pretty general, too much so for me to say what i think of it. if you have specific examples & sources i'd be interested in learning what you're thinking of, though
Did the cold war and red scare happen because of black people as well? Because that seems like the most likely direct cause.
What about capitalism, perhaps the invisible hand is actually black?
On Monday, Sen. Lindsey Graham went on Fox & Friends and called the “Squad”—the four freshmen representatives and women of color currently being targeted by President Donald Trump—“a bunch of communists.” The language sounded familiar to some. “Since at least the 1950s,” activist Bree Newsome Bass said on Twitter, “ ‘communist’ has become a popular coded word for n—-r. Let’s be real.” On Wednesday, “Squad” member Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez added her own explanation: The term communist “was one of the preferred smears against integrating schools, & one of the main attacks segregationists used against MLK Jr.” But this redbaiting sideshow to the escalating racist rhetoric from the White House has even deeper roots than that. “Black activists are Reds” is, in fact, one of American racism’s greatest hits.
A hundred years ago, during the so-called Red Summer of 1919—a term coined by writer James Weldon Johnson, then field secretary for the NAACP—social conflict between blacks and whites turned violent in Chicago, D.C. (where riots broke out on July 19), Arkansas, and many other places. As I wrote for Slate a few years ago, “Red Summer” marked a new determination among black people to fight back against the aggression that white neighbors brought to their doors. Demobilized black veterans, who symbolized black advancement, were often direct targets of white violence; they also helped their communities fight back against it. Cheering on this new spirit, writers and journalists published jubilant exhortations in the black press. Poet Claude McKay’s sonnet “If We Must Die,” which ran in the socialist magazine the Liberator, called in stirring terms for resistance: “Like men we’ll face the murderous, cowardly pack,/ Pressed to the wall, dying, but fighting back!”
The Red Summer was also the beginning of another tradition: the surveillance and redbaiting of black activists—or, really, just any black person who wanted social change. During and right after World War I, wrote historian Theodore Kornweibel Jr. in his book Seeing Red: Federal Campaigns Against Black Militancy, 1919-1925, “any African Americans who spoke out forcefully for the race—editors, union organizers, civil rights advocates, radical political activists, and Pan-Africanists—were likely to be investigated by a network of federal intelligence agencies.” Whether or not these activists were actually sympathetic to socialism, communism, anarchism, or Bolshevism, their government was extremely convinced that they were. Whenever violence occurred during the Red Summer—especially in the instances when black people resisted that violence—investigators directed by then–24-year-old Justice Department official J. Edgar Hoover fanned out to interview participants and find out how they had been radicalized. Although his agents in the field didn’t often uncover evidence of such radicalization, Hoover asked them to try, again and again.
The linkage of even the slightest hint of black activism with “un-Americanism” began with American involvement in the war, in 1917. Wartime paranoia fed the growth of new government surveillance and intelligence agencies, often aimed at surveilling dissidents and critics of the American government. As historian Kenneth O’Reilly put it in a review of Kornweibel’s book, the nascent federal intelligence agencies “shared an … eminently simple assumption … that ‘second-class’ citizens would have second-class loyalties.” Reports in the white press hyped the idea that Germans were spreading pacifist propaganda among Southern black communities, inciting opposition to the war effort. Federal investigative agencies, historian Mark Ellis writes in his book Race, War, and Surveillance: African Americans and the United States Government During World War I, thought that any resistance to the abuses of Jim Crow might be evidence of German meddling.
there are more good people than bad people, its worthwhile to remember that some "good people" stood by and made excuses even during the holocaust, perhaps driven by the fact they couldn't associate themselves with what their own people were doing, and in the case of America, have been doing for a long time.
That's more to Bane, who is probably openly racist in private, but hesitant in public like all white supremacist cowards. But as my good pal Woody says:
Separate names with a comma.