Yes,they always have and always will. Part of why I was originally drawn to the Left was precisely because it didn't - or at least aspired not to. Now I feel essentially homeless, from a political pov.

your home is still the left, white man :D :D :D

as an “ethnic” who is no friend of ethnic struggles and sees both sides of the divide i can tell you with some measure of confidence that the cultural bantustans will slowly melt away into new identities because that is what always happens. i am a happy mongrel and i laugh at racial checkboxes.

there is a funny video of mohammed ali saying how he does not want intermarriage, that he loves his black american wife, bla bla, etc. but what he does not realize is that in africa his tribe and his wifes tribe were probably at war. ha ha ha ha. there is more genetic diversity in africa than in the whole rest of the world.

these ethnicities are all fictions.

and maybe history is a bit hegelian after all, synthesizin’...

anyway, i understand your frustrations with the current state of things, but you gotta relax and understand there is more to oppression than class of oppression, and maybe itks just more class oppression after all, but when class and race become conflated (as it is in america for example) then weird things happen and things can’t be so neatly organized. yes it will be like the life of brian, at least for a while. better than stalinism, no?

anyway, you have taken the red pill, there is no home to go back to, relax and enjoy the ride, or, what was it? DON’T PANIC, lolololol.

alright.

i have to be at the mechanic shop so please tell rob if you see him to FIRE TED CRUZ, a true insufferable scoundrel. yeah....

the corporate internet is sanitizing its user content to accord with secret standards so there will be even less room for dissent or discussion.

I would like the media to be accurate and stop calling identity politics "Left". "Left" is about a economic struggle, not a struggle for identity. WNYC public radio here in NYC has gone 100% Identity Politics, without even a pretense of evenhandedness anymore. There is an official line the media must not cross, nor allow anyone who wants to art of this special internet-corporate media-govt-complex.

My Three Amigos / YMCA references served two purposes:

A) my attempt to lighten the mood. After the tone of your previous post, I felt some laughter was in order.

B) drawing reference to the point of my post. Showing that if three college guys wanted to rent three mariachi outfits to wear on Halloween night for fun, how sad that universities were going out of the way to compare that to benge drinking and vandalism......while at the same time saying ANTIFA is good.

If you listened to the audio NPR clip, ANTIFA groups were protesting against students on college campuses. The ANTIFA side threw a can and hit someone in the head......some of the ANTIFA’s were carrying clubs.

There is no dodging maga donnies on my end. Nothing I need to account for or handle......handle what? Pathetic people do stupid things all the time. I condemn their behavior, what else would you have me say?

......me on October 26th


You even complained about the dots:

#2

so kept thinking about this and did a search and ran into this very smart guy

https://www.salon.com/2015/08/25/whi...poor_white s/

unfortunately nobody is listening to him ha ha ha ha
(or maybe only the right is)

i looked at other articles by him and there are truly some sobering ones. will post links.

but first, some choice quotes from the link above

Is this racist? Of course. But it’s easy to misunderstand what this means. At its core, racism is not about xenophobic reactions to difference, stereotyping people from other groups, or a sense of intrinsic superiority. Racism is about preserving a socio-economic order which privileges the majority group (in this case, whites) at the expense of minorities. And while hate can (and typically does) play an important role in justifying this cause, strictly speaking, it is not necessary: there are plenty of racists who do not hate black people, per se. Many may even have black friends and colleagues whom they hold in great esteem. But this does little to alleviate the gnawing, pervasive and persistent fear that the empowerment of minorities will ultimately come at the expense of whites. For those many white Americans already struggling (or failing) to keep their head above water or support their families, this prospect doesn’t just induce dread—it motivates resistance.

in other words, it’s a case of crabs in a bucket. this corresponds well to the analysis of dog whistle politics from the lópez guy i quoted above. only the phrasing is a little different. i’ll show...

he goes on later

For contemporary racist movements, keeping down minorities is a means towards the end of preserving white dominance over society; it is rarely an end unto itself. Groups typically recruit people, not with hate,
but by evoking love for one’s family, community and way of life, or else appealing to pride in one’s history, heritage and culture. The call is for white people to band together against the forces which threaten these—a mandate through which many find comradery and purpose. It’s counterintuitive perhaps, but the sales pitch for racism relies heavily on positive messaging. This is why so many who participate in ethnic nationalist and separatist groups are so sincerely convinced that they are not racist.

he goes on to describe the teslas and their identity politics, but begins to points towards a solution...



Because the literature from these groups is rife with revisionist history, unsubstantiated conspiracy theories, and problematic (or outright false and falsified) empirical claims, it is tempting to dismiss members as whackos or fools—but this would be a mistake. These elements cohere into a mythology which substantiates and reinforces the white identity that so many Americans believe is under siege—and in turn produces a community to protect it. Outsiders sniping at parts of this belief system merely reinforces this siege mentality and further polarizes adherents. The only way to really undermine these groups is to eliminate their raison d’etre.

and here he follows with the core of his argument and a criticism that i think you also share:

And so the task of social justice advocates should be obvious: to convincingly argue and demonstrate to poor white Americans that it is possible to preserve or even improve their condition and at the same time raise up marginalized groups. Not only have activists miserably failed at this task, their message and tactics regularly alienate impoverished whites while confirming racist narratives. It should be no surprise then that ethnic nationalist and separatist movements have been rapidly expanding in America (and across Western democracies), while their ideology and methods are growing increasingly extreme, and increasingly effective. If the current dynamics continue unchecked, we should expect the problem to grow worse.

cont.,



America’s demographics, economy and culture are evolving rapidly—and as the primary stakeholders in the current socio-economic order, white Americans believe they have the most to lose from these changes. As white privilege is increasingly critiqued and challenged, many have come to fear that minorities have become racist against them, that they are increasingly the victims of reverse-discrimination, and that whites will be increasingly marginalized and persecuted in the future as minorities continue to rise (often resting on the premise that these groups will act as a monolith).

When they express these fears, adherents are immediately denounced as ignorant, bigoted or intolerant. Meanwhile, their own culture is mocked and derided with total impunity: It is perfectly acceptable to denigrate impoverished whites as rednecks, hillbillies, trailer trash, white trash, and so on—to mock their religion, traditions, and even their suffering.



this is clear and evident and nowhere better illustrated for us than in this very thread

we are all trapped in a racialized struggle, while the rich laugh nonstop

The antipathy impoverished whites often get from minority groups and their liberal white advocates is perhaps the single greatest cause for their resentment of “other” poor people. Because progressives typically look down on this constituency as ignorant, stupid or crazy, they tend to believe that right-wing politicians are duping poor white people into voting against their best interests—and accordingly, that they can “help” these lost souls “see the light” by presenting them with the relevant “facts” about racial inequality—oblivious that this kind of condescension is precisely the problem:

White voters know that GOP candidates will target the poor and bolster the wealthy; this is precisely what they are electing them to do. It is clear that some already-disadvantaged whites may become worse off in some respects (although the policies are often tailored to minimize this), but white voters are confident that “others” will be harmed far more. As a result, the position of white people, even poor white people, may be enhanced relative to the minorities who bear the brunt of these actions. In other words, this voting pattern is not illogical--it is a war of attrition to preserve the status quo.



so while lópez sez they are convinced to vote agains their own interests, this guys see the logic of *a war of attrition*

i agree with this now over the previous explanation

this is very good

this guy is very good

he’s got more articles in salon that came after this 2015 piece. in a recent one he predicts trump getting reelected in 2020. and he makes perfect sense. shudder!

ps- his twitter feed is a gold mine

https://twitter.com/musa_algharbi

The only bit I disagree with, and to be fair this is solely from my perspective, as someone brought up in a very ethnically diverse part of London, so it may not apply to the country as a whole, let alone the US, is the bit about resentment towards other poor groups.

My experience is that the resentment is overwhelmingly aimed at liberal whites (traditionally dismissed as 'do-gooders') more than it is to other ethnicities. Equally, I feel the racism towards poor white sections of society is far more prevalent within liberal white society than from black or asian communities. Within the kind of diverse communities I know, social-mixing between ethnic groups has been a simple fact of life for decades and for the most part the different groups get along. It's an extremely poor area so there are huge tensions there and there'll always be those who scapegoat other races as a reason for their own plight, from both sides, but on the whole I'd say people of my generation and below (I'm almost 50) for whom diversity has always been a norm are pretty cool with it. Yes there was a lot of racism in the 70s and 80s when traditionally white working class areas first encountered the large-scale arrival of different ethnic groups into their communities but on the whole I'd say those tensions were fairly quickly resolved. Never completely obviously but I'd say those communities have done pretty well on their own trying to work things out.

What I can't stand is when white liberals who have either next to know experience of diversity or else sample it for a little while as something exotic, tproject their own racism onto those who are actually (in my experience) far less racist in their everyday life than they are.

My point is, I'd say the bulk of white working class people I know hate (and I really mean hate) liberals (usually white but not always) far more than they do black or asian people from their own community. (I mention asian in the british sense, meaning people from India., Pakistan, etc, rather than China, etc, which I know is what it tends to mean in the US).

But I'm not speaking for anyone. I'm only talking about my experience.

here in the u.s ive lived in different places and find that those ethnic struggles do exist in various degrees in various communities, as well as in the media.

but i agree with you that liberals can be overbearingly preachy, self-righteous, and close-minded. i tend to fall into those patterns at times because often they have offered ready explanations for apparent absurdities i can’t figure out. readymade answers. but i’m always for reason and rationality in the end.

for example, when i was trying to figure out if i should buy a home defense weapon, and discussed it with people, my liberal acquaintances chastised me as a repugnant heretic and an idiot, whereas the conservative ones actually discussed pros and cons and offered useful suggestions.

guess what i ended up doing...

so here we have for example ildouche’s debating style, which i find highly repugnant and know to be a turnoff. agree or get ignored, chastise rather than argue, etc. liberals eat their own.

on the other side, however, is loco tesla!

and so i must choose sides

in spite of many issues i find problematic among liberals, ultimately i must go with whoever is closer to my political ideals. especially in a big tent party system.

so i will vote with ildouche 9 times out of 10.

it’s just what it is.

so i think you still belong on the left. you might be disgruntled, looking for answers, feeling betrayed , fighting for a niche... but ultimately probably just are having a family argument rather than being truly homeless.

no, sorry, not quite

you illustrate what he’s saying, but you’re not saying the same thing

you have spoken of white working class pain, but from an already racialized anti immigrant perspective

i still remember also when the paris terror attacks happened you had the poor sense to post a link to a medieval crusader chant about killing muslims

i mean, you’re not exactly the model spokesperson for supraethnic rationality

but you do illustrate one of the polarities that al gharbi describes, yes, i will concede that, and the response to you has come from the opposite polarity, yes

yeah the guy is not asking for the “traditional” anything, but a new thing, and in fact acknowledges that racism is this country’s tradition. so you have not been saying what he’s saying. at all.

(and i should add, labor has been traditionally racist).

what he is saying is that minorities have more to gain from an alliance with poor whites than by pursuing a purely antiracist policy where they are left fighting for scraps against poor whites

again, not what you have been saying.

you keep discounting racism altogether, or pretending it doesn’t exist, or that it doesn’t matter. this is not what he says, at all.

...

and asking for the use of force by appealing to the spirit of the crusades is... well... where should i begin...

...just so fucking medieval :D

o lol “negroes”

i have to get on the road soon so i can’t reply to this old-timey west indies business, but let me repeat: you are not saying what musa al gharbi is saying

stop giving yourself credit for intellectual achievements that are not yours, ideas you haven’t articulated, credentials you don’t have, etc.

okay.

adios.

It's two Lefts. Where I disagree with Symbols is that I see no way of reconciling them. If anything, they're almost diametrically opposed.

Unless someone can find a way of connecting this lot:



with this lot:

Labour has been traditionally suspicious of anything that threatens its livelihood, be it foreigners or technology.

a bit too manipulative and i don’t know who those are (“snowflakes” sez the pic name)

let’s take it step by step

can you connect these two?





or no?