There’s a reason slavery is called our nation’s original sin, and this primary season is seeing no respite from that age old curse. This entire Hillary v. Bernie has had a thinly veiled racial tone, and this week the issue of reparations bubbled up. Ta-Nehisi has a piece up (and he is on Chris Hayes) about Sanders lack of support for them, Kevin Drum counterargues that the Sanders position is basically no different from TNC’s, and so forth. While those two are reasonable and rational and capable of civil debate, I have a feeling this primary season is going to get really ugly soon, especially if Bernie wins Iowa and NH by large margins. Meanwhile, black people will be caught in the middle again.
And I am rambling with this, so give me some latitude if I don’t use the right words or express things correctly- this is stream of consciousness and I am middle aged white dude from one of the whitest states in the country.
I’ve been perplexed the entire primary season by what I perceived to be overwhelming disgust for Sanders by the online black community that I follow via blogs and twitters. Mocking him for mentioning marching with MLK, trashing him for not saying precisely the right thing when BLM activists interrupted his events, etc. It especially made no sense given that O’Malley was a disaster for blacks in Baltimore and MD, and HRC had supported crime policies that decimated black communities. What I’ve learned is that the reason for the antipathy is that Bernie is perceived by many in the black community to conflate systemic racism with economic injustice and being eager to address the latter and not the former (and this is a rough paraphrasing).
It’s also undeniable that the Bernie support does come from a much whiter audience than HRC’s base, and I would not be surprised to see Bernie win both Iowa and NH and then have HRC clobber him in South Carolina, and then watch the Bernie diehards basically act much like the Clinton campaign in 2008 and say basically just black voters. Because the most loyal Democratic voters votes don’;t count as much as the white votes in Iowa or NH, for some reason.
At any rate, I expect there to be a lot of this tone deaf and divisive nonsense, but I expect Bernie and Hillary will be better than their surrogates about things. Or, at least, I hope they will. And from my perspective, the African American community has had the good sense to know what is best for them and for years have rejected Republicans, so I trust they know what is best for them when it comes to voting for Bernie or Hillary. They may see something I just don’t and never will, so if they choose Hillary over Bernie and it makes the difference in the primary, well then it’s time to put some Hillary flags in the front yard to face whatever dung heap the Republicans run against us.
That’s how it works in a big tent party. If that’s not good enough for you, go have a hissy fit and start a blog and vote for random jackass in 2016. I’ll be with the Democrat.
I told you I was rambling. And yes, I am aware that that not all X will vote for Y and so forth blah blah blah monolithic.
Baud
This always happens with Dems. The choice between good and better is treated like a choice between good and evil. I’m old enough to say whatev to the whole thing.
David *Born in the USA* Koch
–
Truegster
I think that Hillary’s support for Neoliberalism has been a huge detriment to the black community through its privatization of the prison industry and it’s offshoring of US manufacturing jobs. Maybe if Sanders connected the two…
BillinGlendaleCA
I think Bernie(or probably more his campaign) can give the impression of minimizing the achievements of President Obama.
David *Born in the USA* Koch
Independent revolutionary Sanders voted for those very policies.
El Caganer
Fuck it – if I can’t have Bernie, I’m voting for Mitt Romney.
SIA
@BillinGlendaleCA: Agree, and last Gallup poll had Dems supporting Pres Obama by around 85%. Whoever wins the primary will need to know that most of us like, love and/or respect him. Any serious criticism of Obama will be an unforced error.
Ruckus
It seems to me that Sanders may have a history here, which seem pretty decent for a old white guy from a state with 95% white and 1.2% black population (2014). That being said I agree that he also seems to think that if we fix the economic inequality everything else will fall in line. I don’t see it. We have wealthy black people and poor white people and yet I still see a far larger percentage of the police homicides are against blacks. A far larger percentage of the drug busts in the asinine war on drugs is against blacks. Stop and frisk in NYC was/is mostly against blacks, MOM’s Baltimore time really turns him off for me for the policing policies he held there. Chicago PD’s Gitmo clone……. and on and on. None of these would be made right by better economic equality.
? Martin
I think that may overstate it. My sense (as an equally white outsider as you, so probably wrong) is that the problem Democrats have with minority groups (gay, latino, black, etc.) is that Dems are okay about stating that minority issues are important and then do roughly jack shit about those issues. Democrats don’t go to the mat for minorities in the same way they will over many other issues.
I don’t think there is any particular animosity toward Sanders (at least among my black coworkers) just that to voters that have earned a right to be skeptical of Democrats, Clinton is a long, well known entity while Sanders isn’t. I don’t think that Sanders can’t win over minority voters, it’s just that he’s up against someone who already has and there’s no way he has the time to close that gap. And it’s not necessarily that Clinton has better policy prescriptions, rather that it’s a lot clearer who has Clinton’s ear and therefore how to communicate and get your concerns in front of her. That’s an important part of candidate infrastructure even after they get into office, especially for groups that lack proportionate representation in Congress, the White House, and agencies of authority.
There’s probably at least a shade of skepticism that Sanders can deliver on his ideas, and if he can’t, what do we get out of the deal instead? That’s a real question I have about single payer. The opportunity cost here is massive. If you come up 5% short of single payer, you’re left with nothing that can be reused in the current system and now you’ve squandered a huge opportunity for incremental improvement. Upper-class white voters can afford to walk away with nothing – that’s the benefits of privilege. But when you really need government to come through for you, you have to be practical.
Just my probably equally ill-informed viewpoint.
SIA
Why hasn’t Apple developed their version of Adobe?
Keith G
@BillinGlendaleCA:
I hear that from folks, but then I remember folks right here less than a year ago so damn sure that Hillary was making noises consistent with a deliberate distancing from Obama. Remember that?. Some are the same folks who are now dumping on Sanders.
Folks tend to hear what they want to hear. So many feels. So many feels
BTW I was looking up the President’s views on reparations. Nothing recent pops up from the White House that I could find.
ellennelle
john, i am also white but female. not sure that buys me anything, but i have noticed some of the same trends coming from black commenters/tweeters (we presume), and do not quite understand it. given that this was pretty much MLK’s essential msg in the final months/years of his life, one would think that this would actually resonate.
i can sort of see why they would want to keep these compartmentalized, but i think it is a grave mistake. and evidently MLK did too. all these frikkin’ divisions the powers that be keep imposing on the people are all about making sure the minions don’t notice how thoroughly they’re exploiting us all. so they pit us all against each other. to borrow randy neuman, they got to keep the n*****s down, and the womens, and the irish and the dagos and the jews and the gypsies and the ragheads and on and on. seems to be a major force of ‘civilization’, sad to say. the pharaoh had to keep up a constant enemy god in order to maintain his throne, but this required an army.
so it has gone. we can change this. best if we keep our eyes on the prize.
as for reparations, did not know bernie dismisses that idea. i think it should be done, right after we pay off the native tribes what we stole from them.
not being coy; damn serious about both of those points.
? Martin
@Keith G:
Obama doesn’t profess to be a Socialist Democrat to my knowledge. My point being, if you are openly advocating for some level of redistribution, it’s fair to question *which* redistribution you are willing to support and which you are not.
Baud
@? Martin: TNC was on Chris Hayes tonight, and it appeared to me he was more miffed at the way Bernie answered the reparations question than Bernie’s actual position on the issue.
ellennelle
@BillinGlendaleCA:
the mere suggestion of improving on those achievements can be interpreted as minimizing them.
should not be, but seems HRC is running with that one.
trollhattan
Internal division and damping enthusiasm for voting are the only tools Republicans have to win this election. Let’s not play their game.
BillinGlendaleCA
@ellennelle: Improving on achievements means recognizing the achievements. If you want to do something completely different, that’s were you run the risk of denigrating those achievements.
Keith G
@Baud:
Oh dear god.
different-church-lady
He doesn’t conflate it, he outright ignores the former altogether.
? Martin
@Baud: Ah, I missed that – had to work late. I’ll try and catch it on the repeat.
Keith G
@? Martin: I guess we can all find hairs to split. How helpful that is.
msdc
Cole:
Twitter /= the general public, and thank god for it. Overwhelming disgust is the lingua franca of the internet.
@? Martin: Excellent points.
@Keith G: He’s opposed them since at least 2004. Mind you, a Google search will pop up all sorts of breathless speculation to the contrary from Breitbart and the like. See above point about the lingua franca of the internet.
Baud
@Keith G: I’m surprised. You seem liked someone who would appreciate the importance of language and tone.
amk
Reparationsdems in disarray, Again.There, fixed.
Cacti
To a significant extent, you could say that Sanders is running against the Obama years while simultaneously hoping to get his voting coalition.
Apart from being an unusual position for a candidate from the incumbent party (sort of) to take, it’s not likely to win him a lot of friends in the black community, where Barack and Michelle Obama are overwhelmingly adored. Don’t mistake that as love for Hillary. Based on what I’ve seen, there’s plenty of side eye still aimed at the Hill and Bill show for 2008’s dog whistle campaign. She’s just generally seen as less likely to muck up everything that was accomplished over the past 7-years, trying to prove she could have done it all better.
Hillary hugging up to Obama might be the smartest thing she does in her entire campaign.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Sanders’ entire campaign is based on a “political revolution”, on reimagining the possible, throwing out all the old rules, ignoring the past and all patterns in American politics, coattails like nothing we’ve ever seen, and of which we’re not seeing any evidence so far, that will not only flip seats but scare Claire McCaskill and Chuck Schemer to the left of Al Franken. But this is the only issue where he acknowledges Congress might be a factor in politics. Kind of like guns are the only issue Bernie doesn’t want to shout about.
The 2012 primary challenge Sanders endorsed, and contemplated doing himself, was a mere suggestion of improving on Obama’s achievements?
BruceFromOhio
@trollhattan: Gaia as my witness, this.
Lord Baldrick
New WMUR poll for NH shows Sanders smashing Trump 57-34. Very curious to see next Dem poll from Ann Selzer.
Cole seems 100% on target re AA voters. Sanders might get a chance to make his case to AAs if he sweeps IA/NH. If so, he may be able to pick up votes in a no-longer-quite-as-hypothetical Sanders Wave.
BillinGlendaleCA
@Cacti: I think she noticed what Al Gore did in 2000 and decided, quite wisely, not to emulate that.
Keith G
@Baud: I will get back to you after I do some due diligence and actually see/watch the two statements in question.
Cacti
@BillinGlendaleCA:
Well, whatever one thinks of her merits as a candidate, lady is not stupid.
oldgold
Cacti, well said.
BillinGlendaleCA
@Lord Baldrick:
I’d put as much stock in that as my cocker spaniel sitting up and telling me in the ‘Queen’s English’ what she wants for dinner.
Baud
@BillinGlendaleCA: Yeah, those polls are meaningless this far out. Even the ones with Hillary, and everyone knows who she is.
BlueDWarrior
As a (young) black man from the South, but def. not to speak for all black people, this is how I feel about things.
Black people are still wary of the ‘great [whatever] hope’ politicans, mostly because we keep hearing about all of these things that will be done for us, and how we can finally turnover the national conversation on race. And yet we always end up stuck because the power brokers and/or the majority (though some might argue merely a large pularity) of white voters who vote conservative keep spiking the discussion of how to make things better for political and ethnic minorities, many of whom who live in cities.
There is a double whammy of ‘us’ not being the right tribe and not living in the right places (we’re black Democrats who live in cities, they’re white Republicans who live in suburbs or the country). Compound that with a chunk of the liberal base who gets nervous that their own high-priority issue (say women’s rights, enviromental protection, broader economic reconstruction) might get sidelined trying to overtly even out the balance using race/ethnicity as the scale.
So ‘we’ get stuck in the crosswind of the broader Democratic party trying to do broad things without adressing us in particular (unless it’s a minor pet issue), and the Republican party who’d rather we just march ourselves into the nearest deep body of water.
If you want to know why it seems like black activists get aggravated at Bernie, that’s some of it from my perspective: we are agitating to make sure that our issues (specific development in majority-minority communities, police/justice reform, balancing of access and distribution to quality education) do not get ignored or short-shrifted when Democrats win.
I doubt many black activists ‘hate’ Bernie or the urbane, liberal Democrats he generally represent, but we do have a set of priorities, which are in many cases the same as said urbane liberal Democrats, just in a different order of importance depending on the person. Just like the difference between any other major constituency of the party, in the long run.
WarMunchkin
@Baud:
Can we settle for “okay” and “meh”?
PhoenixRising
I’m not black. And Bernie ain’t wrong that economic injustice is an issue that unites all Americans who might vote for a Dem, but he IS wrong to advocate for six (politically) impossible things before breakfast…but paying back what our government stole from AAs under Jim Crow is a bridge too far.
If ‘reparations’ is a trigger word, what the F you think ‘socialist’ is?
Keith G
@BlueDWarrior: Thanks for the insight. Hope you have time to share more as you deem it appropriate.
ellennelle
@BillinGlendaleCA:
i agree. i don’t feel sanders denigrates obamacare at all. he helped write the damn thing!
gwangung
@Cacti: Jamelle Bouie had some insight into exactly why Clinton is better regarded in the black community than Sanders and some of it is simple nuts and bolts politics.
Baud
@WarMunchkin: Not as long as I’m in the race.
JBL
Thanks, Cole, this is very good.
ellennelle
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
well, sure; almost by definition, as he did not follow thru with the suggestion.
i shared his outrage that so much was compromised in the process before it even began, esp. with single payer and then the public option being dismissed out of hand.
so, yes, this is a great achievement. but it could have been so much better, and SHOULD be so much better.
we really can’t forget that social security started out for just widows and children, and was improved upon. we should even continue to improve upon that, and doing so would never be a denigration.
BlueDWarrior
@ellennelle: I feel the same way, but that leads on the question of “How do you criticize something in such a way to where people feel you aren’t trying to tear it down for the sake of it?”
Or to put it another way, how do you say “What we did is good, but we can still do better!” with regard to Obamacare, and make sure the people out there actually get that particular reading of whatever statement you make in that vein?
DCF
I watched the Hayes and Maddow shows this evening, where the former featured an interview with TNC…the message I heard from Hayes (between the lines) was that endemic, pervasive and persistent racism with regard to reparations – yes, even extending to the ‘liberal’ side of the equation – is a third rail at this point in the primary process for all the candidates….
Maddow was the real surprise (and disappointment) for me tonight…she called attention to Sanders’ reference to Planned Parenthood and the HRC as ‘establishment’ after their endorsement of HRC…for someone as thorough and well-researched as Rachel Maddow, her failure to distinguish between these ‘administrative/committee’ endorsements and the members-wide endorsement of Sanders by MoveOn and DFA (79% and 88%, respectively) is puzzling to say the least – and troubling otherwise….
Concerned
IMHO Bernie is making great strides in the black community. He’s been endorsed by Killer Mike who’s actually following him on the campaign trail. Also, Larry Wilmore is giving him a lot of bumps on The Nightly. Both of these celebs hold a lot of sway, but more to the point, Wilmore has really changed directions with regard to Sanders. Cornel West has also endorsed and spoke on behalf of Sanders at various times. Perhaps to better understand these issues the white community would be better served by listening to the black community talk about these things than listening to white pundits. Just sayin…
Marc
It seems to me that the online AA community is radical, well to the left of the median AA voter. It’s not surprising that they think that things like reparations – with six percent white support and fifteen percent support overall – are some sort of litmus test, as opposed to being a measure of complete disconnection with the opinion of people that they don’t talk to.
It’s not that different from the Firedoglake and Daily Kos phenomenon at an earlier stage, really; loud voice on the internet don’t necessarily imply that they speak for a lot of people
JCJ
@ellennelle:
I certainly don’t want to try to speak for her, but I believe @Rikyrah commented a while ago about Sanders minimizing recent employment gains – something along the lines that the measure of unemployment was fine for previous presidents but that Sanders was not applying the same measures to employment during President Obama’s tenure. I interpreted that as not giving any credit for the improving economy to the President and his policies.
Steve from Antioch
TNC get more insufferable with every column.
He’s sort of becoming a race-baiting stylistic equivalent of Lewis Lapham during his Harper’s glory days.
Keith G
@Marc:
Twitter, too?
Fuck, I’m crushed.
BlueDWarrior
@gwangung: That is a sorely understated (in terms of frequency) point that is made about the Clintons vis a vis the black political infrastructure.
A lot of HRCs lead amongst black is just a simple fact that she and her husband have been working the black political circuit for 30, almost 40 years, starting from Arkansas and branching out as first Bill, and then Hillary became more and more entrenched in national politics.
Bernie, for all the good he has done as a legislator, and all the things he says in general, has not made the same effort to penetrate the actual infrastructure of black politics; some of it having to do with his own constituency being so lily white that it [working the black circuit] would appear as a vanity project for someone trying to make a national brand.
To wit, if I have any criticism with Bernie as a whole, it is that he should have been trying to make himself a national brand with every major constituency of the Democratic party in 2010 after the failure of that mid-term. He has his cache with urbane whites and ‘hardcore’ Democratic liberal activists, but that doesn’t get you a primary win, let alone a general election win, by itself.
Cacti
@Steve from Antioch:
Right wing snarl word.
gwangung
@Marc:
Well, yes. That’s the next generation of black leadership. And the actual success they’ve had with Black Lives Matter (no matter how shot it is of where they wanted it) marks them as people to attend to. “Radical” rhetoric stops being radical when you can get successes with it.
I would dismiss them only at your own peril. And that may not be figurative….
Baud
@gwangung: How could it be anything other than figurative?
BlueDWarrior
@Cacti: I wouldn’t ever call TNC a race-baiter. It’s just he brings up a lot of things that make people in general, and especially white people, very uncomfortable talking about.
A lot of that queasiness, at least to me, has to do with just plain ignorance. I found myself rather upset with the treatise on reparations the first time a read it. It wasn’t until a second reading and some time to think to where I came to the position of “I would like to do reparations, if there were ever a way to conduct it in a administratively sound manner. Short of that, let us improve safety net and self-improvement programs so that people being held in harm now can get out of trouble.”
Keith G
@gwangung:
??
gwangung
@Cacti: Yeah, folks should be aware that gets me REAL close to a “fuck off” macro.
@BlueDWarrior: Yeah, it’s underestimated because it’s basic politics. Clintons spent YEARS building their credibility in the black community. You spend all that time, you’re going gain some crdibility that’s hard to dismiss. Note that their mistakes vis a vis prison is taken more lightly because they couched it initially in helping the black family. People forgive mistakes if you’ve worked a long time with them; they know you tried whole heartedly.
It’s not something Sanders can combat easily, but it can be done. But I don’t think Sanders will do it, and I’m not even sure he recognizes the necessity that he at least tries.
hovercraft
As a 48 year old black woman, who just lived through 7 years of black jimmy carter destroying america, the bernie agenda is a fantasy. so as TNC says why are reparations a non starter ? if we’re shooting for the fences lets go all in. guns are an extremely important issue for most of us because it is our children who are being killed every day. black lives matters is the sexy new cause because of the videos, but the guns on the street are doing so much more damage. this is not to say that one is more important but the state is in essence killing us both ways, by the state itself (police), and by the lax gun laws that turn our streets and neighborhoods into war zones. so you can’t say black lives matter but not support gun control.
PaulW
This is my sentiment: that regardless of whom will be the Democratic nominee – either Hillary, either Bernie, hell even Marty – I WILL VOTE FOR THAT DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE FOR PRESIDENT.
Because of one undeniable fact:
Whoever will be the Republican nominee is going to be the worst possible choice ever. Because that Republican is likely going to win his party nomination on a platform of pure evil: against immigration, against keeping ACA, against health care rights for women (not just abortion but birth control), against job growth with better wages, against cities and highways and schools in dire need of upgrades and construction, against drug reform, against voting rights for minorities college students and the poor, for massive tax cuts for the rich, for more wars, for more torture, for more bad cops armed like an occupying army, for further deregulation of our water and air quality, for whatever sick desires that Rush Limbaugh and Fox Not-News concoct for their audiences.
Because the Republicans as a party got WORSE after the humiliations of the Bush the Lesser administration, refusing to admit where it all went wrong, refusing to accept where their ideology of deregulation and tax cuts stopped working, refusing to see that it’s not 1985 anymore and that the Golden Age of Ronald Reagan is just another lie.
For the Love of GOD, Democrats, get the goddamn vote out this year. If it’s Bernie, fine. If it’s Hillary, fine. Either one of them are more competent than the Republican choices. Either one of them more compassionate than the entire GOP field. Please don’t go into a goddamn hissy fit if YOUR horse in the race doesn’t finish. There is TOO MUCH AT STAKE.
Just look to Flint Michigan. Just look to Kansas. Just look to every place the Republicans have full control of every political lever and have wreaked utter chaos because of it. LET THAT DRIVE YOU TO THE BALLOT BOX and VOTE DEMOCRAT.
Marc
@gwangung: Or, alternatively, they could be really out of touch with what will actually be effective, and courting their approval could result in a massive backlash. It’s not at all obvious which way this plays out.
I can’t help but feel that there is absolutely nothing that Sanders could do that would be enough for many of his online critics. The goalposts will never stay put.
kc
Broaden your horizons, Cole. There are plenty of black people on Twitter & elsewhere who support Sanders.
Cacti
@BlueDWarrior:
Well said.
Steve from Antioch
Anyone know Clinton’s position on reparations? Did I miss the TNC column about her?
Kylroy
@BlueDWarrior: TNC laid out an excellent moral case for reparations. But his only two real-world examples were the U.S. paying reparations to still-living Japanese citizens for internment, and 1950s Germany paying reparations to Israel.
The former falls well within established legal practices of giving persons reparations for damages done to them, as opposed to their distant ancestors. The latter was only made possible by the Germany’s complete and utter military annihilation at the hands of a coalition that nonetheless wanted to preserve the nation’s prosperity; not exactly a scenario any country wants to be in, or one that is likely to ever be repeated.
gwangung
@Marc: That’s probably because he dug himself a deep hole at the start of his campaign and his moves to dig himself out are both inconsistent and half hearted.
And…multi-tasking. He’s not been good at it, with some unforced gaffes that concern me as to his fitness.
And there are the structural advantages Clinton has in years of work with the black community and taking their concerns with the proper weight.
PhoenixRising
@hovercraft: Thank you. It’s just tough to accept any candidate who can’t meet the floor of, ‘Gun violence is a scourge and the NRA is an industry group promoting the deaths of our children.’ That’s just the minimum I need, as a mom.
@gwangung: I think it’s more accurate (I’m so old I recall it) to describe Bill Clinton’s effort to reform criminal justice as an attempt to meet the demands of one of his constituencies. I lived in Oakland during his election and first term, and there was overwhelming demand for putting away the gangbangers who terrorized our neighborhoods–from the Black matriarchs who got him elected!
It is tragic and fascinating that both the Black people who wanted their neighborhoods back from the drug dealers and a white politician raised in the segregated South were so wrong about what now seems obvious– which is that white supremacy corrodes everything it touches, and that is every policy affecting Black folks. Including of course turning the penal system into a profit center.
Just Some Fuckhead
Christ you are naive, John. It’s politics for gods sake. People of color are the firewall for HRCs chances so the way they keep them from peeling away from her like they did in 2008 is to tarnish Sanders as some sort of crypto-racist.
jl
As long as we can whine all we want about the debauched dipsomaniac hobo Baud and his grotesquely incompetent campaign, I’m good with it.
Baud
@jl: Only I can bring the races together.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
Like you JC, I’m a white guy.
I love TNC’s writing. I think his reparations piece at The Atlantic was a tour-de-force that should be required reading for everyone in politics.
But let’s remember he said:
Emphasis added.
The most important thing for him, as I read him, is the country being willing to have the conversation.
His point about Sanders, as I understand it, is that Bernie isn’t even willing to talk about it while advocating all kinds of other blue-sky things that won’t get enacted anytime soon, either. He wants Bernie to be willing to talk about it and explain why his program is worth discussing but reparations aren’t.
Yes, there’s a danger of the topic being turned into the new Death Panels. But we know that the Teabaggers are going to find something to turn into the new Death Panels before election day. It’s what they do. It’s no reason not to try to have the conversation.
Bernie does need to have a better answer to questions like this. TNC makes a good case for why the conversation is important. TNC was on Hayes’ show on MSNBC tonight trying to make the same point, but I think it went over his head as well.
Of course, too much of the media will try to turn this into a story about the famous author TNC being some sort of radical and how the Democrats are all a bunch of Commies. They don’t do nuance. And we’re all poorer for it.
My $0.02.
Cheers,
Scott.
Keith G
@BlueDWarrior: I think reparations make sense in the abstract. I have no idea how we get there, In fact, I am pretty sure we will never get there given the electorate we have, the way our government can be ground to a halt by a dedicated but influential ideological minority, and the type of Hydra-like racial tensions that never seem able to be cut down.
That is why it seems so essential that Democrats fight for cheaper universal medical coverage, universal daycare, college costs rolled back to what low wage workers can afford. Those types of “For All” programs will be tough enough to get through, but at least they would be less likely to be throttled in their cribs.
It would be a blessing if I were wrong, but….
gwangung
@Just Some Fuckhead: No. Just….no.
Love ya, Fuckhead, but you’re out to lunch here.
Keith G
@Just Some Fuckhead: You noticed that too?
PhoenixRising
@Just Some Fuckhead: So in all seriousness, you think TNC is a Clintonista rather than a man asking a sincere question.
That’s…implausible on its face, and extraordinary claims etc. But let’s play this out: Why do you think that? Is it impossible that someone could wonder, ‘Why is it appropriate to call for a revolution, in those terms, as a Socialist, in a Democratic primary, but unrealistic to support a limited, targeted program of reparations to the directly injured by Jim Crow policies of plunder?’
Because I do wonder that.
Not just because Old Uncle Grumpypants wants to take away the Obamacare that forced my insurance company to pay for my cancer treatment, and replace it with a bureaucracy to be named later that may not find the drugs that saved my life to be worth paying for. But that does play into my views, I’ll admit. I’m selfishly biased on behalf of policies that will directly result in me personally getting old someday.
gwangung
@Keith G:
Well, for white people (and probably most Asians).
Not so sure that black folks will get that benefit, given the the way “For All” programs have been administered in the past (and that’s a part of Coates’ reasoning)
ruemara
I respect you but your authoritarian streak prevents you from understanding why someone you respect is not meeting the standards of others. Sanders is not my buddy and is quite insulting. He gets support from me if he wins the mom but only because I am working against republicans. He has spurned my support and my personhood.
cbear
@BlueDWarrior: Great comment. Thanks.
PhoenixRising
@gwangung: Yup. Single payer is going to get paid for by telling drug companies that the hookers and blow have been turned off at the spigot. Which is great as long as your newborn grandchild doesn’t need a scathingly expensive drug for sickle cell disease. What if it’s not on the formulary? How are you going to force drug companies to make that drug? There are way too many vague items in Bernie’s list of reforms that unless they are approached with the needs of minority populations in mind, could leave people worse off than they are now.
Keith G
@gwangung: The thing is, if we lack the desire to do the proper administration of programs, then how can the desire be created to do something that is so much harder?
I think we are getting better at inclusion and outreach in the “For All” programs, even though “Better” needs to become “Damn near perfect”.
I worked in the public sector for a long time and though now on the outside, I still work with it. The advances I have seen are heartening.
Just Some Fuckhead
@gwangung: If you have something to say to me, say it. Your clucking doesn’t mean a goddamn thing to me. As far as your love goes, it will have to be unrequited. I ain’t here for the affection.
mclaren
Baffles me as well. AFAICT both Sanders and Hillary Clinton are pretty good on black issues. You can quibble about details. Yeah, yeah, Bill Clinton’s 1994 criminal justice bill was terrible for black people and theoretically since Hillary was his wife at the time she bears some responsibility for that… But c’mon! People! How can a president’s wife seriously be accused of responsibility for her husband’s policies?
Does anyone really think that Hillary could have forced or cajoled or sweet-talked both Bill Clinton and the Republicans in congress out of that misbegotten 1994 crime bill that disproportionately incarcerated blacks, no matter how hard she tried?
I’m not the biggest Hillary supporter, but guilting her out for not single-handedly overturning a decision to vote for a bill made by both the president and congress is ridiculous. And Bernie did march with MLK. Bernie has been foursquare in favor of black issues for many many decades.
I’m guessing that TNC is hammering on Bernie because he refuses to come out and advocate reparations. This is an election year. Don’t you think it’s going to be terribly hard to get any white politician to come out in favor of reparations in the midst of a fiercely contested presidential election where the stakes are really really high if the liberal loses?
So, sure, I can understand TNC’s anger. I can also understand Bernie’s reluctance to full-on endorse reparations in an election year where he needs to carry every possible red state.
I admire TNC for taking the high moral ground. Politicians live in a grubbier world. Does this make me a cross-burning scumbag closet klansman? I hope not. I agree 100% with TNC about reparations, and starting a conversation about it is great. Starting that conversation in the middle of hotly contested high-stakes presidential election in which red states could lock out a Democratic from the White House with disastrous results? Maybe not the best idea…
Countdown to someone calling me a racist piece of scum in…3…2…1…
cokane
@Steve from Antioch: Yep so much this. It’s actually very easy to score so many hits with any news story or op-ed on race (even if it’s just a subtext). TNC has become a one issue hack, imo.
mclaren
@Just Some Fuckhead:
Nor for the spelling, apparently.
cokane
@BlueDWarrior: I don’t think this is the case. TNC writes imagined white straw men in his articles and goes on and on in his fictions about what they say in private and think in their minds. This is the mark of a hack non-fiction writer.
Just Some Fuckhead
@mclaren: Already fixed, looneytoons.
Keith G
@mclaren: You. Are. Not. Racist.
Edit..Said for humorous effect
mclaren
@? Martin:
Horseshit.
Who passed the Civil Rights Act? A Republican president? Or a Democratic president?
Who recently proposed a pathway for citizenship status for undocumented (Latino) immigrants? A Republican president? Or a Democratic president?
Who finally forced through gay marriage legalization? A Democratic president? Or a Republican president?
Democrats have consistently done a lot for minorities. Republicans have consistently worked to brutalize and savage and take away the rights of minorities. This is just a plain fact. It’s documented. It’s indisputable.
jl
@Baud:
” Only I can bring the races together. ”
The horse track and pigeon racing touts love your proposals. And the off track dachshund betting proposal is innovative. I admit that.
glory b
@Steve from Antioch: But see, that’s the problem. Each answer can’t be, “But Hillary…”.
TNC’s point was that Bernie and his people give the impression that they are up for a revolution, that everything is going to change, that they are thinking BIG. But reparations are a non starter, too divisive, can’t get through Congress, the same statements he has been dismissive of about all of his campaign.
gwangung
@Keith G:
Well, I think the problem is not “if”. It’s been a demonstrated feature that’s been part and parcel of administrations, particularly at the lower levels, from the New Deal until NOW. We’re not talking about hypotheticals or long past actions. We’re talking about repeatedly demonstrated facts of politics.
GIven that, black activists are quite skeptical of a politician that doesn’t recognize a fact that’s been a part of the black community for generation, and still blithely assumes that from now it’s going to be different. And he simply hasn’t earned that trust for them to take his word for it. It’s not anything mysterious. It’s just simple common sense.
Just Some Fuckhead
@gwangung: Show me where you’ve ever called another politician out by name to push for reparations.
ellennelle
@BlueDWarrior:
i think you put it perfectly, actually.
and i’ve seen/heard bernie say just that. we have to maintain the momentum on this legislation or the damn GOP relentless obsession with repealing it just for hahas will become a reality.
what concerns me is that this should not be an issue, but HRC has made it one. there should be no daylight between them – or any dems – on this, but now she is saying it’s as good as it gets and considering improvements is pie-in-the-sky dreaming. the only practical solution is the status quo. really? this is it? just sit tight and don’t breathe and maybe it won’t hurt so bad when you can’t afford your drugs and your premiums increase after you’ve been sick a while.
obama himself said it wasn’t perfect. it’s our DUTY to improve it, dammit!
Keith G
@gwangung: Again, I can only testify that in areas that I come in contact with, the trends are good. Policy and training are better and the young professionals that I encounter in the public sector are so god-damned with it. In my early years, nearly every supervisor was some legacy good old boy of dubious intellect and lacking in any cultural sensitivity. I wish I was younger and staring out with these new “kids.”
Anyway, I know that this is somewhat a matter of perspective and I tend to be optimistic about certain things.
mclaren
@BlueDWarrior:
That seems completely sensible.
Why would Hillary be any better than Bernie, though? Why the suspicion of Bernie, as opposed to all white Democrats?
The ideal would be to have a black woman to run as the Democratic candidate. I wish we had a viable one. There are any number of highly electable and well-qualified black women who could run…trouble is, they don’t have the track record of racking up endorsements and piling up a campaign warchest that Hillary does. Hillary, with her enormous preparation, has sucked the oxygen out of the room for all the other female Democratic candidates, AFAICT. Her campaign in 2016 is really an extension and an improvement on her presidential campaign of 2008. I can’t think of any black women who have that kind of depth of experience and preparation for running a presidential campaign.
Gvg
TNC is a writer that has taught me a lot, especially about how blacks and incidentally other poor people are robbed by institutions. It would not do any good to give them money now, it those police tickets, confiscations, fraudulent mortgages, and other takings he showed keep happening. First we need a safer justice system and financial system. I think it’s robbing all of us too, just not as blatantly.
Then, or maybe even first, the casual killing has got to end. Money doesn’t trump life or freedom.
If the families weren’t being broken by the system and robbed too, I do think the tide would rise some. Can’t say it would be enough but it would not satisfy justice if we gave reparations and it didn’t work and was stolen again in an instant. It is still happening and TNC isn’t the only one who has shown that to me. I don’t feel the slightest bit of responsibility for slavery or Jim Crow but I do feel for what is going on now and I am desperate to stop it.
Feathers
Well, as a white woman, I can say my problem with Sanders is that he doesn’t seem to see that, for women, their healthcare is better served by being under the control of corporate America than anyplace where a Republican-run government could get ahold of it. Bernie just doesn’t get that. Treats it as an annoying side issue, don’t we just understand what he is trying to do.
And it’s the same with treating the very specific racial injustices in this country as somehow lesser than the overall economic injustices we face. It’s not necessarily more important, but if you don’t understand that we aren’t going to fix inequality without addressing the structural ways wealth is kept out of black hands, you aren’t treating the problem with due rigor. And, let’s face it, there’s a gimme answer to this – when fraud has been focused on minorities, the disabled or elderly, there should be easier linkages for RICO type prosecutions, triple damages, and a drastic extension on the statute of limitations for bringing charges to the wrongdoers. That’s not so hard, is it?
I think the TNC deal with reparations is that you can’t begin to address inequality in America without looking at the systemic plundering of the black community. I don’t know that cash reparations are the answer, as I am gloomy enough to think that they would just get stolen, somehow. But even acknowledging that the wild lawlessness of Wall Street, means that even sleazier folks are engaging in outright theft would be an important step.
mclaren
@cokane:
Hey.
Asshole.
TNC’s book Between the World and Me won the National Book Award for non-fiction in 2015. That is not “the mark of a hack non-fiction writer.”
Ta-Nehisi Coates remains one of the best living American writers. Coates has been compared with other great American writers like James Baldwin and Ralph Ellison — writers whose classic books get taught in our grade schools.
TNC can be criticized for any number of things; but for his writing? For being a “hack”?
Try again, shit-for-brains.
ellennelle
@JCJ:
actually, i have not noticed that; might be true, i don’t know. but i do know that the criteria for calculating unemployment rates have changed year after year, always finding ways to soften the reality blows.
that fact may be lurking in sanders’ perspective, but he chose not to get in that field of weeds.
i will say this, tho; seems in many ways we are picking at nits. this is what it all boils down to imho.
this country is so f*d up on so many dimensions, it is hard to know where to start. likely targeting where all the power has been sucking all the life outa the country would seem smart. that would be the financial sector. their criminal behaviors brought down a whole lotta hurt on a whole lotta folks, and there is no accountability.
that money problem is reflected in the political arena, where politicians are bought and paid for. bernie has taken not one dime from these folks. he owes nothing to anyone but those of us who have contributed.
HRC has been dancing with the wall street boys since at least when she decided to run for senate from NY. i have a great deal of admiration for her and her achievements, but that fact is not one of them.
nor is the fact that she is flailing now in her campaign in the same graceless way she did 8 years ago. it saddens me, but does not inspire me.
Just Some Fuckhead
@Feathers:
I howled. Thank you for that.
mclaren
@Just Some Fuckhead:
That seems unfair. This is the “now” moment for black reparations for a bunch of reasons — Coates’ superb article detailing the long history of racial redlining that has kept black people impoverished and locked up in ghettos for generations, the spate of brutal racist police shootings recently captured on YouTube videos that have shocked white America into realizing what life is really like for black people, the way a black president has been treated by racist Republicans, the re-emergence of not-so-coded dog whistles by the entire Republican party based on race…
Criticizing a Democrat for not calling out previous Demo pols for failing to come out in favor of reparations isn’t reasonable because a confluence of factors have only made reparations a front-burner issue now, in 2015-2016. But it is a serious issue now. And Ta-Nehisi Coates makes a good point that Democratic pols need to start addressing it. It’s no good to vaguely claim “there’s no chance of getting reparations through the senate.” That’s what people said about the Civil Rights Act in 1963.
mclaren
@glory b:
This sounds like a completely valid criticism. It’s a form of white-privileged double standard.
Just Some Fuckhead
@mclaren: So your argument is that because one politician was called out now, it’s now an issue? That seems to indicate that if a politician was called out, say, two months ago, then it would have met the criteria to be an issue two months ago. Am I following you?
mclaren
@Just Some Fuckhead:
No, my argument is that because one of the best writers of his generation, Ta-Nehisi Coates, has eloquently and in great detail raised the issue of reparations in a major national publication, at the same time that white police murders of black people caught on cellphone video have skyrocketed to a level that makes even the most lily-white observers bend over and gag to keep from vomiting, at the same time that we have the front-running Republican presidential candidate endorsed proudly by the Aryan white supremacists who operate the Stormfront neo-Nazi website, I think that 2015-2016 is a perfect storm of racism that demands the issue of reparations be raised as part of the national conversation. And not “in the near future.” Not “sometime soon.” Right. Fucking. Now.
Or maybe you think it’s normal for The Stormfront website to endorse the leading Republican presidential primary candidate? Maybe you think this is a little contretemps we can sweep under the rug and go back to talking about politics as usual…?
FlipYrWhig
@ellennelle: Right, the Sanders argument is that everything good we could have in politics has been wrecked by big money, either playing to the fears of desperate not-well-off people or just outright buying off the political class. I really don’t think that’s true. I think that’s the story of the “Republican establishment.” But what we’ve seen this time around, if we hadn’t already gotten wind of it before, is that lots of Republicans are just dicks and sadists, and they don’t learn to be that way because of the corrosive influence of money, they’re like that by nature and they enjoy keeping themselves that way. Which is why doing something about money’s influence in politics would be great, yes, but it’s not the killer app that leads to the unraveling of racial tension and gets people solving the climate crisis and so forth. It’s one problem among many. For Team Sanders it’s the only real problem and everything else is epiphenomenal. It reminds me of the crusade about 10-15 years ago on campaign finance reform. Nice, but not fundamental.
David *Born in the USA* Koch
PPP Poll — North Carolina — Jan 18-19
Whites
Clinton……………….49%
Sanders……………..33%
O’Malley……………….7%
Blacks
Clinton……………….77%
Sanders……………..12%
O’Malley……………….2%
Others
Clinton……………….51%
Sanders……………..32%
O’Malley……………..10%
There’s a fiction on blogs that Sanders is winning Whites but is being held back by the Blahs. In reality, outside of Iowa, Vermont, and neighboring New Hampshire, Sanders is losing Whites everywhere.
He’s losing his own people by double digits (16 points) in North Carolina, by a margin of 56-26 in South Carolina, and by 15 points nationally.
Sandernistas can’t keep blaming Blacks for their bad polling. Of course, not being in touch with reality, I expect them to find new people to scapegoat
Stillwater
@mclaren: It’s a form of white-privileged double standard.
I don’t know about that. There’s nothing about being white or a socialist that entails accepting the reparations argument. There’s also nothing about accepting TNC’s description of black history that entails accepting reparations as an appropriate solution. For example, what is it a solution to? What problem will reparations fix? It certainly won’t balance the justice sheet, and in particular it won’t do that so long as institutional racism, in both the economic as well as criminal justice spheres, persists. Sander’s isn’t dealing with this issue very well on a political level, to be sure. But my guess is that’s a result of his wanting to focus on effective policy even if some of his detractors view that as further evidence that he’s got tin ears (or worse).
mclaren
@BlueDWarrior:
Your comment, together with Feather’s comment about women’s queasiness at Bernie’s refusal to put women’s reproductive health issues (code for: not having to die from a coathanger back-alley abortion because abortion has been effectively made illegal) front and center, both seem like the comments of this thread.
Both of you get right to the heart of some important issues with Bernie’s candidacy.
Yes, he seems more focused on economic issues than issues of race. And it seems pretty clear that with African-Americans in America, the basic problem is racial, not just economic. And, yes, Sanders doesn’t seem to have the same sense of urgency for women’s issues that he has for issues of economic inequality.
These are totally accurate criticisms.
I guess the only defense I can offer is that this country is so massively fucked up right now, we have to choose priorities, and choosing to front-and-center black issues or women’s issues will benefit some people and solve some important problems in America… But choosing to front-and-center economic issues will help more more people and solve more problems in the short term than just focusing on reparations or women’s reproductive health issues. Because, look, there are solid statistics on this. The two most economically brutalized groups in America, the two groups mired most deeply in poverty, are single women with children, and black women with children. So focusing on economic issues short-term gives the most bang for the buck in fixing our fucked-up society in the immediate future.
Should we focus on more than one issue? Yes, we should, but America is Homer Simpson — we can’t walk and chew gum at the same time. And should we push our horizons farther out than the short term and try to solve long-term social issues? Absolutely. In the short term, though, focusing on economic inequality seems like it gives the best results for everyone — blacks, women, and white middle class — in the near term.
That’s the best defense I can come up with for Sanders prioritizing economic issues. I hope it makes sense. I honestly don’t think Bernie means to slight black issues or women’s issues, and I’m pretty damn sure given his track record that if he become president, he will push hard on those racial issues and on women’s reproductive health issues as well.
Just Some Fuckhead
@mclaren: It was published almost two years ago, you twit, not yesterday. Anyone could have said or done anything between then and whenever, made their brave stand against any number of white people, spoke truth to power.. But now it’s just ugly politics a couple weeks before an election.
CONGRATULATIONS!
Reparations is never going to happen in the United States. Not unless one were to literally kill off all the white people, and I don’t see that happening.
Move on. There are things we can do to make life for everyone a lot better, and we should do them.
BillinGlendaleCA
@ellennelle:
Huh? I don’t think that’s the case. There are different unemployment numbers that count different things(eg U1 and U6), but changing how numbers are counted would make comparisons over time invalid.
Just Some Fuckhead
I guess chicken hawk gwangung ain’t coming back.
Goodnight you vomitous hacks.
mclaren
@FlipYrWhig:
I’ve heard Bernie Sanders speak in person. So I have some idea what Sanders is actually campaigning on. I don’t think you’re getting an accurate picture of what Sanders stands for.
About half of his speech is typically about women’s issues and cleaning up racism and fixing our broken education system and fixing our grotesque pseudo-slavery system where undocumented Latinos get used and abused like braceros, but never allowed a path to citizenship.
The other half of the typical Sanders speech is about economic issues.
Here’s his argument, though — by fixing the economic stuff we help minorities and women and white folks and Latinos. It’s a win-win-win-win for everyone. So Sanders priorities the economic stuff.
That doesn’t mean he downplays the other issues. It does mean that given policy priorities, Sanders has to choose the ones that will most benefit everyone who is getting racially and economically and sexually oppressed. Then, after the knock-down drag-out fight on economics gets dealt with, we move on to the other equally important issues.
If you have the fantasy that a president can do everything at once, okay, then Bernie’s strategy is bad. But this shithole of a country is so dense that we literally cannot manage to hold more one goddamn public policy issue in our heads at any one time. If it’s Iraq, it’s all Iraq and nothing but Iraq…if it’s race riots, it’s all race riots and nothing but race riots. If it’s the Equal Rights Amendment, it’s all ERA and nothing but ERA. So microcephalic America has to focus one teeny-tiny little issue at a time. Sanders figures we’re best served by starting with economic inequality. Then microcephalic America can wipe the drool off its mouth and move on — after counting on its fingers and sounding out the complicated numbers — to dealing with other issues, like race and gender and immigration. Sounds sensible to me.
mclaren
@Just Some Fuckhead:
Don’t think it’s just “ugly politics.” Was Sanders running for president 2 years ago? He was not.
These issues are getting raised right now because, for example, in the latest Iowa poll, Bernie Sanders is within 2 points of Hillary Clinton. The pundits thought they could dismiss Bernie, blacks and women figured he was irrelevant. Now that everyone is realizing Bernie Sanders could win the Democratic nomination, people are starting to hammer on him for his stance on other issues than economic inequality. That seems valid.
gwangung
@Just Some Fuckhead: Oh, you can do better than that.
Mike in NC
@CONGRATULATIONS!: Imbecile proposals about “reparations” would guarantee Republicans getting 80 seats in the U.S. Senate, 350 seats in the U.S. House, and a lock on the White House for about the next 75-100 years.
Just Some Fuckhead
@mclaren: Great job coming around to my original point. Take a victory lap. In an obtuse pattern.
BubbaDave
@mclaren:
That’s probably the best defense of Bernie’s prioritizing I’ve read recently.
That said, when you write
…well, minorities are by definition a minority. Women of an age where reproductive health issues are currently an issue are a minority. Taken to an extreme, that attitude means those issues always get back-burnered.
For myself, I’m leaning Hillary because she thinks small-picture. Bernie pitches some big ideas with fuzzy math because he knows they won’t ever be a real issue. Hillary pitches small-bore ideas and drills down to the point that if by some miracle she ends up with 50 Dem Senators and 220 Dem Representatives she’ll be ready to go on day 1. I don’t know if she’ll join FDR, LBJ and BHO in the pantheon of modern liberal giants, but she’ll be a good President who’s willing to work hard and will mostly make good decisions.
That said, I’ll enthusiastically support whoever wins the nomination with my time and my cash.
Just Some Fuckhead
@gwangung: You are no longer allowed to love me, gwangung. You’ve failed and I can’t abide the stench of failure. Move away.
mclaren
@Just Some Fuckhead:
No, your point was that Hillary is playing ugly racial politics. Not true. Other people are raising these issues than HIllary, and they’re raising different issues than she is.
This entire conversation fills me with great jubilation, though. There isn’t anywhere near the level of venom there was back in 2008 with the Hillary supporters going after the Obama fans with meat hooks.
Moreover, this election it’s pretty clear that all Democrats will unify behind whomever gets the nomination — Hillary, Bernie, doesn’t matter. Today we all recognize that whatever piece of human garbage gets nominated by the Republican party this year represents the shallow end of the gene pool, campaigning on stuff straight out of Vald the Impaler’s reign. Lest we all forget, Huckabee has already publicly called for bringing back slavery for poor people who steal.
I disagree with John. I don’t think it’s going to get ugly this year, even if Bernie wins Iowa and New Hampshire in a landslide.
I think Democrats are going to unite and blow away the Republicans, and the progressive coattails may well shift the House and the Senate.
Time will tell.
mclaren
@BubbaDave:
You make an excellent point. Hillary has seen the process of governance up close and personal, albeit in the background during Bill Clinton’s two terms in the White House. Hillary has actually had to help craft legislation and watch the congressional sausage-grinder at work. That gives her a level of experience that Bernie Sanders doesn’t have.
Like you, I will support without reservation either Sanders or Hillary. We’re going to be a damn sight better off with either one of them than with the passel of fringe lunatics running for the Republican nomination. Pyramid granaries? Building a giant wall across our southern border? Holy fuck, are these people on dope?
Just Some Fuckhead
@mclaren: No, I didn’t say Hillary is playing racial politics, hack. And I ain’t reading another 15 paragraphs from you when you can’t even get the first fucking line right. Christ, stop bloviating for pages and just admit you were wrong and move on. This shit is why everyone detests you and Mnemosyne.
mclaren
@Just Some Fuckhead:
@Just Some Fuckhead:
You need to improve your lying skills. Contradictions this flagrant involve Dubya-level incompetence.
Just Some Fuckhead
@mclaren: TNC is playing ugly politics right before an election. I’m guessing that was only lost on you. Now stop talking to me. Put me in the pie filter if you have to.
mclaren
@Just Some Fuckhead:
So you know Ta-Nehisi Coates is going to vote for Hillary? Great. Show us the evidence.
Oh. Wait.
You have no evidence for your statement that “TNC is playing ugly racial politics right before an election.”
As always, you’re lying.
You really need to improve your lying skills.
Jackie
I like both Bernie and Hilary and I would be thrilled to have either as my president. Having said that. Let me say that my problem with Bernie is that he seems to subscribe to a trickle down theory of social justice (my sin invented that term. I am stealing it). He seems to believe that if you equalize the economy, then racism and sexism will end. It’s a simplistic theory that could only have come from the mind of an old white guy.
In this area, give me Hilary’s belief in changing policies rather than minds.
Just Some Fuckhead
@mclaren: Why do I have to show a contract between TNC and HRC to point out he took a dump on Sanders exclusively a few weeks before the first primary. My evidence of TNC playing ugly politics a few weeks before the election is the public fact of that event. You can characterize it as a humanitarian gesture or bad luck of timing or whatever rhe fuck you want but it was certainly ALSO an ugly political attack a few weeks before the first primary and that’s the reason it’s being trumpeted on this very forum right now.
Monala
@Kylroy: FYI, TNC’s case for reparations WAS for living people, not distant ancestors – living people who had been demonstrably harmed by policies such as redlining.
mclaren
@Jackie:
It’s not clear that this offers an accurate picture of Bernie Sanders’ proposals. But let’s suppose it is — the counter to your argument is that America is all about cash. Changing policies doesn’t do a goddamn thing unless you also change who gets the cash.
Lots of white folks have mouthed empty pabulum about “respect” for black people and “helping” single black women. The single most concrete and effective way to demonstrate genuine respect for blacks and to help single black women is to pay them a decent living wage and clear away the economic obstacles to their renting a good apartment in a livable area of the city, or to owning a decent home in a good neighborhood.
From that standpoint, Sanders is putting the money where his mouth is, while Hillary is waffling. She’s not willing to hammer financially on those banks that are still doing redlining, and she’s not willing to bust those Wall Street firms that refuse to hire blacks.
More to the point, Sanders’ proposal isn’t an “either-or” policy of working to fix economic inequality instead of fixing racism and gender discrimination, his policy proposal is to fix economic inequality and then move on to tackle racism and gender discrimination.
VFX Lurker
@PaulW:
Same here. The Dem has my vote this November, no matter who that Dem may be. For the same reasons you stated upthread.
I don’t want President Trump choosing Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s replacement.
Darkrose
@gwangung: I think Jamelle’s right. 2008 aside, Hilary and Bill have both made efforts to connect with the black political establishment throughout their political careers. While Bernie may have marched with Dr. King, I can’t help but associate him with one of the whitest states in the union.
Bernie’s focus on economic issues reminds me uncomfortably of FDR, who was willing to throw black folks under the bus in order to get white Southern support for New Deal programs. When I hear Sanders pushing the idea that economic inequality is the top priority at a time when it’s become clear that systemic racism is alive and well and literally killing black folks, yeah, I’m going to give him a little bit of side-eye. It doesn’t help that so many of his loud supporters are condescending white guys who are happy to lecture on why they won’t vote for Hilary if she’s the nominee in order to “send a message”–never mind the damage that a Republican president will do to people who aren’t rich, white, straight and male.
The reparations thing, though, is silly, and I feel like TNC should know that. That’s not going to happen any time soon regardless of who’s president.
joel hanes
I am still optimistic or deluded enough to think that this piece from Huffpo:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-flint_us_569e66c3e4b04c8137617f05
is germane and useful in comparing Clinton and Sanders as candidates.
cokane
@mclaren: Yeah, he can be criticized for being a hack. His reparations article contains something like 10,000+ words and only one true interview subject (the couple who lost their son). He never bothers to interview anybody versed in history, political science or any other relevant fields. He never bothered to submit his argument to a serious counter-interrogation that could have added some serious rigor. His historical examples of Germany and interned Japanese aren’t as significant as he thinks because Germany didn’t really have a choice and the US paid only those still alive not descendants of descendants.
All the heft of your criticism is anchored by an argument from authority. “Other people say he’s good, therefore you’re wrong!!!”
Guess who else won that precious award?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_Beirut_to_Jerusalem
A hack.
Darkrose
@mclaren:
I do get that. For me, the problem is that racial issues (not reparations–I really think that’s a non-starter for anyone) and women’s reproductive health issues need to be addressed now. By the time we’ve got economic inequality figured out, how many more black people will be dead at police hands? By the time the next president is sworn in, it’s entirely possible that the SCOTUS will have overturned Roe vs. Wade; I want someone who’s going to be willing to focus on protecting women’s right to choose from the start, not as an afterthought.
Console
I take BLM seriously as an activist organization but not as a policy one. In that sense I don’t feel the need to try to parse out why Sander’s gets pressure differently from Hillary or O’ Malley. I think the strategy is perfect, shoot the hostage so Hillary takes you seriously. Plus there really is something to be said about the fact that class isn’t a substitute for race. The biggest civil rights issue today is immigration (sorry BLM but Trump didn’t shoot to the top of the polls after badmouthing black people) and that has nothing to do with class. That’s straight up white supremacy writ large. You can’t just abandon the language of civil rights for an economic agenda. Substituting class for race is really more of a cowardly dodge than it is a unifying theme. But that’s not to say I think the world of BLM. It’s not like white people are out there clamoring for more unarmed black people to get shot… but they damn sure want to ban muslims, stop brown people in general from coming to this country, and kick out the ones here. On the issue that looms the biggest over the general election, BLM sort of takes the oxygen out of the room and makes everything about black people. It’s sort of a picture perfect example of what it means when privileged people (black people have outsized political power compared to most other minorities, especially in a Democratic primary) dominate spaces that other people need to have voices in.
Keith G
Lots of interesting comments in the late night.
abrxas
@mclaren: Aho!
C.V. Danes
@SIA: Are uou saying that he shouldn’t be criticized? Remember BP, whistleblower bashing, etc…
Enhanced Voting Techniques
So how does representations work for Slavic-Americans like me? We weren’t considered white until the 70s.
Barbara
@? Martin: Martin, great comment. I tried to make a similar point with someone — that the kinds of reforms Sanders proposes are things I have agreed with for a long time, but in the cycle of political issues, for instance, health care has entered its incremental improvement phase, and since this is my area of expertise, I can give you some examples from the past — when Congress was far less obstructionist than it is now. That means the political energy needs to build up again, and in the meantime, we have lots of other important issues that need attention — criminal justice reform (especially important to African-Americans), climate policy, and so on that the next president will have more authority to address as an executive than with health care. It’s offputting when (as I have done) you say this to a Sanders supporter and they give you the back of the hand response, like “what blacks really need is jobs and Sanders has a really good jobs program.” Sanders’ supporters are pretty much awful like that, or at least those are that I have spoken with.
Barbara
@Enhanced Voting Techniques: As a Slavic-American, I have to tell you that Slavic-Americans were no long hyphenated at least as early as 1965. Certainly where I grew up, which was heavily Slavic in heritage.
Barbara
@mclaren:
That’s not true. If you are a woman and abortion is illegal it doesn’t matter how much cash you have because you will not be free. The same is true if you are Black or an immigrant and are being subjected to mortgage or other kinds of financial discrimination. Fairness in tax policy, regulation of predatory practices — these are really important, but in many other ways, cash or the opportunity to earn follows equality. Right now, women’s reproductive rights are under open threat — what else do you call this obnoxious insistence by so many that having to pay for contraception in a benefit plan violates their religious rights. There is a direct bottom line hit — I have to pay for something that is a basic health service — and an indirect bottom line hit — I am much more vulnerable to unwanted pregnancy, and my ability to deal with that as I see fit is being attacked like it has not been in my living memory. Reproductive rights are essential for women to maintain their economic status. I am tired of being told that this is a secondary issue to other kinds of economic issues. Not for me, not for lots of women. And I am sure African-Americans can make a more authentic case about their own concerns, but just look at one example: the rates of mortgage approval in black areas of Baltimore. The “goes around comes around” impact of that has a direct and disproportionate effect on every other economic condition that people experience, such as the value of their housing, the ability to build up equity and to pay a lower rate for financing.
WarMunchkin
@mclaren:
I don’t really understand this primary season. Why are we going so fact free here? Sanders has been in Congress since 1991.
These are Democrats (or left-leaners), people. Believe it or not, they all believe that women’s rights, black rights, inhumanity to immigrants and economic success are vitally important issues that affect the nation, at the core of their beings. This seems difficult for people to understand. Primaries involve trying to make sharp contrasts between candidates when, in our party, there really isn’t that much of a dramatic contrast.
Paula
Times the US gov’t has provided some form of reparations:
1) Japanese Americans for internment
2) The formation of the state of Israel
3) The Indian Reorganization Act
Times the US gov’t has provided some form of reparations to African Americans:
4) The formation of the Freedmen’s Bureau (limited by the Johnson administration)
5) William T. Sherman’s Special Field Order No. 15, aka “40 acres and a mule” (not implemented by the Johnson administration)
Also:
– One can point to the 3/5ths compromise as definitive policy that defined the importance of the slaveholding states for the formation of the Union.
– Many historians have actually tried to measure the wealth produced from the slave trade produced in the antebellum U.S. and tried to figure out how much that would be worth in current money and even specific dollar amounts distributed to African Americans [this would be a complicated and deeply fraught endeavor, obviously, but don’t interpret this as a lack of “pragmatic” models].
Reparations have been existing policy for the US gov’t for many years in a number of cases. Much like “Medicare for All”, it’s merely an extension of current practice to another group, as well as a continuation of policies helping African Americans that were stalled by Reconstruction.
kindness
Kinda late but here’s my take on reparations.
No matter how much they may be justified a Democrat running for office suggesting this should be done would be the kiss of death. At this point in time every other ‘group’ out there would say ‘Why them and not me?’ It doesn’t matter whether it is right or wrong. What matters is it would elect a Republican as the next President.
Sometimes you have to pay attention to the big picture.
Barbara
WarMunchkin, the relatively small differences between Sanders and Clinton mean that people are left to decide based on personal appeal, rhetoric, and so on. Sanders leaves me utterly cold. He has been a sitting senator for longer than either Clinton has been in Washington and now, all of a sudden, he tries to portray himself as a true reformer on issues associated with inequality. I work in Washington and I have to tell you, I have no impression that Sanders has a history of trying galvanize support to make life fairer. He is a good guy, he votes the way I would have him nearly all the time, but sticking his neck out, jeopardizing his stature to take risks? I don’t see it, whereas, I do think Hillary Clinton has done that — and paid a big price for it as well (1994 health care reform). Jim Webb, as silly as his candidacy has been, tried hard to raise the visibility of the unfairness of the criminal justice system and to enact sentencing reform. His efforts are one reason why the issue has become more visible. It isn’t only his efforts, but the point is, I know about them, he was out front of something that probably had zero chance of paying any political dividends. I can accept that Sanders is passionate about two issues, single payer and money in politics, but I don’t accept that he is the kind of person who is so motivated by his beliefs that he would risk much — or maybe he just doesn’t know how — to create the kind of political edifice that is needed to push them forward. He did not do so while he was in the Senate. And if he has not, in spite of being in the Senate for more than 20 years — well, okay, I’ll say it: he’s an idea man, not an action man. I would vote for him, don’t get me wrong. But I don’t think he would make a better president.
Paula
@kindness:
How is “socialism” less of a kiss of death than “reparations”?
dagon
As a black guy who regularly talks to other Black people about this very issue, I think it’s very simple. Many of us aren’t convinced that Sanders can win.
Reparations is just the issue of the day, and doesn’t currently resonate outside of intellectual circles. The talk on the ground is that this nation (and people of colour especially) can’t afford to risk a GOP win in the white house. We want the GOP eradicated and we want President Obama’s legacy cemented and extended.
As someone noted upthread, Hillary Clinton is a known commodity and she’s currently saying all of the right things (like she wasn’t in 2008) so she is the safe choice as Obama’s successor. Sanders has the air of someone who would like to tear it all down, including many of the president’s achievements plus, perhaps more than any other group, Black people KNOW how incredibly stupid the American voter is and how susceptible to BS code and authoritarian memes.
If you don’t think that a large enough percentage of likely voters will respond negatively to the deluge of “He’s a socialist” that Sanders will have to endure should he get the nomination, then you haven’t been paying attention or are too young to remember Reagan. Politically active people of colour warned this nation about Reagan (and Bush) and we’re warning you now. Trump or Cruz are a real possibility and McCaskill was right in that the nation is not ready for Sanders, who is going to have to explain socialism to an ignorant public night after night instead of talking about policy.
WarMunchkin
@Barbara: Look, I don’t support Sanders or Clinton, and if the election were tomorrow, I’d probably reluctantly vote for Clinton. But I think that it’s so easy to desocialize ourselves to accepting facts in a primary.
“What has Sanders done to incur political risk” is a good question. Not much, voting as a lefty in Vermont. But I’ll note that, in your 1994 example, HRC wasn’t holding an elected office. That’s like saying President Obama took an incredible risk in vociferously opposing the Iraq war in 2003. I give him credit, and I voted for him in 2008 largely because of that speech, but by the political risk standard, not much. Remember the resolution condemning MoveOn in 2008? Obama didn’t take a stand on that and intentionally abstained, and I believe he was the only one to do so.
What has HRC done to incur risk as a Senator from New York (which is my home state)? I’m not sure. What I do know is that she voted very safely – pro Iraq, pro PATRIOT act, for example. Sanders, by the way, voted against both. (Again, this isn’t a political risk in Vermont, so I’m unclear as to how to apply your standard).
If Sanders doesn’t inspire you, that’s totally fine. I get that, and I’m okay with people voting on basis of identity and empathy. I’m an American-born straight male of color, but I could never understand what it’s like to be white, black, female, immigrant or gay. But for many people, the lexicon of OWS and financial crisis and the lack of reckoning on Wall Street has defined the financial crisis, and voting for the only candidate in the non-batshit party who talks about that is something they identify with.
There are, of course, differences between the candidates. But they’re both unambiguously pro-racial equality, pro-women’s rights, pro-gay rights, pro-immigrants, pro-economic mobility. It’s bizarre for me to see people contort, over and over, a narrative that Sanders is just another privileged cis straight white male who doesn’t understand the real issues facing American minorities. Eventually, it’ll be hard for me to convince people that he’s not a Republican.
Barbara
WarMunchkin, maybe I do empathize with Clinton more because I am a woman, but I am constantly struck at how much she puts herself out there knowing how hard people would like to punch her down — she was not elected in 1994, that’s a good point, but that makes it even a little bit more insane at how much she was vilified, and how easily she could have let other people take the heat and be the point person on the health care debacle. She didn’t. Yes, she ran for Senate in New York, and I guess you could say that was safe, except that, she had to stand up to all the attacks about her privilege and status and she did it. From the time she graduated from college, she has just always been fighting, sometimes a little randomly or pointlessly. I think she has tremendous guts, no doubt tremendous ego as well. In my more introspective moments I wonder if she would not in fact have made a better president than Obama in some respects. i firmly believe she is more cut out temperamentally for the job than Sanders.
Barbara
Regarding OWS — I don’t want to think of that as a model or even a metaphor. What they could have accomplished if they had coalesced into a more organized form still makes me sad. It’s so easy to point at people like Clinton for their pragmatism and criticize them for making compromises, but OWS didn’t accomplish anything. I have been lucky in life, but two of my siblings have not, and I am totally on board with the agenda to reverse the rank unfairness of having to funnel every blessed benefit through a financial titan to make sure they get their cut (student loans, e.g.). And the whole magillah of the kinds of actions that ought to be criminal but are instead laughed at. It makes me mad too. But I’ve been around the block so many times, and I know that being mad is not enough.
Betty Cracker
@Paula: Because it divides people by skin color, which is a uniquely effective way to make Americans go batshit insane. There’s data on the acceptance of socialism and reparations. But I don’t think their relative popularity begins to explain why a race-based redistribution policy to address systemic racism would be political suicide for the party that seriously proposed it.
kindness
@Betty Cracker: Thank you Betty. I know we all have different points of view but I had figured some realizations were shared across the board. Principles are important. But end results are too important to ignore in this instance. Electing a Republican as president this time would be catastrophic. How is that hard to fathom? Purity isn’t as important as electing either Bernie or Hillary.
Feathers
@mclaren: But…. He is talking about health care issues. Talking about health care issues without addressing how your solutions would be able to ensure that women would retain access to the BIRTH CONTROL they currently get from their employers means you are not being serious about providing health care to the American people.
As to race, when this country has a serious history of allowing various shady (and mainstream) folks come along and soak up (aka steal) any savings which blacks and those living near them manage to accrue. Saying that you will tackle inequality without providing any solutions for how blacks and other vulnerables will be able to hang on to any gains means that you are not being serious about sharing the wealth America generates.
It’s not a matter of front and centering, it means acknowledging that raising all boats isn’t going to help everybody.
Paula
@Betty Cracker
See my comment as those first 5 are all race- or ethnicity-based reparation policies ratified by the US gov’t.
Paula
@Betty Cracker:
There’s millennials liking “socialism”, and then there’s the people who politicians think they can rely on to actually vote.
Other, related questions:
http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2015/1/are-millennials-tolerant-racists.html
http://www.mprnews.org/story/2014/06/24/daily-circuit-millennials-race
Betty Cracker
@Paula: Just to clarify — I’m not arguing about the justice of reparations or the efficacy, just the probable political fallout. The examples you cite are relatively small in scope and much closer in time to the ostensible precipitating events, and even then, two of the five were abandoned due to controversy. Do you honestly believe a political party in the United States today could propose a massive reparations program — or hell, even suggest a symbolic payment of $100 bucks per person — and not get absolutely clobbered at the polls? If so, you have a lot more faith in the American people than I have.
Paula
@Betty Cracker:
Betty, the ongoing management of the U.S. government’s treaties and investment and policies towards tribal lands is not “small in scope”. Neither is our continuing support for Israel.
Understand that Bernie Sanders’ supporters that have put him in a position for carving out a space for radical positions. And if we take them at their word, it’s fair to ask why he’s all of a sudden concerned about “pragmatism” when it comes to race-based redistribution of wealth.
Which comes to the point of why Black voters may not trust Bernie: because he seems like he doesn’t understand radicalism in those terms, and therefore cannot “make space” for them. If they’re supposed to like Bernie because he reaches for the limits of progressive policy, then why can’t he try to reach for this one, which affects a core, reliable dem constituency?
And that’s basically on the level of rhetoric alone. We’re not talking about dagon’s suggestion that Black voters don’t think he can win, which is also a fair concern.
Marc
Why is it sensible to demand that someone take a radical position on every single issue because they take a radical position on some?
Paula
And full disclosure:
Having observed the health care fight closely from 2009-2010, I think single payer has about as much chance of passing as reparations. No one, including Bernie Sanders himself, has presented a viable case proving otherwise.
Betty Cracker
@Paula: I think it’s fair to say the programs for approximately one million Native Americans who live on tribal lands are relatively small in scope compared to a proposal to deliver straight-up cash reparations to about 13% of the population — nearly 40 million people. And I don’t think support for Israel is an analogous situation since it falls under the heading of foreign policy. A reparations program that disbursed sums that weren’t insultingly small would cost trillions of dollars. There’s “radicalism” and then there’s political suicide. A program that transfers money based on skin color would be political suicide, IMO.
Betty Cracker
@Paula: I’m also not in favor of pursuing single payer right now. We’ve just spent tons of political capital on a corporate friendly, suboptimal system that nonetheless improves access. But the idea of universal healthcare has broad support in the Democratic Party and isn’t anathema to independents. Reparations don’t and are. The proposals aren’t on the same plane of “radicalism,” IMO. YMMV.
Paula
@Marc:
From LGM:
Or worse: if Sanders/Clinton lose because of some perceived lack of enthusiasm from those whose fave candidate lost the primary, and we end up with a replay of Reagan and Bush II.
It’s fair to assume there’s some crossover between Bernie fans and people deeply disappointed in Obama. The irony, of course, is watching them deploy the same arguments that so-called obama bots deploy.
dagon
@Paula: Yes, this is to my point. There is a lot of the fad factor happening with Sanders and his version of Socialism right now among Millennials. I’ve got to believe that many are going along to get along with a movement that they want to align themselves with to garner some perceived cred among their peers and on social media. I don’t see that translating into the sort of grassroots organization that President Obama was able to employ.
Original Lee
Not a lawyer, so I probably am missing a lot of nuance. However, I believe one of the problems with reparations is that we can’t really go back to the original intent, which is for the federal government to make good to the slaves, without introducing a lot of unintended consequences. For instance, one of my ancestors was a slave trader (which not something I’m proud of) – his ship traveled the slave-sugar-rum triangle for fun and profit. Theoretically, he could be considered a responsible party under reparations, and I, as one of his descendants, could be expected to kick in to a reparations fund for each of the slaves he transported. For the sake of argument, let’s say I have 99 cousins who are also descendants, and that my ancestor transported 5,000 slaves to the U.S. over the course of his business career. (Just guessing – I have absolutely no idea.) If each of those slaves has 100 living descendants, that’s 500,000 people who would be paid out of the reparations fund for damages done by my ancestor. Let’s further posit that each slave sold for $100 in 1800 money which is roughly $1500 in 2015 dollars, which is decided as the fair liability for the harm done by my ancestor transporting their ancestors. That’s $750,000,000 all told, which is $750,000 apiece for me and my cousins to chip in. A lot of money for us, the slave trader’s descendants, and really, an insultingly low amount of money for them, the slaves’ descendants.
And that’s why reparations is not really going anywhere, even though many of us agree it’s the right thing to do.
Just Some Fuckhead, Thought Leader
@dagon:
That’s just Dumb. If you feel bad about the way you treated her in 2008, just say that. She’s the same person she was then, saying the same things, carrying the same flaws with maybe one new one. This time you all are just choosing to ignore what you don’t like.
Barbara
@Just Some Fuckhead, Thought Leader: I have a real problem with Sanders supporters who seem primed to adopt this kind of style exemplified by the comment “That’s just Dumb.” On another board, I was told that my views were nothing more than expressions of liberal angst (about African-Americans), probably didn’t know any actual black people, living in a fantasy land and completely clueless. Do you really think that kind of dialogue leads people to reexamine their views on candidates? I truly don’t get the reason for this level of hostility and ad hominem insults. I like Sanders but his supporters seem to proceed as if he is Saint Bernie, and should not even be questioned.
Just Some Fuckhead
@Barbara: Blah blah blah. Barbara is outraged, outraged I tell ya. Babs, your behavior is so 2008.
Question Bernie all you want. I have my doubts that he can even win a general. But the comment that forced you to respond with your victimization had nothing to do with Bernie, so ya know.. fuck off. Use someone else for your non sequiturs.
Barbara
I am not a victim and I am not outraged. I am asking a question, a difference that seems to be lost on people supporting Sanders. Sayonara.
dagon
@Just Some Fuckhead, Thought Leader:
Huh?
Where did you get any of that from any of what I posted?