Support NeoGAF

[Deleted member 231381]

It's hard to have a meaningful conversation with someone if they think you are subhuman and are at best indifferent to your wellbeing.

Conversations are necessary for sure, but I don't want minorities walking up to Trump supporters and asking to share feelings. White liberals need to be the ones doing it.

This, at least, I think is true, because white liberals less likely to be distrusted from the start. But even then - metropolitan, college-educated liberals are going to be distrusted just as much as minorities. Unfortunately, that includes me, although I'm going to do my damn best. I grew up in a lower-middle income single parent family (just at the top of the bottom third); but I then went to one of the best universities in the world and now have an exceptionally well paid job in my 20s - I don't say that to boast, because I don't think I even deserve my payscale; I'm just part of an enormous network designed to benefit me and people like me. I say it because I can't talk to these people. I might as well be an alien to someone who works out on a farm in Ohio and doesn't trust the ivory tower folk because they've never done a proper day's work in their life. I can, am, and will do my best, but my traction is limited.

It needs to be white, working class liberals - people who did the hard graft and earnt their authenticity. I don't envy their position, I think the fate of the Democratic Party rests on them. Sanders is one of them - his mother and father died early, his family grew up poor, he attended college but never made much of himself there, and he worked in manual labour for a while. That's why he captured some attention. He knows these people. There are others, and we need them.

EDIT: Incidentally, this is why I think Harris will struggle. She's too much like me and not enough like Sanders.

 

[Debirudog]

I'm afraid of Breitbart. I feel like it's going to be the death of journalism at this point.

 

[Rebel Leader]

I'm afraid of Breitbart. I feel like it's going to be the death of journalism at this point.

Debirudog is going to kill journalists!

 

[Crocodile]

I don't think some people

Spoiler

Crab?

understand how emotionally, psychologically and physiologically draining it is to plea to other people to bring themselves up to the minimum threshold to respect you as a fucking human being. It's already draining when I've had to engage in such conversations (or even just read them) in OT. Putting aside these sorts of conversations have been happening for hundreds of years and will continue to happen (so let's not pretend this is some brand-new idea) its really fucking obnoxious to put the burden on the victims and not the wrong-doers. We'll continue to do what has to be done or should be done but I'm not coddling anyone. If people are doing or saying legit stupid shit that needs to be called out. People have to take responsibility for their actions.

 

[Blader]

Enjoy 20 more years of Trump and Trumplikes, boyo. I'm sure the situation of minorities will really improve on account of you refusing to do the dirty work and aim for conversions.

If you adopt this attitude, you are complicit in Trump's election.

I'm not sure the successes of the civil rights movement in the 60s were owed to talking racist whites out of being racist.

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

I'm afraid of Breitbart. I feel like it's going to be the death of journalism at this point.

It's essentially state run media now. We are in perilous times

 

[Totakeke]

There are rural whites who don't immediately label you because of your looks and there are ones who do. Who knows what's the % of each group but I'd like to believe the former is the majority. I think you guys are discussing too much about the latter group here. Otherwise it's as much of an effect of you labeling them as them labeling you.

 

[Slurpy2k20]

Enjoy 20 more years of Trump and Trumplikes, boyo. I'm sure the situation of minorities will really improve on account of you refusing to do the dirty work and aim for conversions.

If you adopt this attitude, you are complicit in Trump's election.

And honestly, you're just as bad, implying that these kinds of people can be reasoned with in any way whatsoever. How many racists, bigots, and islamophobes have you "converted"? I'm very curious, as I don't even know what that entails. But cool, keep attacking those who calls these things out for what they are.

 

[studyguy]

I don't particularly expect progressives to somehow flood back to the poorer parts of midwest America and preach their values in my lifetime. If that rust belt is becoming more and more economically depressed due to industries bouncing out then I don't see how anyone realistically projects demographic changes beyond the disenfranchised white blue collar worker who is already there.

Hit them with an economic message because expecting them to be socially responsible simply isn't going to cut it. I mean I'm not gonna dissuade people from canvassing or doing their part to push tolerance, but the reality of the situation in some states is there's a whole lot of white rural communities and getting outreach everywhere out there seems... unrealistic.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I'm not sure the successes of the civil rights movement in the 60s were owed to talking racist whites out of being racist.

If people were as racist in 1965 as they were in 1955, the Voting Rights Act wouldn't have passed. The reason it passed is because at least some people who were previously opposed to it, decided to support it.

Not all racist white people can be converted. But if even 5% of them can, then Trump doesn't get elected. That's all you need.

 

[whyamihere]

In a well-duh moment: Tim Kaine says he's running for reelection in 2018, will not run for president in 2020.

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

I'm not sure the successes of the civil rights movement in the 60s were owed to talking racist whites out of being racist.

Along with women's suffrage and the ongoing struggle of LGBT rights.

Show me a precedent of when rights were won by being nice to racists and bigots.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

I don't particularly expect progressives to somehow flood back to the poorer parts of midwest America and preach their values in my lifetime. If that rust belt is becoming more and more economically depressed due to industries bouncing out then I don't see how anyone realistically projects demographic changes beyond the disenfranchised white blue collar worker who is already there.

Hit them with an economic message because expecting them to be socially responsible simply isn't going to cut it.

We really could win them back by running the "just lie and say everything will be like it used to!" strategy that the Slowpoke avi poster argued instead of anything else.

Or just by having Trump destroy trade deals and end up setting Michigan on fire.

 

[iammeiam]

But... we helped...

When Trump made his crazy ill-advised Washington trip for a rally, he held it in Snohomish County, too. Clearly we matter!

 

[Deleted member 231381]

And honestly, you're just as bad, implying that these kinds of people can be reasoned with in any way whatsoever. How many racists, bigots, and islamophobes have you "converted"? I'm very curious, as I don't even know what that entails. But cool, keep attacking those who calls these things out for what they are.

I've persuaded quite a few people not to vote UKIP as a political canvasser. I don't know the exact numbers. I'd guess somewhere between 10-15. That's not many, and I probably could and should have done more. But it's a start.

How many have you?

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

If people were as racist in 1965 as they were in 1955, the Voting Rights Act wouldn't have passed. The reason it passed is because at least some people who were previously opposed to it, decided to support it.

Not all racist white people can be converted. But if even 5% of them can, then Trump doesn't get elected. That's all you need.

Opinions changed because people saw blacks getting beaten on the news, in thier local diners, watching police dogs maul marchers in Selma, having black children in their schools etc etc

People bled for opinions to change.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

The biggest thing the Dems need to do to beat Trump is to nominate a woman who didn't have to deal with the 90's anti-feminist hysteria that caused all non-Dems to hate her.

Which is... all of their possible candidates really.

 

[Debirudog]

preaching other minorities to talk to white racists (and I mean any racists whether they be passive or aggressive) is just going to touch the wrong buttons. I see the point in talking to rural white folks but I feel getting them to care about minorities is going to insanely difficult, even if democrats were able to make their economic lives better.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

I've persuaded quite a few people not to vote UKIP as a political canvasser. I don't know the exact numbers. I'd guess somewhere between 10-15. That's not many, and I probably could and should have done more. But it's a start.

How many have you?

Totally unrelated, but you didn't have a "don't engage" rule when canvassing? When I did it this election they said to avoid conflict and just gather information.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Opinions changed because people saw blacks getting beaten on the news, in thier local diners, watching police dogs maul marchers in Selma, having black children in their schools etc etc

People bled for opinions to change.

Sure, and protest can be a part of it. But it has to be accompanied by more than just protest. Otherwise, when the blacks get beaten, people will cheer. Protest worked because people had some sympathy for the civil rights movement, but still voted for racists because they didn't care that much, then changed their mind when they saw what the result meant - dead bodies, broken families, motherless children, blood and tears. But they still needed the original kernel of sympathy. Right now, they don't have that - and we know, because they voted Trump.

 

[radios shipping overview]

Brietbart will be the direct propaganda outlet for our next President. That should horrify any American. It'll be no better than those accursed "state-run media" complaints we have about so many other countries when trying to get independently verified information.

At least it had a reputation as being part of the batshit fringe long before it was ever aligned with the White House. It's not like its name translates directly to "Truth."

It's just that a good chunk of the country is part of that batshit cultlike fringe now.

 

[Totakeke]

preaching other minorities to talk to white racists (and I mean any racists whether they be passive or aggressive) is just going to touch the wrong buttons. I see the point in talking to rural white folks but I feel getting them to care about minorities is going to insanely difficult, even if democrats were able to make their economic lives better.

If they don't interact with minorities in their daily lives, why are we trying to convince them to care about minorities. And by care I do mean care, not being not racist or whatever. If they're not doing well economically, they're not going to care about how a group of people they don't know are doing.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Totally unrelated, but you didn't have a "don't engage" rule when canvassing? When I did it this election they said to avoid conflict and just gather information.

Yes and no. We're supposed to move on not to waste time and to avoid nasty situations, but honestly most people are pretty happy to chat and I like talking with them - I think it leaves a better impression than just "Are you going to vote X? (y/n) Have a nice day!" style stuff that just roboticizes politics. Sometimes you end up having really moving conversations.

I will admit sometimes I've had to say my thank yous and scarper pretty damn quickly, though.

EDIT: This isn't knocking random doors, mind, it's from a list of current and former Labour voters. There's a big problem with the working class abandoning Labour for UKIP, sort of like the working class abandoning the Democrats for Trumponomics, but I wasn't just talking to random UKIP supporters, I was talking to people who had previously supported Labour and just hadn't been cleaned off the contact sheets yet.

If I was just contacting random people entirely I probably wouldn't have done it.

 

[Elaugaufein]

If you're going to convince yourselves that everyone (note: everyone as in the entire set*) who voted for Trump is irredeemably evil beyond reason, then you've lost, for at least the immediate future (whites aren't going to cease to be a plurality in America any time soon).

If those people aren't irredeemably racist or sexist but are willing to tolerate it for whatever reason you need peole to convince them otherwise. And yes that does require minorities to exercise some degree of understanding too, its pretty damn hard to convince people you don't hate them when you're saying they are irredeemably evil no exceptions. That doesn't require you to make nice with people who are being racist or sexist towards you but it does require the acceptance of the possibility that not all Trump voters are irredeemable.

*Because there's a trend of deliberately confusing this claim with the idea that none of Trumps supporters are racist /sexistm

 

[aspiegamer]

This post-truth talk is interesting. Natural progression of truthiness? That's been the past decade where the easy answer to any question was "check Wikipedia." We're so freaking lazy now that even a Wikipedia check for basic facts or a google search for news is too much effort for countless people. Wikipedia is an information dump without professional quality control, but it operates on consensus and content demands citation. Post-truth by definition lacks any quality control whatsoever.

I'm afraid of Breitbart. I feel like it's going to be the death of journalism at this point.

The media in its current form might as well be dead. It completely failed the country on Trump. There's only minimal good still to find. An odd find the past week, Jezebel (of Gawker) has covered more Trump-related ethics stories and appointee insanity than any actual news outlet I can find. Was true during the campaign, too, but that falls much more into echo chamber territory. Once the situation is no longer theoretical, it's a journalistic service.

 

[chadskin]

Obama: "If you're not serious about the job, you probably won't be there very long."

Ha!

 

[dramatis]

Republicans plan to "drain the swamp" by gutting campaign finance laws

There is really not all that much left to prevent big money from influencing American politics. Donors can already spend as much as they want on “independent” Super PACs that take out millions in political advertisements. Corporations can give as much as they want to these Super PACs, and they’re finding ways to do so entirely in secret.

But weakened though the current campaign finance regime might be, it hasn’t been totally toppled. Vital bulwarks really do remain that prevent politicians from engaging in some kinds of fundraising — at least for the time being.

The Republican Party platform has an array of plans for getting rid of those last bulwarks. One of the most extreme money-in-politics proposals that Republicans have considered would roll back or eliminate the limits on what individual donors can give directly to candidates. Here’s reporter Kate Ackley writing at Roll Call Monday about the key priorities for some Republicans around campaign finance (emphasis added):

(Hans A.) Von Spakovsky, who manages the Election Law Reform Initiative at the conservative Heritage Foundation, says he’s hopeful that McConnell and Trump, along with a Republican House, will greatly increase the limits on donations to party committees and candidates, or undo the limits altogether. Individual donors can give no more than $2,700 directly to candidates per election in the 2016 cycle.​

In 2002, in the wake of several high-profile corruption scandals involving Enron and other large corporations, Congress passed a bipartisan bill called McCain-Feingold that outlawed several forms of limitless political donations.

Most of that bill was shredded by the Supreme Court, which ruled the federal government’s attempts to rein in spending amounted to an abridgment of free speech.

But while most of McCain-Feingold is dead, a part of it remains — the section of the law that contains rules forcing corporations and donors to make some of their political spending public, according to Holman. These disclosure rules have largely held up in court, despite conservative-led lawsuits aimed at striking them down.

“The only thing left on the books are a fairly weak disclosure system — and the Republicans will probably try to end that, too,” Holman says.

I figure we do have to talk about the possibility of campaign finance actually getting even worse than it is now.

 

[whyamihere]

Dem lawyer working on the Cooper recount in North Carolina:

‏@marceelias
BREAKING--As of COB Wednesday, North Carolina Gov-Elect Roy Cooper’s lead has expanded to 5,785 votes.

‏@marceelias
While the @NCGOP continues to make unsupported claims, Gov-Elect Cooper's lead grows. So far this week he has gained a net 806 votes.

@marceelias
And, when you look at what is left to count in North Carolina, Cooper's lead will continue to grow further.

@marceelias
For reporters covering the NC election results, remember its ultimately about the vote totals--And Cooper's net margin is growing.

Awwwwwwwwwww yeah!

 

[Ashodin]

Dem lawyer working on the Cooper recount in North Carolina:









Awwwwwwwwwww yeah!

YES!!!

 

[blackw0lf]

Brietbart will be the direct propaganda outlet for our next President. That should horrify any American. It'll be no better than those accursed "state-run media" complaints we have about so many other countries when trying to get independently verified information.

How is that any different from Fox News during the Bush years?

 

[Crocodile]

Dangers of the Trump Presidency to the Republic: Corruption galore

How is that any different from Fox News during the Bush years?

A) Fox News wasn't as closely tied to the WH as Breibart will be
B) "Diet Racist and #1 with racists" is better than "Full Blown Racist and #1 with racists"

 

[B-Dubs]

How is that any different from Fox News during the Bush years?

As bad as Fox News was they weren't literal Nazis.

 

[aspiegamer]

How is that any different from Fox News during the Bush years?

That's a good point, but I'd call that more of a "nudged" media. Under Breitbart, people in the administration literally own the place. Plus, Breitbart has no qualms publishing unsubstantiated bullshit on top of "just" entirely biased content a la FOX.

 

[RustyNails]

Sure, and protest can be a part of it. But it has to be accompanied by more than just protest. Otherwise, when the blacks get beaten, people will cheer. Protest worked because people had some sympathy for the civil rights movement, but still voted for racists because they didn't care that much, then changed their mind when they saw what the result meant - dead bodies, broken families, motherless children, blood and tears. But they still needed the original kernel of sympathy. Right now, they don't have that - and we know, because they voted Trump.

I'm not saying I'm going to go around punching deplorables in the face. I am not going to beg to differ and explain why internment or calling people monkeys and savages is not alright. I'm just going to call them racist cuntpunchers who are okay with warcrimes against Muslims. That's all. Gandhi did not try to convince General Dyer why shooting unarmed crowd in Jalianwalabagh was a big no no. MLK did not try to convince Wallace why he is not a nice person. They accepted these deplorables as racist cuntpunchers.

Edit: mixed up my imperialists

 

[Slurpy2k20]

How is that any different from Fox News during the Bush years?

Uhh..

1. Brietbart is infinitely more loathsome and dangerous than Fox News (even though Fox News tries really, really hard to be shitty)

2. Brietbart's executive chairman has an official, direct advisory position to the President

Yeah, it's different.

 

[RastaMentality]

Royalan's post earlier this year on coddling racists and white outreach is pretty sound right now.

And he, probably like me for the past 10 years, have been trying to convert white people into not being ignorant as fuck at every turn. Since we wanna assign roles, I'd say after this election it's probably fucking dangerous for muslims to go speak to white people about not being racist. Maybe white liberals should be doing this work because there's an awful lot of whitesplaining (for lack of a better word) going on here. It's not our job to do shit. Stop asking minorities to be the next Nelson Mandela in the era of Trumpism.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I'm not saying I'm going to go around punching deplorables in the face. I am not going to beg to differ and explain why internment or calling people monkeys and savages is not alright. I'm just going to call them racist cuntpunchers who are okay with warcrimes against Muslims. That's all. Gandhi did not try to convince Lord Mountbatten why shooting unarmed crowd in Jalianwalabagh was a big no no. MLK did not try to convince Wallace why he is not a nice person. They accepted these deplorables as racist cuntpunchers.

Not every single Trump voter is a Lord Mountbatten or a Wallace, though.

There deplorables. There absolutely are. But there's also the mislead, the frightened, the lied to, the ignorant, the apathetic. And if you dump them in the deplorable basket, you can't ever win their vote. And the thing is, Gandhi and MLK were both very good at winning their vote. That's why we remember them as succeeding - Gandhi convinced the voting population of Britain that India ought to be free, and MLK convinced a significant portion of white people that black people ought to have voting rights.

Put it this way: in 1955, the majority of the American public supported segregation. Ny 1965, they did not. So, a portion of the American public who previously supported segregation changed their minds. If they had not done, and if there was still majority opposition to desegregation, it would not have passed. That's how democracies work - you need 50%+1 to do anything, and if you don't have your 50%, you gotta work for it.

 

[Holmes]

I'm in the club

We in da cloughb

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Royalan's post earlier this year on coddling racists and white outreach is pretty sound right now.

And he, probably like me for the past 10 years, have been trying to convert white people into not being ignorant as fuck at every turn. Since we wanna assign roles, I'd say after this election it's probably fucking dangerous for muslims to go speak to white people about not being racist. Maybe white liberals should be doing this work because there's an awful lot of whitesplaining (for lack of a better word) going on here. It's not our job to do shit. Stop asking minorities to be the next Nelson Mandela in the era of Trumpism.

People have already said this and I've already agreed with it, quite a few posts back and significantly before you posted this (49 minutes before). If you're going to just ignore what's being said, you may as well not participate.

 

[RustyNails]

Not every single Trump voter is a Lord Mountbatten or a Wallace, though.

There deplorables. There absolutely are. But there's also the mislead, the frightened, the lied to, the ignorant, the apathetic. And if you dump them in the deplorable basket, you can't ever win their vote. And the thing is, Gandhi and MLK were both very good at winning their vote. That's why we remember them as succeeding - Gandhi convinced the voting population of Britain that India ought to be free, and MLK convinced a significant portion of white people that black people ought to have voting rights.

And they did that by not coddling racists, no? They did that by showing racism is fucking inhumane and shouldnt be tolerated. They did that through protesting the racism (burning English made clothes/Selma march). Not saying "hey you guys, we understand your economic anxiety but pls be nice to us "

 

[Deleted member 231381]

And they did that by not coddling racists, no? They did that by showing racism is fucking inhumane and shouldnt be tolerated. They did that through protesting the racism (burning English made clothes/Selma march). Not saying "hey you guys, we understand your economic anxiety but pls be nice to us "

This is becoming such a tedious strawman that it's becoming a chore to reply. I am going to give you the credit of assuming I've not explained my case well enough, and I'd like to start again in the hope we might reach a conclusion.

Firstly;

What do you mean by 'coddling' racists? Practically and politically, what does this involve? Why do you think anyone, at all, is advocating it?

Secondly;

If people were iredeemably racist (your position, as I understand it), why would they be moved by protests? If a black man is killed in a protest, and these people are racist, surely they'd cheer? Why did the death of protestors move them if they were iredeemably racist?

 

[bachikarn]

When Trump made his crazy ill-advised Washington trip for a rally, he held it in Snohomish County, too. Clearly we matter!

I was honestly surprised at the amount of Trump signs that popped up a week before the election in Mill Creek and Bothell. I even saw a group of Trump supporters gathered on a street corner in Everett. It was one my first anecdotal warning signs that the election wasn't going to go as predicted. There wasn't anything like that for Romney iirc.

 

[Holmes]

RustyNails is a woke bae

 

[Deleted member 231381]

RustyNails is a woke bae

You could have thrown in a yaas queen while you were at it.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Crab, do people hate you for who you are?

Note, if people hate you for liking Marx, that does not count.

 

[RustyNails]

This is becoming such a tedious strawman that it's becoming a chore to reply. I am going to give you the credit of assuming I've not explained my case well enough, and I'd like to start again in the hope we might reach a conclusion.

What do you mean by 'coddling' racists? Practically and politically, what does this involve? Why do you think anyone, at all, is advocating it?

Coddling racists is not calling them racists and empathizing with the fact that their way of life is going away. They are not to blame for the racial and sexist resentment, and they are the products of their environment. Telling them Mexicans/Muslims are not responsible for the shitty state of their condidition. Explaining to them Build a Wall/Ban Muslims is not a good idea. I can go on. If you hold any of these views, you're a deplorable and you can fuck off. I'm not being nice to such people.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Crab, do people hate you for who you are?

Some people, yeah. I'm a posho Oxbridge twat who did PPE like that cunt Miliband, plus I'm a filthy immigrant and a deviant. Not anywhere near the same scale, though, and in most circles the first at least gives me enormous privilege, so I only rarely get a glimpse of any hate.

 

[Prof. Bathtub]

On the other hand, one who has cultivated the art of reading will instantly discern, in a book or journal or pamphlet, what ought to be remembered because it meets one's personal needs or is of value as general knowledge. What he thus learns is incorporated in his mental analogue of this or that problem or thing, further correcting the mental picture or enlarging it so that it becomes more exact and precise. Should some practical problem suddenly demand examination or solution, memory will immediately select the opportune information from the mass that has been acquired through years of reading and will place this information at the service of one's powers of judgment so as to get a new and clearer view of the problem in question or produce a definitive solution.

Only thus can reading have any meaning or be worth while.

Seems accurate for selective Post-Truth thought.

 

[Plinko]

Jon Stewart is right on the money. Don't look at a group as a monolith. There is definite hypocrisy from the left on this issue. To be fair, there's hypocrisy from both sides on this issue.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Coddling racists is not calling them racists and empathizing with the fact that their way of life is going away. They are not to blame for the racial and sexist resentment, and they are the products of their environment. Telling them Mexicans/Muslims are not responsible for the shitty state of their condidition. Explaining to them Build a Wall/Ban Muslims is not a good idea. I can go on. If you hold any of these views, you're a deplorable and you can fuck off. I'm not being nice to such people.

Okay, so next question then, and is related to my last one. Why will protests achieve anything? According to you, Trump voters are iredeemably racist, we cannot change this, and it is their sole motivation. Additionally, they are the winning voting bloc. So, if there is a protest, and Muslim Americans are killed by the police, given that these voters are racist, surely they'll cheer? And because they're the largest voting bloc, that politicians will cheer with them? I don't understand how you get from "these people are iredeemable racists" --> "protests will change the situation". What is the link?