2016 Postmortem

portlander23

(2,078 posts) Thu Dec 8, 2016, 12:46 PM Dec 2016

The Blind Spots of Liberalism

The Blind Spots of Liberalism
Adam Fisher
Jacobin Magazine

Politicians are remarkably adept at pitting the economically disenfranchised against the racially or sexually marginalized.

Fear of hitting a glass ceiling is set against the fear of having one’s wages stolen. Fear of never being able to love the way one wants to love is set against the fear of losing one’s job and being out on the street.

Classless identity politics is a failure because it ends up elevating elites instead of recognizing the commonality all working-class and poor people share. We all experience oppression due to class, even if that oppression can be compounded by race, gender, or sexuality.

Inevitably, the blind spots of classless identity politics benefit elites.

In one rarified area, the wage gap has apparently vanished: chief executive officers of America’s richest companies. But this means very little to, say, women in traditionally feminized occupations like nursing and home health care work. A $15 minimum wage would be a more significant win for feminism than gender parity for CEOs.

We must recognize, as a class, that working-class women have more in common with working-class men than they do with Marissa Mayer, and fight together to end exploitation of male and (particularly) female labor. We must recognize, as a class, that working-class LGBT people have more in common with working-class straight people than they do with Tim Cook, and fight to end all working-class oppression (particularly that based on sexuality).

22 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Blind Spots of Liberalism (Original Post) portlander23 Dec 2016 OP

Recommended. guillaumeb Dec 2016 #1

Didn't get your woman president, ladies? That's ok. Lean In is garbage! kcr Dec 2016 #2

The false narrative around here about sacrificing social justice for working class interests... killbotfactory Dec 2016 #3

Or maybe those fighting to include more focus on the poor and working class kcr Dec 2016 #4

You should read the entire article, especially the end. killbotfactory Dec 2016 #5

I promise you. I read the article. Even the bit at the end. kcr Dec 2016 #8

The article is based on faulty assumptions. TwilightZone Dec 2016 #9

kamala harris won more votes, because stein/johnson voters voted for her and then for Stein not HRC La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #13

it has more to do with the fact that both Candidates were Democrats JI7 Dec 2016 #20

Omg. I totally forgot about that. La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #22

you should read what the author left out, the narrative of why Russ Feingold got less votes La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #14

California Senate Candidates were a Democratic BLack woman and Dem Hispanic WOman JI7 Dec 2016 #19

Amen portlander23 Dec 2016 #15

This message was self-deleted by its author BlueProgressive Dec 2016 #18

Economic Justice IS Social Justice NoGoodNamesLeft Dec 2016 #21

K&R Arkansas Granny Dec 2016 #6

Keep trying...nt SidDithers Dec 2016 #7

LOL. is that why HRC won those who prioritized the economy, or those who make under 30K? La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #10

And Feingold and Teachout both lost.... the country is not as lefty as we'd like it to be. bettyellen Dec 2016 #11

we are FDR left. left for white people. bootstraps for the rest of us. nt La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #12

Message auto-removed Name removed Dec 2016 #17

It's taken a liberal supermajority tirebiter Dec 2016 #16

guillaumeb

(42,649 posts)

1. Recommended.

Reply to portlander23 (Original post)

Thu Dec 8, 2016, 12:51 PM

Dec 2016

And a successful Democratic candidate will recognize that:
1) Capitalists use this "politics of division" to create artificial differences, or superficial differences, and
2) Capitalists emphasize these differences to divide the working class.

kcr

(15,522 posts)

2. Didn't get your woman president, ladies? That's ok. Lean In is garbage!

Reply to portlander23 (Original post)

Thu Dec 8, 2016, 01:14 PM

Dec 2016

You should realize you have more in common with the other working class men and forget about that silly feminism anyway! So divisive and elitist...

Ugh. This is so not needed right now. We don't need our noses rubbed in it.

killbotfactory

(13,566 posts)

3. The false narrative around here about sacrificing social justice for working class interests...

Reply to portlander23 (Original post)

Thu Dec 8, 2016, 01:14 PM

Dec 2016

Is just utterly baffling to me.

I think there is a large contingent within the democratic party that is just scared shitless about losing big money donors to republicans, and so don't want us to put up a real fight on behalf of the poor and working class.

Good article.

kcr

(15,522 posts)

4. Or maybe those fighting to include more focus on the poor and working class

Reply to killbotfactory (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 8, 2016, 01:19 PM

Dec 2016

should lay off dog whistle attacks against the social justice crowd. It's baffling to me how so many miss them. Too many are scared shitless that our inclusion of minorities scare off the white folk that they feel we need to attract for the focus on class. Or they're just outright ignorant of their own blindspots, which makes the title of the OP pretty ironic.

killbotfactory

(13,566 posts)

5. You should read the entire article, especially the end.

Reply to kcr (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 8, 2016, 01:29 PM

Dec 2016

This November, the town (and 362 other Placer County, California precincts not unlike it) voted for Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton, 51.1 percent to 39.5 percent.

But it’s hard to blame sexism or racism for Clinton’s loss.

On Election Day, the people of Placer County also voted for Kamala Harris, a black woman, to be their US senator. Her vote share? 63 percent. And her vote tally? 16,178 more than Clinton’s.

Working class people are struggling, and have been struggling for a long time.

And despite bullshit from the MSM, the poor and working class includes more than just bigoted white guys from the rust belt states.

kcr

(15,522 posts)

8. I promise you. I read the article. Even the bit at the end.

Reply to killbotfactory (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 8, 2016, 01:40 PM

Dec 2016

Workers are struggling. It doesn't mean the narrative that some want to spin is correct. Clinton still had huge margins among union voters. She led 16 points among union voters in Michigan.

TwilightZone

(28,833 posts)

9. The article is based on faulty assumptions.

Reply to killbotfactory (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 8, 2016, 01:58 PM

Dec 2016

Trump won on immigration and terrorism, not on the economy. Clinton won voters who believed that the economy was the #1 issue both nationally and in the rust belt states.

One county in one state is proof of nothing, most certainly not proof that sexism and/or racism had nothing to do with the outcome. That assertion is laughable.

La Lioness Priyanka

(53,866 posts)

13. kamala harris won more votes, because stein/johnson voters voted for her and then for Stein not HRC

Reply to killbotfactory (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 8, 2016, 02:17 PM

Dec 2016

these are not the mythical WWC voters we are looking for

also california overwhelmingly voted for Clinton, so misogyny and racism is less of a factor for CA to begin with.