One subject having to do with demographic change that I don’t think gets discussed much is just how much of our politics, and European politics of course, is defined by well, European sensibilities. It seems to me, based on common sense and on observation of how things work in the non-white world, that liberalism and conservatism as we know them are not really much of a thing in places like Asia, Africa, or even South America. Liberalism, and conservatism, American style, are basically white supremacist ideologies. Not in preaching white supremacism, but in preaching white IDEAS as supreme, and the acceptable range of debate in this, and European countries, is primarily defined by what white lefties and righties disagree on. And there seems to be an expectation that people of color will just plug themselves right into the system as white people have defined it and accept our premises as valid.
As our demographics change, how will our politics change? I think some Democrats have lullled themselves into thinking that it just means Democrats win. But the Democratic Party is still run mostly by white people steeped in the traditions of Western liberalism. What happens when people raised in different traditions, such as populist parties, authoritarian parties, religious parties, explicitly racist or sectarian parties get a voice? What happens when Americans who have always seen our very system as stacked against them want a total overhaul and have the numbers to make that happen? White liberalism is basically conservative when it comes to the basic social compact and government structure. Is it adequate to the needs and desires of a growing minority population?
Liberals will have to humble their egos and accept the new reality.
*Did we force ourselves on you, or you on us ?
*v. Goethe
*The spirits that I summoned up
I now can’t rid myself of.
*
v. Goethe
Hmmm, that’s not really what I was getting at either. Actually, I think liberals should fight for their values. Chances are, Western liberalism will still rein supreme no matter how much our demographics change, but there may be some changes.
The only change that’s super obvious to me is that we’ll become a more religious country. Not Judeo-Christian, but a much more diverse, but more devout country, with a lot more Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims, Buddhists, plus growing numbers of religious minorities who we take in as refugees, like Yazidis and Ba’Hai. But let’s not leave Chrisitanity out, we also have a growing Latino population which is rather devoutly Catholic, an already religious African-American population, and it’s hard not to see white Protestants rushing to their churches as a reaction to all these other faiths popping up in their neighborhoods. The US will not be a great place to be an atheist in 2050.
Fine. If BLM wants nothing to do with liberals, I say liberals should stop being allies to them. Toss 'em to the wolves.
They’ve sort of made their point as far as I’m concerned. I’m going to commission a t shirt that reads
“Black Lives Matter”
“BLM Can STFU”
It appears that the only black lives matter movement hates the voices of non-black people, regardless of that non-black person’s point of view. Maybe all of those other people should simply shut up, and bow to the demands of the only black lives matter crowd?
YUCK!! Seems like bullying to me. A “my way or the highway”-type attitude on the part of the BLM crowd. Don’t care for it at all.
A movement that had a decent idea is hijacked by radicals who take it to a ridiculous yet predicted extreme? Slippery slope says hi.
First of all; they’re students. . . they are upset that “free speech” applies to oppressive speech. A position that is echoed by a lot of liberals - right here on this board, as well. They don’t fully understand the implications of deciding what is acceptable speech and what is not. Conservatives also succumb to this knee jerk as well - see any of the threads on anthem protests.
The thing is (and they, and others may never get it) is that free speech protection that doesn’t apply to everybody is not free speech protection at all.
mc
“liberalism is white supremacy.”
Those guys would throw rocks at the fire truck if their houses were on fire.
So, college students did something dumb and assholic, film at 11?
Shock and surprise.
College students don’t grow up in a vacuum. They had to have learned these “ideas” somewhere–family, teachers, social media, internet, somewhere.
I’ll try again to get back on track.
To rephrase what i was asking another way, do minorities want a liberal party, or do they support the current liberal party because it’s the only place they feel welcome? Will minority voters continue to support what white progressives support once they are the majority of the Democratic Party? My sense is that they will not.
Historically, the US has built its two party system around sectionalism rather than ideology. The 1930s saw a big shift towards the parties seperating along ideological lines, a process which wasn’t fully complete until 2000 or so. And right as we reach peak left vs. right, I think we’re going right back to sectionalism. Which of course has a big racial component. So I can see a future where both parties again have liberals and conservatives in their ranks, and the primary faultlines between the two parties being over race, region, and culture.
When I asked if BLM had a point, that’s what I was referring to. Liberalism may not be white supremacy, per se, but it is white, with 99% of the intellectual basis of liberalism coming from white people, mostly white males. And conservatism is the same. Non-white countries don’t look at left and right in the same way we do. European countries are somewhat similar, but the ideological arguments going on in Japan, African democracies, and South America are not very similar.
I thought this was a quote by some wacko BLM supporter. Turns out you wrote it. I… don’t think I can adequately address it. Let’s just say that the reason that these “white ideas” define the acceptable range of debate is that they’re the best we’ve come up with, and the alternatives are heinous. Everyone involved in this stupid protest would do well to recognize that. Throw out western democracy as “white supremacist”? Might as well throw out electricity, running water, and the germ theory of disease as artifacts of the patriarchy because they were developed mostly by men. I’m starting to understand what people mean when they talk about social justice as postmodernism.
No, I think we were answering your question. You’re using a college demonstration to make the point that minorities’ political views are not in line with liberals. And we’re saying that college students do not represent the minority view.
As the voting majority changes in demographic there will certainly be adjustments to policy; it’s the natural progression of politics.
mc
Yeah. As an ACLU member and BLM supporter, I think the students were wrong here, although I can see their point about modern free-speech absolutism being in some respects a social luxury that is paid for mostly by members of disadvantaged groups. When we say that we must protect the First Amendment rights of white supremacists, for instance, it’s nonwhite people who generally bear the consequences of white supremacists being able to publicize their views.
However. I don’t think this anti-ACLU sentiment will last, because the vast majority of what the ACLU does involves protecting the rights of groups that are genuinely oppressed. These high-profile free-speech-for-hate-groups cases are a very small part of ACLU activities. As anti-ACLU BLM activists grow up and branch out and realize who it is out there in the trenches fighting for police reform, for immigrant rights, for LGBT rights, for prisoners’ rights, for voting rights, etc., it will become apparent to them that the ACLU does a hell of a lot more to support the rights and wellbeing of nonwhite people than to undermine them.
No, OP, nonwhite Americans are not naturally more “authoritarian” or “sectarian” than white Americans. These students are understandably somewhat pissed off that nowadays “free speech” is frequently code for “speech that insults and denigrates minority groups”, and they resent being expected to support that. But the broad issues of civil liberties and what the ACLU does are far more complex than that one phenomenon, as these students will doubtless learn if they continue their commitment to activism.
At what point do college students forget their politics? Is it between the junior and senior year or is it right after they are handed their diploma ?
I was just intrigued by their “liberalism is white supremacism” chant. All Western ideologies are based on the ideas of white males for the most part. So in some sense their statement is accurate.
I’ll just point out that the Legal Director of the ACLU of VA, who is the person who decided to represent the Charlottesville folks, is herself a person of color.
(As relevant to who speaks for “the oppressed.”)
On the other hand, free speech absolutism means they can also speak. NOT respecting the 1st amendment has also been a tactic primarily used against minorities.
I was actually thinking more of how things are done in foreign countries and how much of those beliefs are brought here by immigrants. To the extent I was thinking of African-Americans, it was to ponder why they would accept a white ideology as their own when the existence of their group is primarily about how white ideology seems to have failed them. Whether liberal, conservative, libertarian, or even Marxist.