You do whether you like it or not. You don’t own the word “racist.” I think most people read it with intent implied, even if you don’t.
Sigh.
Yes, you’re the dispenser of truth and others are dolts who have no idea what’s going on.
I disagree. I doubt we’ll resolve this, but that’s okay.
I’m the dispenser of truth as I see it, and you’re the dispenser of truth as you see it. I understand that you disagree with what I believe is true.
I, very strongly, believe that one of the main problems with our society is the ubiquitous racism and white supremacism that goes unremarked upon and unchallenged. If you don’t believe this is a big, big problem in our society, then I’m sure you’re not going to like the way I advocate and explain things.
But I don’t get why what I say bothers you so much. If you believe I’ve wronged someone, that might be different – show me what I said, and who you think I wronged, and I’ll address it.
Your previous statement sounded really arrogant to me, and this one shows why. I can believe racism is a big problem and still disagree with you about whether something is racist, or harmful.
Also, using the word “truth” sounds arrogant. If you dispense the truth, it means you think you can’t be wrong. Just say opinion or something.
I said “truth, as I see it” – not absolute truth (if that even exists). Everything I’ve said is my opinion, and I could be wrong about everything. From our discussions so far, my opinions remain the same as before.
Ah, I see that now. It got lost. I thought you meant your overall opinion, not just “the truth.” And the rest of the statement didn’t help.
Minimum wages originated in South Africa and Canada when black and chinese laborers were taking jobs from white people. They came to the US in the 1930s when northern lawmakers were upset about black people coming up from the south and taking white’s jobs. If you look at the debates about the Davis Bacon act, they were quite explicit about trying to protect white people from competition with black people.
If you look at history, up until minimum wage laws, unemployment rates were lower among black young people and then after the laws were passed they soared and are now much higher than for white young people.
Black employment levels in the US have never recovered from the biggest blow: the abolition of slavery.
>Using a shill site like fee.org
Bill Clinton was a moderate southern Democrat, yes. A “New Democrat,” trying to be more liberal than the old boll weevils and more conservative than Jesse Jackson. Liberals were very disappointed in him signing the legislation to end AFDC.
Note that for most of his time in office, he was stuck with Newt Gingrich as Speaker of the House, too. And Gingrich was a right-wing revolutionary who hated the Republican Party as “too liberal” until he took it over. So…yeah.
[shrug] The dental plan sucked anyway.
The thing is, racism is not something you compromise on if you have any principles, nor can supporters tolerate compromise on racism. What supporters can tolerate even less is actively pursuing policies they called racist.
So what needs to happen is that given what actually happened in the 1990s, not just with the Clinton administration but with most of the Democratic Party minus its hardcore left wing, Democrats need to quit with the “Southern Strategy” shtick. Yes, the Southern Strategy was real, and it was designed to appeal to racist whites. We own that, no getting around that. Where Democrats go wrong is in accusing us of focusing on “dog whistle” politics. That one was weak tea before the 1990s, after the 1990s it’s just inexcusable. Democrats just need to admit that conservatives were right about those issues.
Appealing to racists using coded racist language is wrong and hurts America and Americans, even if you think the policies advocated are good for the country. “Welfare queens”, Willie-Horton style racist fear-mongering, and similar rhetoric was racist, period.
What hurts America is taking something that isn’t racial and turning it into a racial issue to whip up minority voters in the way that Democrats accuse Republicans of doing with white voters.
But as far as it goes, I’ll agree that the language should have been less intemperate, if you’ll agree that on the core policy issues involved, the Republicans were right. There should not have been furloughs for convicted murderers and rapists, and people should not have been able to make welfare a permanent life choice.
I’m not going to agree with that in a blanket fashion – it’s possible that furloughs and other issues should have been tweaked, but I think law enforcement and the justice system have gotten worse (at least in some areas), not better, since the 80s, and I don’t believe the changes to policy were responsible for improvements in crime rates. And while welfare changes may well have been warranted, I’m not convinced at all that the new system is better.
Perhaps you don’t think so, but Democrats almost completely capitulated on those issues. Which they would not have been able to do if they honesty believed the policies Republicans supported were racist.
“The genetic fallacy (also known as the fallacy of origins or fallacy of virtue is a fallacy of irrelevance where a conclusion is suggested based solely on someone’s or something’s history, origin, or source rather than its current meaning or context. This overlooks any difference to be found in the present situation, typically transferring the positive or negative esteem from the earlier context.”
Plus it’s not TOTALLY accurate. The South opposed wages and hours legislation because they feared it would cost them their trade advantage with the north. They insisted on lower minimums so that jobs would stay in the south. Otherwise, all things being equal, manufacturers would have preferred to set up shop in the north and midwest.
But that gets us to the other fallacy whose name I do not know. The fallacy that because racists support something, then it must be racist. Yes, racists supported minimum wages, and so did a lot of non-racists. Some racists also opposed minimum wage legislation for the reasons cited above, and many non-racists also opposed minimum wage laws, for being a crime against basic economics.
There are still a lot of racists who vote Democrat because they like free stuff. They just wish they got all the free stuff and black people none of the free stuff.
The minimum wage is an issue where the effects and the side effects have switched. When it was originally proposed hurting black employment was the intended effect and helping unions was the unintended side effect. Now helping unions is the intended effect and hurting black employment is the unintended side effect.
It just shows the double standard. The democrat party has one standard and the republican party has another one. A former high ranking Klan member, who personally filibustered the civil rights act, and uses the n word on tv, is allowed to be the leader of the senate and that says nothing about the how the democrats feel about black people. Yet Jesse Helms is an indictment of every Republican everywhere.
The minimum wage is a policy that hurts black people and is championed by democrats and they get a pass on that, yet republicans are forever tainted by racism because someone in 1988 ran an ad that criticized Dukakis for letting a murderer out of prison to rape and attempt to kill again.
Unsurprisingly, you missed my point.
Racist hiring preferences hurt black people. Enforcing standards for minimal compensation and conditions in all jobs, does not.
Minimum wage law helps black people. As with slavery abolition, it means that some white people no longer have means they can countenance in employing black people. I call that all to the good.