The reason there’s no special place in hell for men is because hell is run for and by men. The whole PLACE is theirs.
I think that’s his point - though he can correct me if I’m wrong.
Right. I was talking about the amount of attention, not suffering.
As to your question, my answer is the working class.
So his complaint is that centuries of social structures have made it difficult for minorities to enter certain fields, and that many of these social structures exist into modern times, and that some scholarships seek to work against those social structures by giving minorities a leg up, and that since no social structures specifically disadvantage him there’s no scholarship designed specifically to counteract those nonexistent disadvantages, and he hates that?
Ooookay.
Your answer is ridiculous. One candidate was favored by almost every union and had strong economic policy proposals to benefit the working class. The other nominated a billionaire who ships jobs overseas and doesn’t pay his contractors for the work they do. And you say it’s the first party that doesn’t care about the working class?
The point is that for a long time white men were on top and others were excluded from the same opportunities. Then along came the civil rights movement which said that excluding people from opportunities is wrong. The civil rights movement succeeded and the morality of society changed to say that excluding people from opportunities based on their identity is wrong. Any white male who made a racial appeal or said vote for me because I am a man would not only lose the election but be shunned by his party.
Then the new identity politics comes up and says that it is okay for black people to vote for black people because they are black. That says it is okay to say that you will go to hell for not voting for a woman. The Bernie Sanders quote said we need more african americans and women in the senate. Not people who believe what we believe but members of certain groups.
If a republican said we need more white people and more men in the Senate he would be pilloried. That is a double standard. Double standards go against the fundamental fairness that everybody wants from their government. That is why the civil rights movement succeeded because it appealed to fairness. People who are on the losing end of a double standard can’t fail to notice and be upset.
The only two stable equilibriums are a double standard that benefits the most numerous and are enforced by the state power, or a single standard that is fair.
Not what she said, and she apologized for what she said.
If a Republican said, “White men should be represented in the Senate in numbers proportionate to th general population,” he wouldn’t be pilloried. That’s essentially what Sanders was saying. There’s no double standard.
Hint, he didn’t say of what country.
There is no country where Trump has working class-friends.
Are you saying that he isn’t working class?
Website blocked because of nudity. What the…?
But they are. That’s the sad fucking thing about this. The word “privilege” may be inapt, but nonetheless the “privilege” they’re getting is precisely what you described: “not experiencing all the disadvantages of being a minority”.
Because the minorities and women in those same towns and communities are **also **seeing their jobs disappear due to outsourcing and globalization…and on top of that have to deal with all the sexism, racism, xenophobia and other forms of bigotry that white men generally don’t. They have to deal with assholes demanding that non-whites “go back to where they came from” and women just “deal with” comments about “pussy-grabbing” and LGBT people stop demanding special rights like “existing” and “not being fired or refused service for no good reason”. They have to deal with these assholes blaming them for job losses actually caused by the rich white men the assholes just put into office, or just by normal changes in the way the world works. They have to eat the same shit sandwich the white men in these communities do…but they get second and third helpings.
And let’s be clear here: I’m not saying that “asshole” in this example refers to all “cis-gendered right-handed heterosexual white men” - most people are relatively decent human beings. What I’m saying is that “cis-gendered right-handed heterosexual white men” don’t have to put up with that extra layer of abuse every day from those assholes that people who aren’t do.
If that doesn’t feel like much of a “privilege”, trust me - it’s still a lot better than the alternative.
No, it doesn’t. But is it just me, or is the loss of the working class vote an embarrassment to the Democratic Party?
Ummm, wasn’t supposed to be NSFW, just a bunch of pics of putin, looking very working class.
Though, I guess there are some shirtless pics, they may have set off your filter.
Did you hear the joke about the engineer in hell?
If not, I’ll tell it to you.
Identity politics is one of those boogeyman phrases that has been thrown around so much and used to mean so many different things that it has effectively lost all meaning. It’s a buzzword now on the same level as PC where its meaning is almost exclusive determined by what point the user is trying to make.
Like anything else, identity politics is only blameworthy if its usage is incorrect. If someone makes identity an issue in a situation where it isn’t, identity politics, or more accurately the person using it, is blameworthy for incorrectly injecting identity as an issue into the situation. If someone correctly points that identity is an issue in a situation, identity politics, or more accurately the person using it, is praiseworthy for correctly pointing out identity as an issue in the situation.
Like anything else, the people who explicitly or implicitly claim “everything is about identity” or “nothing is ever about identity” are both wrong as absolutes often are.
It’s an embarrassment to the working class.
You mentioned wanting to “call out” white people. What did you want to call them out for?
Obama called out Biden the other day. Is that the kind of thing you mean?
To be fair to the working class, the republicans have spent a more than generation undermining the working class, and blaming the democrats for it. While it would be nice if they had more time and opportunity to investigate the issues, policies, and candidates better, the situation that the republicans have pushed them into does not lend itself to such examination.
This is just the culmination of their efforts.
Yes. That’s a good tactic. Calling voters stupid is a good way to win them over.