Can We Have An Open Honest Discussion About Progressives, Civil Rights, And Income Inequality ???

[WillyT]

In the movie 'All The President's Men' we were taught to.... "follow the money"...

Good advice for the last 40 or so years...

And yet here at DU...

Many people SEEM to value Civil Rights over Economic Rights... Income Inequality...

I believe that is a FALSE CHOICE.

Yet what it does do is the divide and conquer.

From George Carlin:

Now, to balance the scale, I'd like to talk about some things that bring us together, things that point out our similarities instead of our differences. 'Cause that's all you ever hear about in this country. It's our differences. That's all the media and the politicians are ever talking about--the things that separate us, things that make us different from one another. That's the way the ruling class operates in any society. They try to divide the rest of the people. They keep the lower and the middle classes fighting with each other so that they, the rich, can run off with all the fucking money! Fairly simple thing. Happens to work. You know? Anything different--that's what they're gonna talk about--race, religion, ethnic and national background, jobs, income, education, social status, sexuality, anything they can do to keep us fighting with each other, so that they can keep going to the bank! You know how I define the economic and social classes in this country? The upper class keeps all of the money, pays none of the taxes. The middle class pays all of the taxes, does all of the work. The poor are there just to scare the shit out of the middle class. Keep 'em showing up at those jobs.

Link: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_Carlin

IT IS THE MONEY... IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE MONEY...

It has rarely been about anyone's civil rights...

The good news.... is that you fix income inequality... you make people happy...

And happy people tend to live more in harmony.

[99Forever]

1. Proud to be the first K&R.

[Phlem]

2. K&R!

[drmeow]

3. IMO - fixing income inequality

is like stopping (or slowing) the bleeding. It is absolutely necessary and needs to come first but is not sufficient. It also may not be possible to do completely without addressing civil rights. We need income equality AND income security. That will get rid of some of the fear and drive to scapegoat. Then we need to address underlying ignorance and attitudes or it will be too easy to go back to income inequality and insecurity.

[1StrongBlackMan]

6. I am less optimistic ...

this country (world) has a history of framing the argument in a way to win parity for those born in the status quo that handicaps others.

[randys1]

27. That statement just flew over many heads, I am afraid

[MFrohike]

77. You're not wrong

I think your observation would make a great guideline for crafting a movement, a law, or a program. If you know they're going to make a strong play to break off some of the group, how do you prevent it? How do you make your people aware the play is coming so they can see it coming? If you don't do that, it ends up being the New Deal all over again. All the white people get covered, but what about everybody else? That's not to knock the New Deal. I'm just wondering how all of us could prevent that sort of thing from happening again.

[muriel_volestrangler]

113. Weren't we all 'born in the status quo', by definition?

Since the 'status quo' is 'the existing situation'. And parity with what?

[1StrongBlackMan]

114. Yes ...

And that status quo benefits some and hinders others.

[Kalidurga]

4. I am pretty sure they overlap

so separating them is not entirely if at all possible.

[WillyT]

71. YES !!! - They Are Intertwined And Inseperable... That's Why MLK...

Started Taking Heat From His Own (African American And White Civil Rights Leaders) When He Started Speaking Out On Vietnam, And Then Supported The Sanitation Workers In Memphis Where He Was Shot Dead

Poor People's Campaign, 1968

In 1968, King and the SCLC organized the "Poor People's Campaign" to address issues of economic justice. King traveled the country to assemble "a multiracial army of the poor" that would march on Washington to engage in nonviolent civil disobedience at the Capitol until Congress created an "economic bill of rights" for poor Americans.[175][176]

The campaign was preceded by King's final book, Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community?, which laid out his view of how to address social issues and poverty. King quoted from Henry George and George's book, Progress and Poverty, particularly in support of a guaranteed basic income.[177][178][179] The campaign culminated in a march on Washington, D.C., demanding economic aid to the poorest communities of the United States.

King and the SCLC called on the government to invest in rebuilding America's cities. He felt that Congress had shown "hostility to the poor" by spending "military funds with alacrity and generosity". He contrasted this with the situation faced by poor Americans, claiming that Congress had merely provided "poverty funds with miserliness".[176] His vision was for change that was more revolutionary than mere reform: he cited systematic flaws of "racism, poverty, militarism and materialism", and argued that "reconstruction of society itself is the real issue to be faced".[180]

The Poor People's Campaign was controversial even within the civil rights movement. Rustin resigned from the march, stating that the goals of the campaign were too broad, that its demands were unrealizable, and that he thought that these campaigns would accelerate the backlash and repression on the poor and the black.

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King_Jr.

He Continued...

The issue is injustice. The issue is the refusal of Memphis to be fair and honest in its dealings with its public servants, who happen to be sanitation workers.

Somewhere I read of the freedom of assembly. Somewhere I read of the freedom of speech. Somewhere I read of the freedom of press. Somewhere I read that the greatness of America is the right to protest for rights. And so just as I said, we aren't going to let dogs or water hoses turn us around. We aren't going to let any injunction turn us around. We are going on.

And he seemed to foreshadow his own death...

Like anybody, I would like to live - a long life; longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will. And He's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over. And I've seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the Promised Land. So I'm happy, tonight. I'm not worried about anything. I'm not fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord.

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27ve_Been_to_the_Mountaintop

[Kalidurga]

75. Oh I had almost forgotten

One of my professors said something about him being a union organizer and that is probably why he was assassinated. Considering how our government has had people murdered for striking for better working conditions and wages and that union busters have done the same, it's a believable theory. I think if it was just racism and over civil rights the method would have been cruder than a sniper attack.

[1StrongBlackMan]

5. All I can say ...

It isn't about Civil Rights ... to those with those born with those Rights

And, that is the PROBLEM!

No, the bigger problem is the constant refusal of those born with those Rights to acknowledge the first statement.

[Fumesucker]

7. I sometimes wonder if you think blocking economic justice will increase social justice

I had an OP up a little while back about social justice in the crab bucket, in our society it isn't the best crab who wins, it's the best connected crab. There's an old saying in racing that if you ain't cheating you ain't trying, I think they brought that over from bidness though.

It seems to me that in a world where connections rather than ability are becoming ever more important to social and economic success that those who don't already have connections are at a distinct disadvantage over those who do.

http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/02/18-us-presidents-were-in-college-fraternities/283997/

Fraternities breed leaders. That, at least, is what most any chapter website will tell you, in not so many words—and the message certainly makes for a compelling rationale for joining the Greek system. It seems, too, to be borne out by the hard numbers. While only eight and a half percent of American male college students is a member of a fraternity, University of Kentucky professor of communication Alan DeSantis points out in his 2007 book, Inside Greek U: Fraternities, Sororities, and the Pursuit of Pleasure, those who are tend to cluster in one particular sweet spot of society: the top.

Citing data from the Center for the Study of College Fraternity, DeSantis charts some impressive figures. Fraternity men make up 85 percent of U.S. Supreme Court justices since 1910, 63 percent of all U.S. presidential cabinet members since 1900, and, historically, 76 percent of U.S. Senators, 85 percent of Fortune 500 executives,and 71 percent of the men in “Who’s Who in America.” And that’s not counting the 18 ex-frat U.S. presidents since 1877 (that’s 69 percent) and the 120 Forbes 500 CEOs (24 percent) from the 2003 list, including 10—or one-third—of the top 30. In the 113th Congress alone, 38 of the hundred Senate members come from fraternity (and, now, sorority) backgrounds, as does a full quarter of the House. Is there something inherent in the fraternity culture that sends its members to the country’s top echelons?

[1StrongBlackMan]

10. No ...

I don't think blocking economic justice will increase social justice ... But, I have to ask why you think I am attempting to block social justice? How does reminding people that economic justice is paramount, only for those born with (non-economic) social justice.

It seems to me that in a world where connections rather than ability are becoming ever more important to social and economic success that those who don't already have connections are at a distinct disadvantage over those who do.

Can I point out, here, that "connections" are unrelated to "social success"?

Can I, also, point out that you are late the this particular party ... PoC have always experienced this disadvantage.

BTW, you (I think it was you ... I can't find the thread) responded to one of my posts that you, "are not my (or "the&quot enemy" ... that very well may be true, but you certainly are not presenting yourself as my/an ally.

[Fumesucker]

13. I've spent time in both worlds, the one with heavy duty connections and the one without

I greatly prefer the unconnected world to the connected one for honesty and forthrightness, playing politics every waking moment is wearying and bores me to distraction. There is no question though that the connected world offers far greater opportunities both for social advancement and for economic gain as well.

You are a member of a minority that has legal recognition in the US, a racial minority (I'm assuming from your handle), I on the other hand as an atheist do not have legal recognition as a minority.

Sure I can "pass" as a theist better than many theists but does that make it right that I have lost jobs when my atheism became known?

[1StrongBlackMan]

16. How do you define "social advancement"? ...

It seems that you define it purely in economic terms.

Sure I can "pass" as a theist better than many theists but does that make it right that I have lost jobs when my atheism became known?

S, since personal experience serves as the best teacher ... I would expect that you would understand the fallaciousness of your income inequality primacy argument ... no amount of income equality would prevent the wrong you experienced as an atheists.

[Fumesucker]

65. As you advance in society you gain power over others

An individual advancing through society is not the same thing as a society advancing.

I can't think of many societies that have advanced socially while going backward economically, perhaps you are aware of some instances of that sort of thing happening that I'm ignorant of.

[1StrongBlackMan]

68. Now you really have me confused ...

in a discussion of social and economic equity primacy, you introduce social advance/advancement as "gaining power over others"?

I hope I'm misunderstanding that ... because it appears that your economic fight is not for justice; but, rather, just a fight over your position in the system ... which would explain why the civil rights of others, denied, is of little consequence.

Please tell my I am misunderstanding.

[Fumesucker]

86. As you move up society your responsibility becomes less and less, you can get away with more

See General Petraeus for a recent example of rank having it's privileges. Petraeus doesn't have billionaire type bucks but he has a great many connections and isn't above working them for all they are worth.

I already indicated I'm not interested in that sort of life but I am not naive enough to think it doesn't exist, I've run into it too many times. It's really quite amazing the doors that even a relatively low level functionary can open just by knowing people who know people. It's a back scratching world to a big extent.

Saying that I observe something is not the same as saying I agree with it or support it. I welcome the day men don't have to metaphorically go out with club and spear to kill dinner to be thought real men.

I would just as soon we don't end up in a Hunger Games type world, that's not going to be very egalitarian or much fun either unless you are at or near the top of the social pyramid.

[jwirr]

11. I like the phrase "economic justice" better than income equality.

[1StrongBlackMan]

12. I agree ...

I, typically, use the phrase "Income Inequity"; but, "economic justice" works, too.

[Zenlitened]

44. So sadly true

It isn't about Civil Rights ... to those with those born with those Rights.

I suppose it's easier to fragment our identities, when only one aspect of our identity is under assault.

Why people go to such great lengths to obscure this fact, to deny the perspective of those whose identities intersect in more complicated ways... I just don't get it.

The blindness, willful or otherwise, it's exhausting. Disappointing. Dumb.

[1StrongBlackMan]

47. It's NOT blindness ...

I suppose it's because recognizing that means having to acknowledge that there are things out there beyond their particular interests.

[Zenlitened]

66. Good point.

You're probably right, it's impossible NOT to see the reality.

Maybe that's what makes some people so frenzied, so desperate to deny it? As if, if we don't talk about these things, they don't really exist?

I used to expect people to be better, smarter, than that.

I guess I'm getting over it now, however slowly.

[betterdemsonly]

8. MLK advocated for both civil rights and income equality.

That is gone nowadays. We have pro-gay marriage greed heads like Cuomo and Rahm and they run the party and anyone that objects to idea of emphasizing civil rights while ignoring income inequality is trolled as opposing civil rights.

[1StrongBlackMan]

17. I'm not understanding what you are saying here ...

but, your "pro-gay marriage greed heads" comment makes me think I can't agree.

[woo me with science]

62. +100000 Which illustrates how cynical and empty and manipulative the Third Way exhortations

and claims to especially care about "civil rights" really are.

My favorite recent example is the swarm response I received when I had the audacity to suggest in a thread about Ferguson that the protests by Ferguson residents should yield some ACTUAL POLICY CHANGES.

You would have thought I committed a mortal sin for bringing up the fact that this corporate administration has been complicit in the militarization of police and other policies, such as privatization of prisons, that actively *grow* exploitative communities like Ferguson.

For merely suggesting that protesters demand an end to the federal militarization programs. I was met with one of the most over-the-top, sustained, hyperbolic, and vitriolic defensive swarms that I have ever seen from the corporate posting crew here. I was even accused of not caring about RACISM because of suggesting that the protesters might actually have policy demands that might involve the Obama administration. It would have been amusing if the political motive behind it weren't so transparent and ugly. And the cherry on top was that, AFTER all these accusations were leveled against me, the Ferguson protesters *themselves* came out the very next day, demanding exactly what I had suggested.

The MO of corporate Third Way propaganda is to give lip service to the disempowerment of minority groups while DEFENDING THE MALIGNANT POLICIES THAT SUSTAIN IT and attacking those who would implicate Third Way politicians in its perpetuation and escalation.

The corporate corruption of this nation will never end as long as we yield to the bullying to refrain from holding politicians accountable just because they wear a certain team color. Dividing us by team color is a tactic and a tool by corporatists and their propaganda machines to keep us powerless in the face of what is being done to us all.

Policies that concentrate wealth in the hands of a tiny elite, while dismantling democratic protections of the masses, have NEVER resulted in empowerment of or increases in civil rights for vulnerable groups. Never in history, and not now. See my extensive links elsewhere in this thread documenting the REAL consequences of neoliberal policies on women and minority groups.

That is why the lies of neoliberals are so dangerous.

[It is Tuesday]

80. BTW, you were alert stalked, I think...

On Sun Mar 29, 2015, 08:44 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

+100000 Which illustrates how cynical and empty and manipulative the Third Way exhortations
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6433911

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Absolutely disgusting post. This guy is a fucking lunatic. If this manic screed isn't distuptive, I don't know what is.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Mar 29, 2015, 08:53 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Sorry, I happen to agree with this gentleman. Third Wayers are dangerous and needs to be removed from the Democratic Party because they are corporatist, right wing idiots that have no business being in politics in the first place, when they should be, in fact, reporting into a mental institutions to get their heads examined for the right-wing kind of thinking. So, WMWS is correct. Alert rejected as a Third Wayer whine, which the alerter should be suspended from alerting for a minimum of 120 days.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: yeah, the poster *must* be insane for posting this. nice language use there, alerter.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: When the alerter refers to someone as a "fucking lunatic" there should be a way to give them a hide. The alert is worse than anything in the post that was alerted on.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: That is one bullshit alert...You should be alerted on for calling him a fucking lunatic and a manic.
But I don't know what "distuptive" is etheir.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
....

[woo me with science]

87. Wow, thanks for posting this

and for serving. I'm glad the community got to see that one!

[sabrina 1]

110. That alert should be alerted on. It is an abuse of the Jury system and violates

the TOS.

Great jury responses, and btw, that was a great post, Woo.

[sabrina 1]

109. Excellent jury. I agree with juror #2 that the alerter should be suspended for calling a longtime

respected DUer a 'lunatic'. Isn't that against the rules? Can you alert on alerts because that clearly was 'over the top' to put it mildly.

[Bjorn Against]

81. I hope the person who alerted on this is embarrassed...

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
On Sun Mar 29, 2015, 08:44 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

+100000 Which illustrates how cynical and empty and manipulative the Third Way exhortations
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6433911

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Absolutely disgusting post. This guy is a fucking lunatic. If this manic screed isn't distuptive, I don't know what is.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Mar 29, 2015, 08:53 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Sorry, I happen to agree with this gentleman. Third Wayers are dangerous and needs to be removed from the Democratic Party because they are corporatist, right wing idiots that have no business being in politics in the first place, when they should be, in fact, reporting into a mental institutions to get their heads examined for the right-wing kind of thinking. So, WMWS is correct. Alert rejected as a Third Wayer whine, which the alerter should be suspended from alerting for a minimum of 120 days.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: yeah, the poster *must* be insane for posting this. nice language use there, alerter.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: When the alerter refers to someone as a "fucking lunatic" there should be a way to give them a hide. The alert is worse than anything in the post that was alerted on.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: That is one bullshit alert...You should be alerted on for calling him a fucking lunatic and a manic.
But I don't know what "distuptive" is etheir.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[woo me with science]

88. That was certainly

illustrative.

Thanks for serving, and posting the results.

[octoberlib]

9. I think income inequality and

racism are 2 separate issues. If everyone in theUS made $100,000.00 a year we'd still have racism and discrimination.

[1StrongBlackMan]

53. True ...

and knowing that everyone makes the same income; but, I (or you) can't advance in a job (or get hired into a job for which one is qualified), or live were one can afford to live, or receive the same service, or any of the other indignities that PoC (and other systemically disenfranchised others) face ... well ... that is NOT a society that I am inclined to support.

[woo me with science]

14. The Third Way claim of caring most about women and minorities is a cynical, vicious lie.

Issues of civil rights are deliberately used as a tool and a wedge by corporate candidates to blackmail people into voting for their own economic destruction. There is no more transparent LIE than that corporate candidates are the only candidates who care about women and minorities. Rather, they are the candidates who EXPLOIT them. And the vicious irony is that the corporatist policies actually work to SAVAGE the groups that corporatists brag they care about. Corporatism harms all Americans, but corporate policies PUMMEL minority and disadvantaged groups the most.

It is a cynical, vicious con game, and we should call it out for what it is.

Predatory corporatism harms all of us, but it ravages disadvantaged groups most of all.

Women Facing Globalization: The Impact Of Neo-liberal Globalization On The Economic, Social And Cultural Rights Of Women
http://www.awid.org/Library/Women-Facing-Globalization-The-impact-of-neo-liberal-globalization-on-the-economic-social-and-cultural-rights-of-women

Neoliberalism’s Deleterious Effects on Women
https://genderandsocs13.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/neoliberalisms-deleterious-effects-on-women/

NEOLIBERALISM THRHOUGH THE EYES OF WOMEN
http://focusweb.org/publications/2001/neoliberalism-through-the-eyes-of-women.html

Racial Aspects of Economy are Significant for White House to Address
http://www.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/07/28/racial-aspects-of-economy-are-significant-for-white-house-to-address

The Astonishing Collapse of Black and Latino Household Wealth
http://www.alternet.org/economy/black-and-latino-household-wealth-has-collapsed

The Roots of the Widening Racial Wealth Gap: Explaining the Black-White Economic Divide
http://iasp.brandeis.edu/pdfs/Author/shapiro-thomas-m/racialwealthgapbrief.pdf

Wealth Gaps Rise to Record Highs Between Whites, Blacks and Hispanics
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/files/2011/07/SDT-Wealth-Report_7-26-11_FINAL.pdf

The truth is that women and minorities can't afford more corporatism and are already dying because of it. The effects of *continued* corporate warfare on this nation and other nations will be a disaster for all human beings, but *especially* women and minorities.

It's all a viciously cynical rhetorical game, and the corporate propaganda doesn't fly anymore. The Third Way will not protect values of racial *or* gender equality by supporting candidates whose policies are dismantling the very economic and democratic systems that make it possible for women and minorities to be empowered. They certainly won't do it with policies like Obama's and Hillary's that protect bankers, starve schools and communities, grow exploitative industries including private prisons, and militarize the hell out of police in marginalized communities.

If people think things are bad now, just wait until we see the status of women and minorities in this country when we are all working for Third World wages, Hillary's trade agreements have ramped up corporate power and the ability of predatory corporations to override our democratic laws and protections, and dissent in the new corporate America has been crushed.

[1StrongBlackMan]

18. Said the white guy...

born into the Civil Rights, that his "progressiveness" denies others.

ETA: No ... The lie is your that "progressive" façade is anything other than an attempt to secure your own, selfish, economic interests ... within this capitalistic system, I might add.

[woo me with science]

22. Your response is predictable and slimy.

You know nothing about my sex, gender, color, race, socioeconomic status, or ethnicity. But even more importantly, you remain utterly unable to argue the point on its merits and instead leap immediately to attempted personal smear, *even though* you know nothing about me.

That is the cynical corporate propaganda MO, and it's disgustingly familiar from the reliable, full-time corporate posters here. How sad that we live in a base propaganda state now....that this relentless disingenuousness and smear replaces honest discussion of issues and policy.

Any potential genuinely progressive candidate for president stands for the civil rights you pretend that your neoliberal corporate candidates represent. The Third Way claim to be the ones who especially care about them is a vicious lie, as any review of policy and history shows clearly.

Expanded equality is *never* the result of policies that concentrate power and wealth in a ruling elite and dismantle the very democratic institutions that minority groups rely upon for empowerment. And that is what neoliberal politicians do.

Just ask the women and children working in sweatshops and fleeing Honduras after Hillary's right-wing handiwork there. And just ask the citizens living in any US community blighted by neoliberal policies that expand police militarization and private prisons and attach a profit to human incarceration.

You are unable to justify what neoliberal policies ACTUALLY do to civil rights and the welfare of women, minorities, and other vulnerable or marginalized groups. And you can't back up your ABSURD attempt to imply that we must turn to Third Way candidates for consideration on issues of Civil Rights.

What utter garbage we are fed by the propaganda machines. We are fed obvious shit and told that it is a nutritious meal. More importantly, we are told that the ACTUAL nutritious meal available to us does not even exist.

It doesn't fly anymore.

[font color=red]Shun the corporate talking points, diversion, disinformation, and smear.[/font color]
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5767160

Women Facing Globalization: The Impact Of Neo-liberal Globalization On The Economic, Social And Cultural Rights Of Women
http://www.awid.org/Library/Women-Facing-Globalization-The-impact-of-neo-liberal-globalization-on-the-economic-social-and-cultural-rights-of-women

Neoliberalism’s Deleterious Effects on Women
https://genderandsocs13.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/neoliberalisms-deleterious-effects-on-women/

NEOLIBERALISM THRHOUGH THE EYES OF WOMEN
http://focusweb.org/publications/2001/neoliberalism-through-the-eyes-of-women.html

Racial Aspects of Economy are Significant for White House to Address
http://www.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/07/28/racial-aspects-of-economy-are-significant-for-white-house-to-address

The Astonishing Collapse of Black and Latino Household Wealth
http://www.alternet.org/economy/black-and-latino-household-wealth-has-collapsed

The Roots of the Widening Racial Wealth Gap: Explaining the Black-White Economic Divide
http://iasp.brandeis.edu/pdfs/Author/shapiro-thomas-m/racialwealthgapbrief.pdf

Wealth Gaps Rise to Record Highs Between Whites, Blacks and Hispanics
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/files/2011/07/SDT-Wealth-Report_7-26-11_FINAL.pdf

The truth is that women and minorities can't afford more corporatism and are already dying because of it. The effects of *continued* corporate warfare on this nation and other nations will be a disaster for all human beings, but *especially* women and minorities.

[1StrongBlackMan]

24. Predictable and slimy ...

and accurate.

There is no question that PoC and women and all other systemically disenfranchised groups suffer from economic injustice. None whatsoever.

And yes ... any potential genuinely progressive candidate for president stands for the civil rights. And, I have no problem with any of the potential Democratic candidates. And I have seen no pretense by any "neoliberal corporate candidates" (whatever and whoever that and they may be).

[randys1]

29. Your response was actually right on and completely accurate

[woo me with science]

35. Ah, the predictable, content-free backup.

Empty consensus is *so* convincing.

But seriously, the corporate PR response here will follow its usual diversionary course. Try to smear me based on imagined race or gender, or divert, or pile on in agreement with posts that say absolutely nothing. None of it refutes the point being made here. None of it changes the longstanding, proven, and obvious malignant effects of wealth-concentrating and democracy-dismantling policies on the *actual* lives of marginalized people and groups throughout history and in our lives today.

Policies that concentrate wealth in the hands of a tiny elite and dismantle democratic proctions of the masses have never and will never result in increased civil rights for those masses.

That is why the lies of neoliberal politicians are so dangerous.

Repeating "2+2=5" endlessly does not make it so. It merely underscores for all how brazenly disconnected from reality our Orwellian political messaging machine has become.

Women Facing Globalization: The Impact Of Neo-liberal Globalization On The Economic, Social And Cultural Rights Of Women
http://www.awid.org/Library/Women-Facing-Globalization-The-impact-of-neo-liberal-globalization-on-the-economic-social-and-cultural-rights-of-women

Neoliberalism’s Deleterious Effects on Women
https://genderandsocs13.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/neoliberalisms-deleterious-effects-on-women/

NEOLIBERALISM THROUGH THE EYES OF WOMEN
http://focusweb.org/publications/2001/neoliberalism-through-the-eyes-of-women.html

Racial Aspects of Economy are Significant for White House to Address
http://www.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/07/28/racial-aspects-of-economy-are-significant-for-white-house-to-address

The Astonishing Collapse of Black and Latino Household Wealth
http://www.alternet.org/economy/black-and-latino-household-wealth-has-collapsed

The Roots of the Widening Racial Wealth Gap: Explaining the Black-White Economic Divide
http://iasp.brandeis.edu/pdfs/Author/shapiro-thomas-m/racialwealthgapbrief.pdf

Wealth Gaps Rise to Record Highs Between Whites, Blacks and Hispanics
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/files/2011/07/SDT-Wealth-Report_7-26-11_FINAL.pdf

The truth is that women and minorities can't afford more corporatism and are already dying because of it. The effects of *continued* corporate warfare on this nation and other nations will be a disaster for all human beings, but *especially* women and minorities.

[woo me with science]

31. Two plus two equals five! A predictable Orwellian, avoidant, disingenuous response.

You are not being told merely that genuine progressive candidates stand for issues of social equality.

You are being told that the wealth-concentrating, democracy-dismantling policies for which neoliberal candidates stand actually SAVAGE disadvantaged groups.

That's not mere speculation. That's history and reality. And it makes the con game and the propaganda and the attempted blackmail by corporate politicians that much more evil.

Your Third Way talking points are absurd on their face. You cannot claim that politicians defending predatory, antidemocratic policies that disproportionately impoverish and disempower vulnerable groups are also the politicians who stand for the civil rights of those groups.

That is the very definition of Orwellian doublespeak, and the 99 percent have had their fill of such garbage.




Third Way politicians are a menace to democracy and to human beings....*especially* marginalized groups.

[1StrongBlackMan]

41. Okay. n/t

[woo me with science]

46. More on the ACTUAL aftermath of neoliberal policies on women, children, and minorities.

Hillary's Right-Wing Honduran Coup and Its Devastating Effects on Women and Human Rights
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laura-carlsen/honduran-coup-violates-wo_b_348510.html?

Why the Honduran Children Flee North
https://consortiumnews.com/2014/07/12/why-the-honduran-children-flee-north/

Why women are less free 10 years after the invasion of Iraq
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/18/opinion/iraq-war-women-salbi/

Neoliberalism, Migrant Women, and the Commodification of Care
http://sfonline.barnard.edu/gender-justice-and-neoliberal-transformations/neoliberalism-migrant-women-and-the-commodification-of-care/

Women Facing Globalization: The Impact Of Neo-liberal Globalization On The Economic, Social And Cultural Rights Of Women
http://www.awid.org/Library/Women-Facing-Globalization-The-impact-of-neo-liberal-globalization-on-the-economic-social-and-cultural-rights-of-women

Neoliberalism’s Deleterious Effects on Women
https://genderandsocs13.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/neoliberalisms-deleterious-effects-on-women/

Henry A. Giroux: The Militarization of Racism and Neoliberal Violence
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/25660-the-militarization-of-racism-and-neoliberal-violence

Locked up: racism in the era of neoliberalism
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2008-03-19/locked-up-racism-in-the-era-of-neoliberalism/1077518

Race, Poverty, and the Neoliberal Agenda in the United States
http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2008/bauzon130208.html

[1StrongBlackMan]

56. Okay. n/t

[msanthrope]

49. I'm reading your racially insensitive post and shaking my head......

You call a respected DUer "Third Way" because he has the temerity to disagree with you? Instead of lecturing AA members of DU, maybe you should listen to them.

[Number23]

85. I don't know what's worse. The OP using a rich, old white man to somehow "dispute" the validity

of the struggle for equal rights, the ubiquitous and mind numbingly stupid "THRID WAY!! THIrD WAY!!one" insults from the pointless and usual suspects, or the posters leaping like kangaroos in this thread and others but are silent as corpses in every single racism or sexism discussion on this web site. Which unintentionally proves the point of this OP better than ANYTHING ever could.

I am encouraged by the number of people disputing this OP and the low number of recs. But I'm not nearly as encouraged as I probably could be.

[Bobbie Jo]

91. If only

AverageJoe90 were here, this thread would be complete.

[msanthrope]

92. Simply amazing, isn't it, the arrogance

shown to people who actually experience racism and sexism?

I am not surprised. ....only shocked that it's done so openly.

[Number23]

106. The thing about this thread: you've got posters of color, women and gay posters flat out

disputing the OP's premise. The people who overwhelmingly make up the base and the bulk of the Democratic Party.

The OP and his ilk are almost suggesting that we take back seats so that the wealth and economic security of straight, white people, particularly men, be addressed and that justice for the rest of us will "trickle down" from efforts to address economic parity. Once the economic inequality is taken care of in their heads, the social inequality will just take care of itself. And some have even taken it upon themselves to cherry pick some MLK quotes to bolster this belief.

This "trickle down justice" ( to Freshwest for coining that phrase a few months ago) is the other side of the same coin as the "trickle down economic" theory espoused by many conservatives. And I don't think it's a coincidence in any way that the demographics of both groups who subscribe to these theories are so similar.

[1StrongBlackMan]

117. There is NO "almost" to it ...

The OP and his ilk are almost suggesting that we take back seats so that the wealth and economic security of straight, white people, particularly men, be addressed and that justice for the rest of us will "trickle down" from efforts to address economic parity. Once the economic inequality is taken care of in their heads, the social inequality will just take care of itself.

That is the EXACT message he/they are trying to sell, particularly to PoC ... and sadly, some are buying it.

[bettyellen]

129. On top of the condescending bullshit is the most laughable suggestion of all-

That women and POC are somehow being divisive by asking for what they deserve. That is startlingly un-progressive and divisive as well as pretty fucking selfish. Just no. WE are the party, and the party is for equality. Anyone who has a problem with that I'm giving the side eye too.

[TheKentuckian]

25. All you are doing is fighting to selfishly maintain your class privilege

and have it fully recognized, to not be lumped in with the impoverished masses or be questioned as we are.

You "built this" and demand satisfaction and a bunch of poor trash, useless eaters be damned.

Many are perfectly happy to see the vast majority of us us hungry and hopeless and long as the "upwardly mobile" and well of get what they think is their fair due in the capitalist system that has rewarded them but a system that still sees them as just another minority, woman, or gay grates hard, to be treated below one's station is a great affront and to them is a far greater sin than a poor black, brown, white, man, woman, gay, or straight watching their child try to go to sleep hungry or to face homelessness.

[1StrongBlackMan]

30. What are you talking about? ...

Many are perfectly happy to see the vast majority of us us hungry and hopeless and long as the "upwardly mobile" and well of get what they think is their fair due in the capitalist system that has rewarded them but a system that still sees them as just another minority, woman, or gay grates hard, to be treated below one's station is a great affront and to them is a far greater sin than a poor black, brown, white, man, woman, gay, or straight watching their child try to go to sleep hungry or to face homelessness.

I think you are confusing me with the white guy you are defending, my brother.

[Bluenorthwest]

52. This is the guy who told me 'rights don't matter if you need a job, can't eat your rights'

I pointed out that Kentucky, after which he names himself, is one of 29 States that allow discrimination in employment against LGBT people who then can't get a job and then can't eat because they lack rights equal to his own.

[1StrongBlackMan]

55. I know ...

It's as if he (a Black man) doesn't understand that there is a relationship between the lack of rights and the lack of a job.

[TheKentuckian]

101. No, I'm talking to you. Every time, you are circling the wagons for the upper crust and poo pooing

economic justice that I have ever seen.

I think you are among the well rewarded and what infuriates is that being black is seen before the cut of your suits and that gets you lumped in with people you think of as less.

I think you don't feel you are getting the full status of your class and it grates more than anything that some might think you belong in steerage despite "you built this".

I might be reading you wrong but that is what I get from the holistic picture of views you present here and I'm sure I present as uncharitably to you as you do to me but all I see is Reaganism without the "Moral Majority" with the deck chairs arranged in line with demographics in your espoused politics and a consistent siding with power.

I'm sorry you often rub the wrong way and again, I'm sure I do the same.

[1StrongBlackMan]

104. Uh Huh. That's nice ...

{1SBLACKM turns BACK to Cousin Cookie} ... So, you never sent me those pictures from your Aruba trip. I was really waiting on them.

[closeupready]

59. Yes, and Hillary did NOTHING for Walmart's women employees whilst on their BoD

for 6 years. Yet, somehow, we are supposed to believe this time, it will be different.

Uh-huh.

[woo me with science]

64. +1 Watch what they do, not what they say.

Especially true for corporate politicians with well-funded propaganda machines.

[1StrongBlackMan]

118. The women that moved into Walmart's management ranks ...

during her Directorship, after decades of being locked out, would disagree with you.

[closeupready]

119. Then let's all hear from them.

I think we should all hear from those women who worked for Walmart during the six years she was on the Board of Directors.

Would you like that? Or would you prefer not to hear what they have to say?

[1StrongBlackMan]

120. I don't know them personally to ask them ...

But I would hazard to guess that more than a few of the women that were NOT management with Walmart, and rose into the management ranks during HRC's woman empowerment initiative, are/were pretty happy.

[closeupready]

121. But if someone did know them and asked them, would you be interested?

I'm sensing from your guarded response that you do NOT want to hear what they have to say.

There must have been thousands who have something to say. But, a priori, you dismiss their accounts and opinions anyway.

[1StrongBlackMan]

123. Yes I would be interested to hear what the have to say ...

But, my not knowing any of them, personally ... I do know that the beneficiaries of Affirmative Action Initiative tend to be happy to get into pipeline ... even when they do not hold press conferences to pronounce it.

[PowerToThePeople]

15. I always find myself rec'ing your posts.

You are a good egg WillyT

[woo me with science]

39. [phone]

Last edited Sun Mar 29, 2015, 03:36 PM - Edit history (1)

WillyT keeps the important topics at the top of the forum.

You can't overstate the value of that in a climate where deliberate, diversionary, corporate/Third Way propaganda is now standard MO for political messaging.

[WillyT]

72. Thanks PowerToThePeople... Very Kind Of You To Say...

[geek tragedy]

19. The FDR Democrats in the South were also segregationists.

They supported the New Deal ... for white people.

It is about civil rights.

Black people are still having their votes taken away, their young men shot, their communities bullied and harassed by the police.

This is not some distraction.

Fighting for economic justice does bit mean a thing if it doesn't mean justice for everyone.

[TheKentuckian]

20. What is Social Justice for the destitute, desperate, and hungry?

[1StrongBlackMan]

26. Social justice INCLUDES economic parity ...

with those of similar skill and ability, so that when income equity is attained throughout society, PoC, women and all other socially, systemically, disenfranchised groups benefit, too.

[steve2470]

76. +1 nt

[TheKentuckian]

93. Equity in poverty and lack of opportunity is a sales pitch to sand off a few rough edges while

preserving the overall death spiral with the crushing and overwhelming advantages at and near the top leading the lion's share of us to hopeless and poverty.

Parity in income for similar skills is important but it is just woefully inadequate on its own. It is all tree and little forest.

Yay! The white man and I that do the same job make the same money. Boo and hiss neither of us can pay our rent and care for our children.

This focus certainly allows for a shrinking piece of pie for all as long as class "equals" get the same size slice and that math doesn't add up for me.

[1StrongBlackMan]

94. Yeah. Okay ...

{1SBLACKM turning to Cousin Cookie} Girl ... You put you foot in these Greens! How's your Lil Man doing in school?

[TheKentuckian]

96. I season my greens with spices not with swine and my little girl isn't born yet but she is

developing nicely thanks for asking, Cuz.

[1StrongBlackMan]

98. Yeah, Uh huh. That's nice ...

{1SBLACKM, turns BACK to Cousin COOKIE} ... So Girl ... Have you heard that new Estelle joint?

[TheKentuckian]

99. Why the fuck do you keep calling me, girl? Is this supposed to be cute?

[1StrongBlackMan]

100. Because I'm not talking to you! ...

I'm nodding at the appropriate points in the conversation ... then, talking to Cousin Cookie. You keep interrupting!

[TheKentuckian]

102. Then reply to cousin cookie.

[1StrongBlackMan]

105. Uh Huh. That's nice ...

{1SBLACKM turns BACK to Cousin Cookie} ... Uhmm. I think I'm gonna have to shut down the bar ... You know who seems to be getting on full. He does it every holiday. Why can't he just find a corner and go on to sleep like his daddy used to.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

33. I'd say it's a choice of deaths.

You get to starve to death, rather than being shot or imprisoned. I don't see why we have to choose between the two, why we can't demand social equality AND economic equality.

[winter is coming]

34. +1. The whole point of triangulation is "how little can I offer you and still get your vote?"

We deserve and should demand both.

[woo me with science]

50. +100000 It's a vicious, disingenuous scam, the neoliberal claim to care about civil rights

while aggressively pursuing economic policies that inevitably disempower and lead to the erosion of civil rights for vulnerable groups.

Never in history has an agenda of policies that concentrate wealth in the hands of an unaccountable elite and dismantle democratic institutions resulted in the empowerment of marginalized groups. NEVER.

And the recent history of neoliberal policy screams the malignancy of these policies for the very groups neoliberals claim to care about. See my posts and links above.

That is why the lies of neoliberals are so malignant and dangerous.

[1StrongBlackMan]

97. I agree; but, it seems a segment of DU ...

that is (largely, if at all) unaffected by the Civil Rights/Social part, disagree ... loudly and frequently.

For the loudest and most frequent ... See Post #50.

[MADem]

21. If you fix income inequality, you make people happy....? Nice if that were true.

They've got income equality in North Korea, and they live in terror.

I strongly believe that a rising tide lifts ALL boats, and I also think the minimum wage should be enough to support a family of four.

"Follow the money" didn't mean "Follow the money that people were paid for the work people do." It was more about bribery and nefarious conduct.

And if you look at the people who live in poverty, a disproportionate number of them, in relation to their total representation in the nation, are people of color. The issue of poverty and the issue of civil rights are inextricably linked.

Here's the bottom line--if you give people a living wage, you give them the POWER and the ability to participate in public life--they aren't working four jobs to make ends meet. They aren't saying "I can get a half day's pay, or I can lose a half day's pay by going to vote."

Divide and conquer doesn't cut it. Those issues are fraternal twins.

[Bluenorthwest]

23. Can you explain to me how the legal discrimination in employment in 29 States against LGBT

people is separate from the ability of LGBT people to achieve income, much less income equality? People keep insisting that civil rights are not about economics, but they never manage to explain how people who are not treated fairly in the workplace can ever hope to have income equality even to their current straight counterparts. Forget the many advantages given to the 'legally married'. Let's talk about jobs.
So. You, as a straight white man who wants more money, says it is all about the money, and not about the rights of others to be treated equally when they want more money. It's about you wanting to maintain the current status dynamics while giving everyone a raise, that way you can have more and rest assured your privileges remain intact, for others are still disadvantaged economically relative to yourself.

[1StrongBlackMan]

28. +1 ...

income equality for all, except for those that do not have social equality ... for us, it's status quo.

[Bluenorthwest]

45. You notice not one of the people making these assertions is able to discuss specific points raised.

They are white, straight, mostly men. Mostly East Coast. Some of them make large six figure incomes in Corporate settings while calling themselves middle class. All that education and money and they still can't step up to answer a simple question.

[1StrongBlackMan]

58. It would be laughable if it weren't so sad ...

the only answer they have is the poison that is harming them, harms me ... I know that.

But what about the poison that is harming me ... but not them ... that they wish to keep in place?

[MineralMan]

38. Privilege. That's the answer.

Those with privilege already enjoy their civil rights. They don't understand that not everyone enjoys the same rights. So, they don't have to concern themselves with that. They can focus on money issues.

For me, if I don't have rights, I have nothing. If my neighbor's rights are withheld, he or she has nothing. No amount of money can replace those rights, in my opinion.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

32. Probably not.

There seems to be a meme floating around that if you don't value civil rights above all else, you're 'marginalizing' it, and that you obviously don't 'value' civil rights. There appears to be no room to value both and believe both to be inextricably intertwined, to believe that economically empowering minorities will also empower them in the fight for civil rights.

[Maedhros]

108. As we're seeing in Indiana right now, economic rights ARE civil rights. [n/t]

[Man from Pickens]

36. to answer the title question

no, not while Hillary is running

the LAST thing she wants is a discussion of these particular issues

She opposes progressives on core issues, she's been on both sides of almost every civil rights question (depending on which polls better at any given point in time), and is a living incarnation of income inequality.

So if you want to have that discussion - and I do too - the first job is to make sure that Hillary doesn't dominate the debate. The sooner it is made clear to her that she will not and cannot win her precious, the more open and honest a debate we're going to be able to have on those important topics.

[woo me with science]

54. Well said.

[MineralMan]

37. Both are important. Civil rights only seem unimportant if you have them.

If you don't have them, they are the most important thing there is. If you can't vote, you don't get to help decide the course of the nation or even your home town. If you can't get married, you can't take advantage of the benefits of marriage. If you are discriminated against because of some misbegotten law, you don't have equal rights. If you can't get equal pay for equal work, you can't compete on an equal basis.

It's easy for people like me, or you, to pay little attention to civil rights and social justice. We have those things, because we were born with certain privileges. Our rights are the basis for the founding of this nation, not our paychecks. That's because the founders knew that without rights we had no guarantee of anything.

Rights and economic issues are different, but they are equally important. Ignore either at your peril.

[FLPanhandle]

40. A quick read down this thread so far and the answer is, apparently not

You are correct and Carlin had it 100% right.

[Bluenorthwest]

42. Carlin was a rich white guy, worth millions and he was very aware that his counterparts who were

LGBT or African American or women were not afforded the same opportunities he had, which he took and for many years made seven figure incomes.
When I read this thread, I see straight white people unable to answer questions put to them, so privileged that they don't even bother to acknowledge they have been asked a question.

[FLPanhandle]

43. Carlin was right and his color/income doesn't automatically make him wrong

He can be correct and not be a LGBT or African American or a woman, or are only LGBT or African American or a women correct? In that case, your attitude is a prime example of why this topic can't be discussed logically.

[Bluenorthwest]

48. Did you read what I wrote? Carlin does not say what the OP claims. Carlin did not shit on others

seeking the same rights and opportunities he had, the OP does. Carlin would have been angry to be used in this way. He got it.
Yeah, I'm white, in showbiz and was making a hundred K when I was 22. Do you really think I believe that being white and affluent means he's automatically wrong? Seriously? Because the point is that the OP abuses Carlin. George himself said true words are important. He said he was allowed to call people 'fruits' in context one assumes I have the right to point out that he was a very rich, very white man and a comic who traded in all of these tropes and his image for profit.
Here is a collection of Carlin talking about LGBT people. Which he did when others did not. Which he did as he did with everything, with intention to provoke thought and laughter.
Carlin never did material saying black people or gay people should not seek equality to George Carlin because of money.

[FLPanhandle]

51. I know and love Carlin

But in the OP, he is correct about the rich dividing the middle/lower classes against either.

If we ever fought the rich with the same passion we fight each other, everyone would be better off.

[Bluenorthwest]

60. And where's the part where he says those who are disenfranchised compared to George should not

seek equality to George? He does not. I am not taking issue with what Carlin said, but with the use of his words to suggest that women, People of Color and LGBT people should not advocate for equity in civil rights. I offer that the OP is really about politicians, all of whom are rich. The OP seeks to divide 'civil rights' from 'economic equity' when that is a false division. That false division is foisted in service to millionaires fighting with other millionaires seeking more power in life. The OP does something Carlin would never do, exploit important issues to make cheap partisan political points.

Straight white people would do well to learn about poverty in minority communities before they pontificate about civil rights being separate from economic equity. Without equal opportunities, there is no equality of any sort possible. It's not even being attempted.

Try to fathom that I agree that income inequity is a hugely important issue. I do not agree that it is a free standing issue not associated with any other issues. I also have a great deal of trouble believing that people who don't seem to mind legal job discrimination in most of the country give a fuck about equality in incomes. What about those discriminated against? People who seek equality as a principle should be utterly furious that millions of Americans simply do not have equal protections under the law in employment and housing. Instead they shrug it off, claim it's not economically important that those people have any sort of equality. The economy they are concerned with is their own.

George was a comic and a strong voice for equality and civil rights and in spite of his famous stage being, for civil treatment of one another. This is a man who witnessed the integration of television. He was working back in the late 50's. For him to suggest that others wanting to have equal treatment was wrong would have made him a colossal asshole, and he was no such thing.

[FLPanhandle]

63. I don't think anyone is suggesting that Carlin "others wanting to have equal treatment was wrong"

It is, as you said, not a free standing issue.

However, it is worth noticing that the rich and the republicans do separate the issues and use them to divide the middle and poor.

There is a good reason why so many desparately poor white people vote for republicans. It's not that they don't want income equality, it's just that they have been told that Democrats are only concerned with social inequality.

[Bluenorthwest]

70. But the OP is the one dividing people to serve rich politicians. Sorry. He exploited George to

avoid standing up and saying what he really means. There is a huge push here by some who want to frame 'populism' as meaning 'we only talk about my money, not your rights'.
The OP is saying that money solves bigotry. George said no such thing. Yet he included that piece as if George did say that, and here we are talking about George, not the OP.
Good God, the level of utter self interest out of so called populists is astounding.

[WillyT]

82. WOW... Lord Help Us All...

REALLY ???

[Bluenorthwest]

111. You never bothered to answer my first question to you in this thread. WTF indeed.

You asked for an honest discussion, yet you refuse to discuss. See if you can muster a response. I doubt it.

[MerryBlooms]

57. Being held as an equal human being entitled to the same considerations and protections

as those wielding power is the first step to income equality. The continued legislating some people to be less than, is what continues the income inequality.

Do you really believe a person with a lot of money in the bank is living in harmony, even though they are denied marriage to the one they love? Denied service?

Do you really believe a person is living in harmony driving a BMW if they're pulled over weekly for driving a nice car?

I know from reading many of your posts, you didn't mean for this OP to come off as cruel and dismissive, but it's how it struck me.

[pampango]

61. For progressives it's not civil rights OR economic rights. It's AND. Neither should be ignored.

There is no reason that we cannot work for both. We can walk and chew gum at the same time.

And we know that conservatives are going to oppose both.

Some conservatives spend more time and money taking away our civil rights. Other conservatives spend more time and money taking away our economic rights. If some progressive want to prioritize our economic rights, while other progressives focus on our civil rights, that is fine, as long as we support each other in the end.

[Starry Messenger]

67. Civil rights aren't a dessert topping on society.

I care about income inequality too, but I can tell you as sure as we're sitting here that you don't get to parity without addressing social inequality and what some here are so fond of calling "wedge issues" (aka, for example: poor woman wondering how to get an abortion when she has $15 to her name and is six hours from the nearest abortion clinic and they are required by law to make you wait...! Riddle me that, Batman.)

[Cheese Sandwich]

73. I like this answer

It all has to go together. There's no sense in framing things as a competition between different just causes.

There are real problems with the police in black neighborhoods, or the way certain ethnic groups were targeted for predatory loans, or with having safe affordable access to abortion and birth control, etc etc.

It's important to address people's real life material problems whatever those may be. All the issues overlap.

[1StrongBlackMan]

78. +1 ...

All the issues overlap.

But it seems that this only holds true for those that suffer both socially and economically. For those born into Civil Rights, the social doesn't seem to matter ... or worse, those not born into Civil Rights are foolish for noticing.

[WillyT]

74. Please See Post #71... And... The Point I Was Making Was About The ThirdWay Theory...

That goes... give them the rights that costs US no money...

Wage parity between genders...

Raising the Minimum Wage...

Health Care for all...

Not so much.

[Bluenorthwest]

112. 'Give THEM the rights that costs us no money'? Are you serious, straight man?

The Obama administration has extended Social Security Survivor benefits to same sex couples. That costs money. In addition, that is money that YOUR people have been cheating us out of, creating an institutionalized and official income inequality, the very thing you claim to care about.
If there are two couples with equal careers, each has a spouse die and one gets a check each month while the other does not do they have income equality? Has that bigoted law actually demanded inequality of income based on sexual orientation? Could it be that this and hundreds of other poverty creating rip offs could not be corrected without the right to marriage? A civil right correcting economic wrongs?

But my favorite part of your verbiage was the word 'them'.

[woo me with science]

69. kick

[liberal_at_heart]

79. You cannot have social justice without economic justice.

They are one in the same. Shame on the Democrats for claiming to be pro civil rights and completely ignore economic justice. What about the single mothers out there? What about the African Americans who have been shut out of the educational and upward social mobility ladder? You cannot claim to be for civil rights and not fight for economic justice. They are one in the same.

[zeemike]

83. This might be the place and time to add this from MLK.

...It seems MLK got it.

A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies. On the one hand we are called to play the good Samaritan on life's roadside; but that will be only an initial act. One day we must come to see that the whole Jericho road must be transformed so that men and women will not be constantly beaten and robbed as they make their journey on life's highway. True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar; it is not haphazard and superficial. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring. A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth. With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say: "This is not just." It will look at our alliance with the landed gentry of Latin America and say: "This is not just." The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just. A true revolution of values will lay hands on the world order and say of war: "This way of settling differences is not just." This business of burning human beings with napalm, of filling our nation's homes with orphans and widows, of injecting poisonous drugs of hate into veins of people normally humane, of sending men home from dark and bloody battlefields physically handicapped and psychologically deranged, cannot be reconciled with wisdom, justice and love. A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.

America, the richest and most powerful nation in the world, can well lead the way in this revolution of values. There is nothing, except a tragic death wish, to prevent us from reordering our priorities, so that the pursuit of peace will take precedence over the pursuit of war. There is nothing to keep us from molding a recalcitrant status quo with bruised hands until we have fashioned it into a brotherhood.

[liberal_at_heart]

84. +1. Yes, he absolutely got it.

[TBF]

90. It was only when Dr King started talking about class

that he was assassinated. It is the money, it has always been the money. There is no doubt that we work on both at the same time, but drop your quest for economic inequality and you will never see progress for people.

[Marrah_G]

89. I'm not sure why you can't value them equally.

[WillyT]

116. I... Value Them Equally... It's The Roadblocks That Politicians (Republicans) Put Up...

Gay Marraige... seems like some (Except for Indiana) don't put up much of a fight...

(That may be a tad naive... I admit)

But try to raise the national minimum wage... close the gender pay gap... Expand Social Securty and Medicare... Build/Refurbish Infrastruture... Make our public schools the envy of the world... etc...

Those cost money... and may involve raising taxes on the wealthy.

Then you meet road-block.

IOW... if it can be passed and we get to keep all our financial advantages... Ok... I Guess.

If you're gonna take more of MY money... NO FUCKING WAY!

[Comrade Grumpy]

95. Circular firing squad at work. Meanwhile, the Republicans...

[WillTwain]

103. What good compassionate progressive does not like being called a racist and mysoginist?

Try to point out that the parties are using social issues to gain the White House at the expense of everyones economic future, and the personal attacks begin.

We are the folks looking out for everybody, and are called small-minded and selfish.

Strange days are made of these.

[raouldukelives]

107. The corporate oligarchy and those who support and profit from it

Are destroying my democracy, air, water and the ability to even live in a comfortable ecosystem. They are literally creating and expanding the conditions that are killing me and turning the only home I have ever known into a desert. They do it everyday with donations to achieving the desires of the corporations. They work hand in hand with them and then claim to care about civil rights, about my rights, about the health of our planet and its wildlife when all the time they are ones investing & helping investors to fund its destruction.
They care nothing for me, for the planet, for civil rights, for any rights except to treat the planet like a sewer and all life as expendable, as long as they can share in the proceeds.
We are not what we say everyday, we are what we do everyday.

[lumberjack_jeff]

115. I think that identity politics has largely been designed to distract us from economic populism.

Look at the Lily Ledbetter act. For all the noise and fury, I would like to learn of one person who has benefited from it.

Economic populism is where it's at
Economic populism is where it's at
Economic populism is where it's at

[1StrongBlackMan]

122. Well ...

Lily Ledbetter?

Point to ponder: Do you ever wonder why those NOT suffering under systemic discrimination (based on their "minority status) are also the ones that feel comfortable saying:

Economic populism is where it's at
Economic populism is where it's at
Economic populism is where it's at

And call "identity politics" made up stuff?

And why those suffering under systemic discrimination (based on their "minority status) object?

[lumberjack_jeff]

124. Privilege, as a framework to action, is pointless.

People in poor communities also suffer from systemic and institutional discrimination. The difference is that no one cares, because it's their own damn fault for being born in Appalachia.

If every person enjoying the benefits of a privilege were to stand up simultaneously and acknowledge their privilege, through whatever vector, the net result would be... what? What's the next step? What concrete actions could this acknowledgement catalyze?

I don't think any serious person could look at the social landscape in the united states and say that economic inequality isn't the most serious problem. If Russell Wilson and I were to arrive at a hospital each needing an organ transplant (of which there is only one), that healthcare choice won't be rationed by race or merit. It will be rationed by ability to pay.

Yes, systemic discrimination is a serious problem. Wealth inequality is the most immediate root cause of that discrimination - and the only immediately soluble one.

And the Lily Ledbetter act didn't benefit Lily at all, except to the extent that she now is a celebrity and can get paid to speak to audiences.

[1StrongBlackMan]

125. Okay ...

I don't think any serious person could look at the social landscape in the united states and say that economic inequality isn't the most serious problem.

But I will have you know ... there are plenty of "serious" people (myself included) that see economic inequality as A serious problem; but not, THE most serious problem.

Yes, systemic discrimination is a serious problem. Wealth inequality is the most immediate root cause of that discrimination - and the only immediately soluble one.

NO ... WEALTH INEQUALITY IS NOT THE ROOT OF RACIAL/GENDER/LGBT DISCRIMINATION, SYSTEMIC OR OTHERWISE ... put more money in my pocket, or Oprah's pocket, and I/we will still face, both, systemic and personal discrimination.

People in poor communities also suffer from systemic and institutional discrimination. The difference is that no one cares, because it's their own damn fault for being born in Appalachia.

That is not a matter of systemic or institutional discrimination.

[yeoman6987]

126. If suddenly we paid 20 dollars an hour and raised it a dollar every year

We would still find some not able to live on it. There will ALWAYS be the least paid person. There is no other way to do it. Unless we literally pay each American 50 grand no matter the job. That way there are no winners or losers.

[woo me with science]

127. kick

[nadinbrzezinski]

128. It is both

civil rights is connected, by the hip you might argue, to economic rights.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026446148

You always need an undercast... or at least we always have had one, Indentured Servants, Slaves, you mention it.

And until people get it...

[clarice]

130. America's strength is NOT in it's diversity....it's in it's commonality....nt

[woo me with science]

131. kick

[Bluenorthwest]

132. Amazingly similar to the May 13th version...

"Can We Have A Toughtful/Respectful Discussion Of Civil Rights Versus Income Inequality ???"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026669120