Once we get past the convention, I hope we can all agree on this:
There was NEVER any reason to imply that the social justice and economic justice movements work for agendas that conflict with each other.
And there was NEVER any justification for accusing anyone in either justice movement of not supporting the other justice movement.
If you work for economic justice, you are automatically going to be working against all forms of institutional and grassroots bigotry(and in the prohibitive majority of cases, in defense of reproductive choice as well), because you recognize that the triumph of economic justice for all requires the defeat of bigotry and of restrictions on women's reproductive autonomy.
If you work for social justice, you will almost certainly be working for economic justice as well, because the vast majority of people facing institutional bigotry and challenges to reproductive autonomy are also going to be in a position of economic disadvantage, and because you are aware of the fact that one of the most crucial elements of defeating social injustice is to remove economic disadvantage and the fear of falling into want that drives too many people into "zero-sum" thinking and makes them susceptible to appeals from demagogues and hatemongers who argue that any gain for someone else is a loss for them.
It isn't possible to defeat social injustice and leave economic injustice unchallenged.
It isn't possible to defeat economic injustice and leave social injustice unchallenged.
These justice movements are distinct, but they are related, and they intersect at many points.
In the end, the real fight is for all forms of justice for all those living with injustice.
After Philadelphia, the unity and natural alliance between the distinct justice struggles needs to be restored.
= new reply since forum marked as read
