2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumTo close racial gaps, the economic status quo must change...
It's not the only part of the solution, but a necessary part of any solution. We've had a moderately conservative Democratic Party for decades, and the leaders still by and large support the status quo of an economic system that protects and shelters white privilege, and racial gaps still remain as gaping as ever.
Clinton is not only the status quo Democratic nominee, a direct result of privilege and status as an insider for years, but her policies are all more of the same.
If we want greater equality, we can do so much better than Clinton. She will keep the status quo, and she has been very explicit about that. Her big donors are among the greatest benefactors of the privilege this system brings, and we see who they are.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)First, our economic system allows for very little economic mobility, so that people who are born poor mostly stay poor and people who are born wealthy mostly stay wealthy.
Our economic system takes historical inequalities and perpetuates them indefinitely in this way. It helps perpetuate racial gaps that already exist. Even if attitudes change, and they have to some degree, it won't make a dent in racial gaps of there is no economic mobility. Increased economic mobility would reduce some of the racial gaps.
Second, our society is still incredibly segregated. Again, the current economic system perpetuated this segregation, even as attitudes shift. Market forces dictate that it's most economically advantageous for the wealthy to live, work and send their kids to school with other similarly wealthy people, and poor people are seen as a threat to neighborhoods because of their potential impact on schools and housing prices. Our economic system incentivizes segregation. Segregation leads to unequal funding and unequal opportunities between different races. Decreasing segregation would give increased opportunities and resources to minorities, which would help close the racial gaps.
On a side note, segregation and racial gaps also encourages racial bigotry and stereotyping, so reducing both would also help attitudes about race.
It's not the only solution, but if economic incentives for segregation aren't removed, and if economic mobility remains low, what are the chances that racial attitudes improve, much less that racial gaps are closed?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)wouldn't that economic mobility be available to white folks, as well? So again, how will changing the economic status quo affect the racial gap without first changing the racial status quo?
Aren't you assuming that most Black people are poor? (We are not) And, aren't you merely substituting the word "poor" for "Black" and suggesting that segregation is a economic function? (It is not)
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)Would most help those at the bottom of the economic ladder. So those who are disproportionally poor would disproportionally be helped. Again, it's not the only solution, but it would help close racial gaps. And no, it doesn't require assuming most black people are poor, it just requires being aware of the fact that some minorities are disproportionally poor (being aware of racial gaps).
Segregation is definitely incentivized by the way we fund our schools and the way we price houses. I'm not sure what you mean by segregation is not an economic function, but if you think our current economic system doesn't incentive it, go ahead and explain why.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)... but all not lifted equally.
and America is going to accept the "not lifted equally"?! Meaning blacks and Hispanics and Natives and Women will be give a substantial percentage more in advantage and everyone would be fine with that?
Even liberals aren't going to stand for the "give them much more so they can catch up in a couple of years" notions.
your take?
tia
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)There is no one solution. If racial animus is magically solved tomorrow, the lack of economic mobility would still mean we would see persistent racial gaps.
Increasing economic mobility through things like universal health care and state paid for college education are possible, but the current Democratic Party has been opposing both for decades, and until the Democratic Party seriously addresses issues of poverty and inequality, we're going to be treading water in terms of those same racial gaps remaining.
We'll remain as segregated as ever and with those same racial gaps, as has been the case the last several decades.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)And putting it back into the hands of the 99%. Until that happens, the Civil and Voting Rights Acts will continue to erode, and POC will have their voting rights systematically stripped from them, as is happening now under the current economic model.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I deal with on a daily basis that enable/enforce/act in furtherance of social injustice ... those would be the ones trying to convince me, and themselves, that chasing fathoms will make the world a better place.
We, as a society, could strip the top 400 families of every dime of their wealth and the racial status quo would not change ... the racial gaps would remain intact.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Pretending they are mere 'phantoms' is saying, 'I don't want to admit that the people who are systematically stripping away my voting rights actually exist'.
That's like plugging your ears saying, "Lalalalalalala".
The psychological term for it is, 'Cognitive dissonance'.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)How can they accomplish that without the folks that you and I deal with every day.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)By buying politicians. The politicians, in turn, do the oligarchs bidding.
What is happening in Wisconsin right now is a good example of it. The Koch brothers have bought and paid for the governor there, who in turn stripped voting rights from POC, thus assuring the Oligarchs control the state.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)... dealing with a subculture.
Those things wont diminish with a progressive taxation and income eqaulity...
Cause folk going to be ignorant
Cause folk going to be apathetic
Wouldn't it be better to set laws to protect the minority from the majority?
tia
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)And the only way out of it is by encouraging higher education and making it easier to go to college. In most cases, a persons level of bigotry is inversely proportional to their parents education level. The less educated the parent, the more bigoted the offspring. The more educated the parent, the less bigoted the child.
The only way to quash racism down to a minimum is by educating the population. Passing laws won't end racism. They will only drive it underground. Education is the only solution and it will take at least a couple generations before it takes hold.
This is why Republicans are so anti-education, because educated people don't vote for Republicans.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)I'm not going to get into an unresolvable argument abut it with you.
It doesn't on its own close the other social, phychological, legal and historical forces that result in racism.
But it does help a lot.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)There's plenty of rich black people that experience racism every day.
To end racism, we need to make it socially unacceptable, and educate people. Stamping out systemic racism as well. None of that has anything to do with economic disparity.
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)I didn't say this would end racism, just that it's necessary to close racial gaps. Racism is already socially unacceptable, and there's been education for decades, neither has closed the racial gaps. You could increase the social unacceptability, and people would still hold on to their bigotry behind closed doors and in the voting booth, and you can increase education, but bigotry and stereotypes are human conditions that reflect society. Neither will close racial gaps all on their own.
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)If you think I have blinders, say why. But first understand what I'm saying. Nowhere did I say this would end racism.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)... from a cop grabbing his gun at a traffic stop because I'm black.
But...
If the cop had to pay out of his pocket, go to jail and the city got bent every time deadly force was used instead of non deadly force the cop would think twice.... for instance.
Money makes the effect of racism less biting it doesn't stop the bite
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)It's about which group controls the politicians. Money = power.
You will not end racism by legislation. The only way to quash racism effectively is through education. In general a persons level of bigotry is inversely proportional to their parents education level. Educated parents tend to raise kids who aren't bigots.
And it won't be done overnight. It will take generations.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Changing the relative economic position between white and Black will do nothing to affect the social status quo.
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)At all? I completely disagree.
Most whites racial bigotry is based off of the fact that racial gaps exist. They take those racial gaps in our society and use stereotypes and bigotry to explain away the gaps.
I didn't say it would end racism though, so I guess it's kind of missing the point?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)What gaps are you referring to?
Are you suggesting that white racial bigots and bigoted because Black folks make $0.72 on the dollar of white folks? ...Or, because Black folks possess less than 10x the wealth of white?
Are you suggesting that closing these gaps will decrease white racial bigotry?
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)That closing racial gaps (income, wealth, education, health) and less segregation would decrease racial bigotry, because segregation and racial gaps are behind a lot of present day bigotry and stereotypes for whites, but it wouldn't end it all on its own.
Many white bigots see racial gaps in society while simultaneously believing we live in a perfect meritocracy devoid of racism, so to reconcile the fact that racial gaps exist, they blame the victim.
There's a lot less racial bigotry towards Asians overall partially because there are few racial gaps to blame the victim with, IMHO.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)
aspirant
(3,533 posts)"To end racism, we need to make it socially unacceptable, and educate people. Stamping out systemic racism as well. None of that has anything to do with economic disparity."
What specifically do you do to make it "socially unacceptable"
How do you educate people w/o money?
"stamping out systematic racism" Exactly how do you do that?
jwirr
(39,215 posts)are you going to tell me about my great grandchildren who do not always have enough to eat? Who live in substandard and over crowded housing? Who do not have money for healthcare - an inhaler that ACA will not pay for? Who do not get to play community sports because they cannot afford the cost? Who will not be able to go to college? Who's parents work full time jobs and still cannot make it?
And before you ask - yes they are people of color. And yes, they are not safe from police violence and incarceration when they step out the door.
I want both for those children. I need both for those kids.
We are celebrating the signing of the voting rights act in 1965. Well that was not the only thing the LBJ signed in 1965 - he signed the War on Poverty. We got both back then - we can and must get both now.
I was delighted to see a post that talked about the BLM demands today. They were calling for both. Thank you BLM.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)addresses systemic racism. None of it.
I'm not saying we don't need to address economic inequality, but conflating economic inequality with systemic racism is intellectually bankrupt.
Black people in the top 1% face the EXACT SAME RACISM as black people in the bottom 1%. The answer to all the world's woes are not economic inequality.
aspirant
(3,533 posts)and then Hillary....
"Clinton said. "By that I mean, there are some who say, 'Well racism is a result of economic inequality.' I don't believe that."
Please inform Hillary of your disagreement as soon as possible.
"Black people in the top 1% face the EXACT SAME RACISM as black people in the bottom 1%."
So the black 1%'ers must rely on public defenders and set in jail for days
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)Regardless, I agree with her, racism is NOT a result of economic inequality. But this whole argument is about conflating two separate issues as being the same. If everyone made good money, there would STILL be racism.
aspirant
(3,533 posts)and still racism exists.
They are 2 parallel issues that need to work together. Assistance programs w/o funding are worthless.
"racism is NOT a result of economic inequality" so just what exactly is racism the result of?
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)Fear of people who are different. Fear of what the media makes out to be a bad guy.
Also, superiority complexes. Social scientists have been studying the causes of racism for a long time, and there's no definitive answer. But during this country's most thriving economic time, racism was the strongest.
http://www.stophate.us/racism/racismcause.html
aspirant
(3,533 posts)"we are not sure of the exact cause of racism" Are you serious?
"Allows one group to socially, politically, and economically dominate other groups. An American Psychological Association article states racism serves to "rationalize the hierarchical domination of one racial or ethnic group over other group(s), and maintain psychological, social, and material advantages for the dominant group." Did you notice the reference to "economically dominate" and you say Hillary and you agree that racism is NOT about economic inequality, this is amazing.
"But during this country's most thriving economic time, racism was the strongest." Where in your link is this stated and how did they measure racism?
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)That's me talking. And yes, social scientists don't have an exact cause, but you can be damn sure fear is one of them.
aspirant
(3,533 posts)"you can be damn sure" that economic dominance is a cause, so you and Hillary are proven wrong that economic inequality is not a cause of racism.
"That's me talking" saying racism is highest at peak economic times is unproven by you and should be viewed as your propaganda.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)Have a great summer!
aspirant
(3,533 posts)summer wishes
jwirr
(39,215 posts)economic justice.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)And I haven't seen ANYONE on DU calling to ignore economic justice. But conflating systemic racism with economic justice is dishonest, or maybe just ignorance due to white privilege. As a white person, I didn't understand it until recently. Listening to some of our AA activists, like 1StrongBlackMan and bravenak, has helped me to understand. And that's all BLM wants. To be listened to. Listen to their grievances and issues, and try to understand them.
aspirant
(3,533 posts)no they are interdependent and parallel. A social program w/o funding is worthless.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)I tend to listen to what AA leaders and activists are saying about racism. And it's not what you're saying.
aspirant
(3,533 posts)What AA leader or activist is the author of your blog link?
Does an unfunded social justice program FIX racism?
If this country ever obtains economic equality, all rich or all middle class, let's see how racism reacts
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)Second, I have no idea who wrote it, it's a website with information. There is a difference. You asked for reasons, I gave you some with a link. But I see what you tactic is here...
aspirant
(3,533 posts)Good thing it points out you and Hillary are wrong about economic inequality based on "economic dominance."
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)aspirant
(3,533 posts)both economic inequality deniers and wrong
"Clinton said. "By that I mean, there are some who say, 'Well racism is a result of economic inequality.' I don't believe that." "economic dominance" from your link proves this to be untrue.
Why do you hate the Poor and impoverished little children?
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)For a popular book it is mercilessly researched. Anyway, it shows that social mobility does not happen. It traces unique surnames over hundreds of years and they keep repeating at the highest levels. For example, Clark as a lastname in England means clerk, like Cooper means an ancestor used to be a barrel maker. Anyway, the literate Clarks tend to have educated and wealthy descendants. BTW, more wealthy Britons tend to have frenchy names, since the Norman conquest means the frenxh took over. Battle of Hastings had consequences.
I think social mobility is a myth and will never work. I would like to be proved wrong but into my 5th decade I have not been proved wrong. The only thing that ever leveled the classes in America was destroying the world in WW2, thus creating a labor shortage in the US, raising wages. The world has rebuilt.
Cheers! Life is gonna suck for a while.
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)Is higher in other countries with different economic systems, maybe not the same as social mobility, but better than nothing.
Things like universal healthcare and state funded college education would allow for more economic mobility, from what I have seen.
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)I wish it was true that everyone could be equal. The empirical evidence says otherwise.
