Has the Democratic party become too obcessed with race?

[ieoeja]

119. Had you said "social issues" instead of "race" this thread would look drastically different.

You are just lucky that today was my turn to be a token defender of obvious wrong.


FYI: regarding anti-war, if you're old enough to remember the '60s then you should probably recall that Republicans used to mockingly refer to us as the "War Party". Republicans have always been about "I, me, my and mine". Once upon time this translated into isolationism to protect American businesses against foreign competitors. Today, they are interventionist to protect 0.000001% of American businesses taking advantage of cheap overseas labor.

For Liberals and Progressives this is a bit of a Catch-22. We want to help people overseas, but protect the weakest among us. Fortunately for the elected Democrats, Clinton's electoral "I'm not like 'those' Democrats' success gives them an excuse to abandon the weakest among us as a matter of pragmatic politics.


The "anti-war" confusion really comes out of Vietnam. While a substantial minority of elected Democrats did oppose *that* war, the main thing that identified Democrats with anti-war was the defense of unpopular speech (yes, ladies and gentlemen, the anti-war movement was huge, but not until really, really late in the war did the vast majority of Americans stop being angrier at the anti-war movement than at the war itself). Defending the rights of the anti-war movement does not make one anti-war. But that was clearly too subtle a distinction for many people (on both sides).