Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Where did the idea come from that support for a second New Deal means support for Jim Crow? [View all]Lee Adama
(90 posts)99. Since there has never been true desegregation
there can never be true economic justice.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
155 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Where did the idea come from that support for a second New Deal means support for Jim Crow? [View all]
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
OP
No, it's the truth... The Democratic Party changed under LBJ when he passed civil & voting rights
MrScorpio
Sep 2017
#2
Pointing out the shortcomings in an historical era doesn't "Poisoning" everything in that era.
ehrnst
Sep 2017
#13
You'll of course, support your allegation with evidence and provide a link
LanternWaste
Sep 2017
#67
That's horrible about the kid. And we need to protect choice But we have federal civil right laws.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#108
And we need them. AFAIK, nobody on our side of the spectrum is minimizing the need for them.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#119
you made the claim that we don't have to worry about government programs discriminating
dsc
Sep 2017
#122
I take your point with regards to antidiscrmination measures for the LGBTQ community.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#123
We can't totally establish social justice first, in complete isolation from economic justice.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#59
The reason that happened in the Thirties was that the Democratic congressional leadership
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#64
And that brings us back to the fact that there can be NO Economic Justice without Social Justice
Lee Adama
Sep 2017
#74
Social justice issue drive economic justice for those who aren't white straight men
ehrnst
Sep 2017
#92
There's no difference between doing both at at the same time, which we would do
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#109
That's not what I get from Sanders. He is all about economic justice & nothing about social justice
Lee Adama
Sep 2017
#125
Tell that to those who are yelling at anyone who won't sponsor "Medicare for all." (nt)
ehrnst
Sep 2017
#143
Again... have you seen the news? Dems are waffling on whether women's health care
ehrnst
Sep 2017
#80
A tiny handful are waffling. But choice, at this point, isn't covered by federal civil rights laws
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#97
A very public and vocal group is advocating for waffling. One of whom is the most vocal of all.
ehrnst
Sep 2017
#144
Reps were racist because people electing them were racist - not vice versa. (nt)
ehrnst
Sep 2017
#93
There was a lot of racism-but if it hadn't been for the Southern committee chairs
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#100
I mean economic justice for ALL-I've never meant it exclusively for white men.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#101
So now you understand that people can indeed say that the New Deal was made smoother by
ehrnst
Sep 2017
#142
It's not an actual idea, it's a huge misunderstanding of the point that is made that
ehrnst
Sep 2017
#11
Not focusing on race but blacks and women make up large part of the democratic party.
melanctha
Sep 2017
#83
I always thought Libertarians and AnCaps were the group of FDR Revisionists.
HughBeaumont
Sep 2017
#19
We should discuss the health care we can get now...the ACA with a public option down the road. The
Demsrule86
Sep 2017
#23
When there is no chance of getting it for the foreseeable future and every chance that support for
Demsrule86
Sep 2017
#27
There is no chance for progress as the GOP won't even bring it to the floor...
Demsrule86
Sep 2017
#96
I read these threads, and no one said that. However, the idea that the 'new deal' was the be all
Demsrule86
Sep 2017
#22
Were did the idea that isolationism-nativism-populism-protectionism-and anti-capitalism...
Expecting Rain
Sep 2017
#33
Except Sanders, despite his title, isn't a socialist in the sense FDR understood the term
white_wolf
Sep 2017
#36
Nor was Huey "Share the Wealth/Every Man A King" Long, who was FDR's mortal enemy.
Expecting Rain
Sep 2017
#48
And we all agree that it was wrong that people of color were left out of the original New Deal
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#51
guess we need to tear down the fdr statues along with the other confederate generals
dembotoz
Sep 2017
#77
Ken, you seem like a decent person. I know you and I disagree on some issues.
Blue_true
Sep 2017
#149
For too many, it is impossible to separate the New Deal label from 1930's racism and sexism
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#155
And there's no possibility that New Deal-type measures passed today would exclude people of color
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#61
The whites who turned right didn't do that because social programs were open to all.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#115
FDR took TR's Square Deal, added more, removed much more and re-branded it as the Fair Deal
LanternWaste
Sep 2017
#65
Exactly WHO is saying that? It appears that this particular "objection" exists only in your mind.
NurseJackie
Sep 2017
#84
We can have both Social & Economic justice at the same time. IF WE fight for both!
JoeOtterbein
Sep 2017
#102
It is a cynical tactic to try to avoid supporting progessive economic issues.
Willie Pep
Sep 2017
#116