when anybody argues that we need to address economic justice in a stronger way, is the response always "We need to stop voter suppression"? And do pundits like Joy Reid keep trying to frame it as "either/or" or as though there are actually people arguing that voters suppression doesn't matter?
And why does virtually any argument for a stronger economic justice position get labeled as, of all things "choosing rich white men over people of color"? Does anybody here really think that the only way we can fight for peoples of color is to be "centrist" on economic issues? You'd think that people of color somehow aren't part of the economy and aren't affected, in addition to the massive effects caused by social oppression, by economic issues-income inequality, massive concentration of wealth in the hands of the few, wage cuts, layoffs, and outsourcing?
An artificial division was created in the 2016 primaries between the concepts of "social justice"
which in 2016 was stripped of most redistributive and egalitarian aspects) and "economic justice" which, in 2016, was presented as something that could almost be described as left-wing support of white privilege). Given that neither of the people whose candidacies represented that artificial divide are likely to run again, that whoever we nominate in 2020 will be of a newer generation that isn't defined by that divide, can we all finally move on from it and accept that the two justice struggles are not at odds with each other? That, at least in post-1964 America, those causes are in a natural affinity with each other and should be working together?
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read