2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Why Hillary Clinton Supporters are Still So Angry at Bernie Sanders [View all]Haveadream
(1,630 posts)because it means there are still those in Sander's camp who fail to hear the legitimacy of the issues of many who voted for Clinton. It is also truly offensive when applied to the many progressive Hillary supporters who are being characterized as stupid, shallow, craven and dishonest. Where support specific to Sanders was found in millenials and white, male and rural voters, Hillary's was in black, brown, women and minority communities. The writer uses the right wing charge of "identity politics" repeatedly to discredit and minimize the economic, social and political legitimacy of Hillary's progressive support.
The article also highlights one of the salient differences between Sander's supporter's progressive issues and Clinton supporter's progressive issues. Putting aside what millions consider Hillary's vastly superior experience, qualifications and competence, let's focus on the concept of "progressive" and the way it is embraced by various factions of the Democratic Party.
For some, it means a revolutionizing change to an economic "class" system that favors corporate interests to the detriment of the populace at large. Sanders did a very good job of harnessing the Occupy Wall Street momentum and for legitimizing that movement by bringing it into the Democratic tent. Many progressives pointed to heroes of the past, such as FDR, who were brave enough to take steps to level the economic playing field. It is taking steps to wrest the unfair advantage of a few back into the hands of many. Supporters believe the economic privilege afforded to some, with the tacit cooperation of a corrupt political system that actually mirrors it, to be worthy of a revolution. They find those who profit at the expense of so many others to be a revolting miscarriage of justice. For them, Sanders was the candidate of choice. Although Hillary spoke to all of this, it was Sander's message that was trusted and came through.
For others, a progressive is a social justice warrior. It means a revolutionizing change to a "class" system that economically, politically, legally, socially abuses those who are not white, male and heterosexual. It means working to dismantle an entrenched, corrupt system that maintains its power by taking advantage every class of people who do not fall into that category. It means taking steps to wrest unfair advantage of some into the hands of many in a way that has never happened. Supporters believe the economic, political, legal, social privilege afforded to some, with the tacit cooperation of corrupt political system that actually mirrors it, to be worthy of revolution. They find profit on the backs of and at the expense of so many to be a revolting miscarriage of justice. For them, Hillary was the candidate of choice. Although Sander's spoke to this, it was Hillary's message that was trusted and came through.
That those issues are not considered to be worthy of even being progressive and are instead fodder for derision and condescension by some on the left shows just how complacent, right wing and conservative many who claim to be progressive truly are. Especially when it comes to facing, never mind giving up, their own privilege when it comes to pushing people with less power around. A specific faction of the left does not get to define what a progressive is nor for whom they should vote, no matter how entitled to that they feel, without pushback from those with whom they do not agree.