Skip to main content

On Steps Taken Back pt. 2

I had a conversation with a woman earlier this week who feels that the democrats and republicans are basically the same party. I felt that way too until bush. In retrospect Clinton was actually a pretty good president, the most effective in my lifetime, unless you consider Reagan's success at making workers less secure and corporations stronger a good thing. I personally don't. She also said that the democrats won't speak the truth because, like the republicans, they are afraid of losing money and power. I disagreed with her at the time on several points, but find myself agreeing with her on this point, at least in part. I hear individual democrats making smart, precise, and thoughtful critiques fairly often. At the same time I feel they lack the seemingly unified voice of the political right. I also think that for too long the dems have rolled over for bush, instead of making principled stands because they were afraid of the political backlash. Bush has been politically vulnerable for a while now, but they still seem incapable of all making the same stand at the same time.

there have been suggestions that the democrats need their own version of the contract with America promoted by it's own group of young upstarts. I'm ok with that, but what I think they need even more is to start speaking the truth like they don't care if they are re-elected. They need to start speaking as if telling the truth means more than keeping their jobs, every last one of them. Some actually might lose their jobs in the short term, but the party would grow in the long term. They also need to speak the same truth from a common platform, a shared paradigm. At the heart of any platform should be the promise to restore the transparency of the government and to keep us safe without false wars and while maintaining our rights and principles.

------
To save on all of the effort I'll just say that part 3 was to be about the why of my blogging and decisions around that but I'll cut to the chase and just say that instead of writing just about politics and the news that makes me cry myself to sleep I'm going to start writing on the topics I usually write in other places, like comics, music, art, dance, djing, biting, mammals, queens, sexual frustration, how much I can fit in my mouth at once, the library card numbers that I remember from six years ago, the elasticity of smoke, queens, ny, honeyforms, music, and cartoons. Maybe. And I'm also going to try to remember to use the shift key.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

If You Love Your People, Set It Free (or How an Identitarian Came To Prefer Universal Policy Over Identity Politics)

This post is late because I was in LA last week, where I made a point of walking as much as possible to enjoy my audiobook. Although I still have 20/20 vision I have been slow to accept that aging has made it more difficult to read, making it feel increasingly like a chore. In fully embracing this I've finally started looking for audiobooks I might find engaging enough to not be constantly distracted. For my trip I chose Mehrsa Baradaran's The Color of Money, which looks at the persistence of the racial wealth gap in the US.  It was incredibly striking and depressing listening to The Color of Money while accidentally walking through encampments of the unhoused, watching new encampments sprout up in the short time that I was there. This is who we've always been. If you have any doubt, the history recounted in The Color of Money makes it clear that capitalism has always been about extracting wealth from Black people and keeping poor people poor. On checking into Twitter I wa…

Anti-racism - Class = Status Quo: The Neoliberal Argument Against Coalition

I was approached a few months ago around the idea of collaborating to make the progressive case for reparations. I've said before that while the idea of reparations is morally appealing I don't believe in them as an immediate political project. It's not clear to me that it's possible to build a coalition around a reparative justice focused on just 13% of the population. Encouraged by a recent Twitter conversation that included economists Sandy Darrity and Darrick Hamilton where they suggested that saying reparations will never happen is cynical I've begun trying to think of them as an eventuality and lay out the steps to reaching them. Doing this has made clear that our understanding of reparations as a form of compensation to the descendants of the enslaved is not the reparative justice that we think it to be. If we were living with the kind of understanding of justice that made reparations possible we would not be a nation where war, healthcare, education, and cr…

Why Are We Expending So Much Energy on Something Barely Half of Black People Want?

Presidential contenders are being asked about their support for reparations. One could be forgiven for assuming that reparations has broad support within the Black community, it seems like an easy bet. But only slightly more than half of Black people support the idea. So why has the idea suddenly gained so much traction? Neither Yvette Carnell nor Antonio Moore, originators of #ADOS (American descendants of slaves) have the following to drive a topic supported by less than a quarter of Americans into the national conversation. I suspect that it has everything to do with Bernie Sanders, the obvious frontrunner since announcing, and the ongoing attempt to portray him as racially blind and unaware. When asked directly about his support of reparations in 2016, Sanders answered, "Its likelihood of getting through congress is nil. Second of all I think it would be very divisive." He then went on to explain how his policies would have a disproportionate positive effect on the Blac…