rigorousintuition.ca

So what to do? Appeal to our common ground with the entitled white racists, homophobes and Christian soldiers and at least try to ameliorate our ever accelerating economic inequality? Or keep allowing our 0.1% overlords to split voters down the middle strictly on the basis of their differing social identities?

guruilla » 10 Nov 2016 22:49 wrote:Personal request to not shorten my username from guruilla to Guru; it may seem trivial but it actually inverses the intended meaning of it, which was something like fighter for freedom from gurus (leaders).

Luther's model pretty much says it all, so far as the abyss between a psychological view and a political one, dropping in scapegoating at the very bottom as if as more or less an afterthought.

@slomo: If psychological principles precede and largely determine social & political factors, might not a lived experience and internalized appliance of those principles lead to an understanding of society & politics without too much specific or detailed knowledge of them? Turn that around however, and it wouldn't apply the same way (i.e., even the widest & most sophisticated grasp of sociopolitical principles can't make up for a lack of psychological insight). Maybe there's a similar case of this with biological principles, kind of a fractal view in which, once you have a workable idea of the template, you can extrapolate all subsequent forms that grow out of it? I see Girard's scapegoat mechanism in these terms, as well as other psychological principles such as the Shadow, and whatnot. Sure, they won't satisfy a lot of people at this forum (maybe even the majority), but I'm not in it for the "likes." On the other hand if no one gets it enough to do more than garble it and repeat it back at me in unrecognizable forms, then I guess I am in the wrong place (again). I had thought the purpose of the thread was to explore what went wrong with liberalism.

@dada: I haven't made any subtle put-downs I'm aware of on this thread, or seen any from slomo either; it may just be a question of different sorts of intelligence & communication styles. (Half the time I don't even understand Wombat gnomic phrases.) Chalk it down to neurodivergence?

Dear Fellow White Women: We F**ked This Up
Exit polls show 53 percent of white women voted for Trump — compared to only 43 percent for Clinton.
10/11/2016 3:39 AM AEDT | Updated 10/11/2016 6:28 AM AEDT


Fellow white women, I’m done with you.

After all this talk of allyship, you didn’t show up to the polls to push back against the openly racist, xenophobic, misogynistic now-President-elect Donald Trump.

The exit polls from the Nov. 8 election show that 53 percent of white women voted for Donald Trump, compared to only 43 percent for Hillary Clinton. It appears many white women are not moved by Trump’s sexism, and instead would rather applaud the candidate for his lack of political correctness.

After all the supposed progress we’ve made, painstakingly trying to change a white feminist movement into an intersectional one (and for that we have only the hard work of women of color to thank), white women didn’t show up to fight back against a man whose rhetoric and policies directly attack women of color, immigrant women, Muslim women, LGBTQ women and more.

And the worst part is: By the end, he had come for you, too. For many it wasn’t enough when he came for Muslims, Latinos and Black people. The real “pearl clutch” was the “grab ‘em by the pussy” moment, one that threatened all women but specifically white women. All of a sudden, everyone was appalled, and the endorsements started dropping like flies ― as if, to paraphrase Maya Angelou, he hadn’t already shown us who he was.

To quote one of my favorite lines from Roxane Gay’s Bad Feminist: “And yet.” And yet you still didn’t show up to the polls to elect our first woman president ― a white lady, no less. When the demographic split for the exit polls came out, showing the divide between Trump and Clinton supporters, my eyes immediately jumped to one group: white women. Tell me we came through for our sisters of color, I begged, at least this one time. We didn’t.

So I am ashamed. I am ashamed of my country. I am ashamed of white people. But more than anyone else, I am ashamed of white women. Is this who we really are? Clearly ― and it is who we have always been.

So take a good long look in the mirror this morning, and instead of blaming others for this nightmare we’ve woken up to ― no, we’ve chosen ― make an active choice today: The buck stops with you.

This is what an ally looks like. Be one. Because in the next four to eight years, our sisters of color will need one ― though who knows if they will trust us now.

dada » Fri Nov 11, 2016 6:19 am wrote:I have this thing called intuiton. It isn't rigorous. What it's telling me is that this thread has really got under some liberals' psychological skins. I think this is productive. The right likes to attack liberals with a chainsaw. The critique from the left needs to use a scalpel.

Liberals like structure, hierarchies. It's the liberals job to protect the status quo. Anything that challenges it is frightening to them.

Build a social movement, and liberals will try to hijack it. They fancy themselves the 'intellectual vanguard.' And this is their rightful place. It isn't, they belong in the dustbin of history, with the words they'd like to throw out.

Gotta go work for twelve hours again. See ya'll later.

stickdog wrote:

So what to do? Appeal to our common ground with the entitled white racists, homophobes and Christian soldiers and at least try to ameliorate our ever accelerating economic inequality? Or keep allowing our 0.1% overlords to split voters down the middle strictly on the basis of their differing social identities?

bks » Fri Nov 11, 2016 10:11 am wrote:

stickdog wrote:

So what to do? Appeal to our common ground with the entitled white racists, homophobes and Christian soldiers and at least try to ameliorate our ever accelerating economic inequality? Or keep allowing our 0.1% overlords to split voters down the middle strictly on the basis of their differing social identities?

This is the crucial question, and there is only one answer.

If anyone is squeamish about the racism of those to whom appeals must be made: I get it. It cannot be tolerated at the level of policy, and won't be in any socialist or radically left political organization. But please understand that for many Trumpists, their racism is not a fixed, invariant, quantity but something that, in terms of its POLITICAL valence, can fluctuate enormously. If some white racist entertains his racism in a world where deep structures exist to shield his targets from the political EFFECTS of racism, his racism becomes HIS problem. That's the goal here as I see.

Working for economic justice will begin to undo the conditions that allowed a pig like Trump to put enough lipstick on himself to appear credible - conditions that were jointly created and managed by the leadership of the Democratic and Republican parties.

Liberal elites are my class enemy. They might be yours too.

Morty » Fri Nov 11, 2016 5:27 am wrote:White women were the only women who favoured Trump over Clinton as a group. Kind of strange given Hillary is a white woman, and given feminism, and whatnot. So there are obviously factors other than race and gender which have guided their choice. Their political affiliations for one, as I think Jack would argue. Must go look for some stats on the political affiliations of US white women...

Dear Fellow White Women: We F**ked This Up
Exit polls show 53 percent of white women voted for Trump — compared to only 43 percent for Clinton.
10/11/2016 3:39 AM AEDT | Updated 10/11/2016 6:28 AM AEDT

Women supported Clinton over Trump by 54% to 42%.

By Jens Manuel Krogstad and Mark Hugo Lopez5 comments
Hillary Clinton won 65% of Latino voters on Tuesday, according to National Election Pool exit poll data, a level of Democratic support similar to 2008, when 67% of Hispanics backed Barack Obama. However, Clinton’s share of the Latino vote was lower than in 2012, when 71% of Latinos voted to reelect Obama.
While Clinton underperformed among Latinos compared with 2012, Republican Donald Trump won 29% of the Latino vote, a similar share to 2012, when Mitt Romney won 27%, and to 2008, when John McCain won 31%, according to exit polls.