Liberals did. BLM. Equality, including sexual orientation. The challenge for liberals is there are a lot of causes (with disparate enemies) so liberals are naturally splintered. The right manages uses these wedge issues to artificially force their whole electorate into a single camp and unify their voice. So the challenge is democrats are always playing defense. Trump was a boon to democrats to help them unify their voice against a common enemy. In short, you and I agree on a lot.
I have not read this book but it seems to do what the 1619 project tries to do and does not assign blame. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/26/books/review/white-rage-by-carol-anderson.html WHITE RAGE The Unspoken Truth of Our Racial Divide By Carol Anderson As the Obama presidency draws to a close, it is clear that the post-racial democracy it was supposed to inaugurate has not materialized. But over the last eight years something very important has emerged in the way race gets discussed in America: the foregrounding of whiteness. From discussions of diversity on campus and white appropriation of black culture to #OscarsSoWhite, “whiteness” as a cultural and social category has become a subject for scrutiny and criticism in ways that “blackness” was in years past. Unfortunately, this reversal of perspective has tended to seize on the shallower ways in which whiteness functions in American life. To see the full picture, whiteness must be understood in light of our national history, specifically the use of state power to engineer preferential treatment for whites and deliberately impose cumulative disadvantage on blacks. Carol Anderson’s new book, “White Rage: The Unspoken Truth of Our Racial Divide,” brings such a historical context sharply back into focus. This book is an extraordinarily timely and urgent call to confront the legacy of structural racism bequeathed by white anger and resentment, and to show its continuing threat to the promise of American democracy. In August 2014, as the headlines from Ferguson focused on the eruption of black rage, Anderson, a professor of African-American studies at Emory University, wrote a dissenting op-ed in The Washington Post arguing that the events were better understood as white backlash at a moment of black progress, a social and political pattern that she reminded readers was as old as the nation itself. Her essay became the kernel for this book, which expands and illustrates her thesis. “I set out to make white rage visible,” Anderson writes in her introduction, “to blow graphite onto that hidden fingerprint and trace its historic movements over the past 150 years.” This time frame takes us back to Reconstruction, that tragic decade in the wake of the Civil War, which is where Anderson picks up her narrative. “America was at the crossroads,” she writes, “between its slaveholding past and the possibility of a truly inclusive, vibrant democracy.” She chooses to highlight President Andrew Johnson’s aggressive opposition to the enfranchisement of black Americans. She also details the horrors of paramilitary terrorism waged by the Klan and its affiliates. But we get only sketches here of the wide and brutal conflict in which Reconstruction “was overthrown, with impunity and audacity, in one of the bloodiest, darkest and still least-known chapters in American history,” which is how Stephen Budiansky put it in “The Bloody Shirt: Terror After Appomattox” (2008). With the Hayes-Tilden Compromise of 1877, Southern Democrats agreed to support Rutherford B. Hayes’s claim to the presidency in exchange for an end to Reconstruction — a collusion that plunged the South back into white supremacy. Against these depredations blacks sought the protection of the Constitution. Anderson’s book is particularly acute in recalling the Supreme Court’s shameful role in repeatedly denying that relief, and in securing and ratifying the legal apartheid we know as Jim Crow. Like a series of tableaus by Jacob Lawrence, Anderson’s survey links scenes that should be familiar to us, yet somehow keep falling by the wayside in the story of America we tell: There are the boxcars full of sharecroppers fleeing the South; the bellowing declarations of massive resistance to school integration after Brown v. Board of Education; the “Southern strategy,” Nixon’s playbook for using white anger over the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, enshrining race-baiting as a political maneuver; the Reagan administration’s machinations in the so-called War on Drugs; the vitriolic hatred directed at Barack Obama. Why has white rage been such a feature of American life? Anderson doesn’t offer an answer; her book is a historical catalog of white backlash — not a theory about its origins. In a move that seems at once tactful and tactical, she sidesteps the wearying debate among progressives over the competing priorities of class and identity politics, preferring to highlight the danger posed by a force that erupts at moments of progress to thwart the advance of democracy and racial equality. Anderson’s epilogue brings her account to the bloody steps of Emanuel A.M.E. Church in Charleston, S.C., and the rising star of Donald Trump. In her closing lines, she calls on us to “choose a different future.” As the rough beast slouches towards November, one prays that we still can.
I am saddened (but not surprised) that the Trump clan is buying into this BS and as usual you have your usual suspects fanning the flame to divide this country even further, just go ahead and say it out loud, the GOP is racist and there tactic is to LIE, CRT is not taught in schools K-12
That's why I don't get assigning blame to liberals for things like defund the police. It may have had a negative impact on election turn out but I doubt it's the worst participants within that circle that caused such a dissent. It's right wing media manufacturing an issue out of nothing. It's a bit odd to me to see liberals ask other liberals to silence themselves over policing in this country because some liberal leaning publishers create content in bad faith opposite that may hurt the cause. Who outside of Os and jiggyfly as of recent shares even the HuffingtonPost or hard political leaning OpEd blogs on here nowadays? Like I get that there are some loud mouth liberal Twitter users with a big enough following to just stir **** up but I don't see their stuff shared often on here. At least often enough to cause a split among posters that wasn't initially started from right wing media.
The issue is woke liberals trying to defend stupid slogans like defund the police including local politicians. Republicans lay the trap, and liberals keep walking into them. Democrats have no focus and are too afraid to call each other out for stupidity like the riots that came along with the BLM protest, defund the police, and sticking up for more drug dealers and convicted felons after they get beat up by cops when they are resisting arrest. It makes it easy for right wingers to paint you a certain way when you cling on to the most recent trendy cause without knowing all the facts. You end-up looking uninformed or even worse, a hypocrite.
You read like someone that just repeats talking points someone at the watercooler overhears and finds enough people nodding in agreement over with and then claims their popular agreements as your own as though it's genesis came from you. I'll give you a recent example in Austin. Local elected officials in Austin have been proponents for creating another health and human services program but done under a jail setting. The cost to build this new jail is $80 million dollars. Problem is, most jails most of the time in Austin are barely ever above 40% capacity. Seems like a wasteful amount of money doesn't it? To create a new jail when there's no occupancy problems with the existing jails in place. It's sold as offering health and human services to the public but why do services for a community need to be done under a jail setting? Seems like a reasonable thing to find opposition over, especially to people who tout themselves as fiscally conservative. Right? https://www.statesman.com/story/new...ers-debate-plan-build-womens-jail/7477746002/ So community organizers pushed back on the creation of this jail. And succeeded. https://communityimpact.com/austin/...nst-plans-for-new-womens-jail-east-of-austin/ https://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2021-06-11/womens-jail-vote-postponed-amid-community-pushback/ https://communityimpact.com/austin/...county-pauses-plans-to-build-new-womens-jail/ One could argue this a way of defunding the police by not building a brand new jail that's not even needed I suppose. People like Tucker Carlson would likely try and spin it that way. And you'd be the type of sucker to lap it up. I still hold the opinion that liberals pointing fingers at liberals by finding the worst bad faith actors within the movement is exactly what conservative media wants you to do. To each their own though.
Indeed more incarceration is the answer. We only have 22% of the world's incarcerated population and 4 percent of the overall world population. Have to pump those numbers up.
This is the problem. I never said the policing shouldn't be overhauled. I said defund the police is a stupid slogan. However, you made it into personal insult by lumping me with Fox News moron. You just proved my point. I didn't even lay a trap and you walked right into it.
Nah, you're just pivoting. Your entire argument is defund the police is the real big bad boogeyman. Not police brutality that is rarely held accountable. I promise you if liberals had come up with the most perfect slogan to address criminal justice reform, conservatives would find a way to spin it as the worst thing imaginable, simply to oppose, and you'd find a way to b**** about that too and blame liberals for it.
And my argument is there could be the most perfect slogan ever conjured and it'd still be spun as bad. There's no winning. We're arguing over slogans instead of how to better address criminal justice reform which is a real issue, yet that very real issue that is often unaddressed is instead focused on marketing. How ****ing stupid is that? How is that helpful more importantly?
