"When you're used to privilege equity feels like oppression."

[Epic Beard Man]

In growing research, it is interesting that racial attitudes and racial resentment overall, play an important role in the association of political party attachments, policy attitudes (e.g. welfare benefits/cuts), voting and other measures where political behaviors have significantly grown since the election of former president Obama. This of course relates to the following video:

The article in question is in the following link:

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

The article provides some compelling evidence of the socio-political trends, share your thoughts after the read (the article is short).

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

*popcorn*

 

[fantome profane]

And you also have to understand it is a scam. The people with wealth and power want the have nots to fight with those who have even less. The last thing those in power want is the working class White and the working class Black (and Hispanic etc) to work together for justice and equality.

 

[Stevicus]

In growing research, it is interesting that racial attitudes and racialresentment overall, play an important role in the association of political party attachments, policy attitudes (e.g. welfare benefits/cuts), voting and other measures where political behaviors have significantly grown since the election of former president Obama. This of course relates to the following video:

The article in question is in the following link:

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

The article provides some compelling evidence of the socio-political trends, share your thoughts after the read (the article is short).

I think there's truth to this, although it's hard to say where it actually comes from or what factors it can be attributed to.

I'm not sure about the graphs in the article or the poll questions they're charting, though.

For example, one poll question was "Africans Americans should not have special favors." What "special favors"? How does one define a "special favor"? Overall, the questions seemed kind of vague and don't really explain that much.

This article seems to suggest that racial resentment showed in increase the presidency of Barack Obama, although it's not entirely clear that Obama's presidency itself was the cause of it.

It also doesn't clarify how it ties in to liberal vs. conservative politics in general. What I've observed is that both sides tend to talk past each other.

Conservatives tend to embrace policies related to free-market economics and social issues pushed by the religious right - and they tend to fall all over themselves to try to prove that race is not a factor at all in any of the positions they take. Indeed, they might even point to Obama's presidency as "proof" that America is no longer racist and wonder why anyone in the here and now would still embrace racial identity politics.

Liberals have ostensibly given in to the conservatives on economic issues, although they've pushed hard on the social issues and have also embraced racial identity politics (in addition to gender identity politics as well, although that's a different topic).

 

[sun rise]

For example, one poll question was "Africans Americans should not have special favors." What "special favors"? How does one define a "special favor"? Overall, the questions seemed kind of vague and don't really explain that much.

I would, for example, have trouble with that question. No one should have "special favors" but the problem is that whites are the ones today who often get "special favors" from the current regime in power and specifically rich white males.

So I'm in favor of radical equality which might require some deliberate scale balancing to get there.

 

[Stevicus]

I would, for example, have trouble with that question. No one should have "special favors" but the problem is that whites are the ones today who often get "special favors" from the current regime in power and specifically rich white males.

So I'm in favor of radical equality which might require some deliberate scale balancing to get there.

I can see your point, although I'm not sure if it actually clarifies what would constitute a "special favor." In previous discussions regarding this topic, many have brought up Affirmative Action - although that itself has been a can of worms in politics where a lot of misinformation has been propagated.

I've also seen arguments of a more petty nature regarding "special favors." I remember an old classic one being "Why is there a channel called Black Entertainment Television but no White Entertainment Television?" A lot of the arguments about "special favors" seem to be of a more superficial and symbolic nature, without really closely examining the nuts and bolts of who's getting what.

There can't really be any true equality (radical or otherwise) without first ensuring class equality - at least to some degree. I think the trouble we've had in these past decades is that there is inordinate fear of communism/socialism that any talk which challenges or questions the current economic system of the United States is met with suspicion and scorn.

Since people can't really discuss class differences without being branded a commie, all that's left to discuss are superficialities and symbolism.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Conservatives tend to embrace policies related to free-market economics and social issues pushed by the religious right

I wouldn't say that's true at all. Conservatives tend to be more corporatists than free-marketists. They only really support the free market when it suits them.

For example, look at all the conservatives who support protectionist tarrifs.

 

[icehorse]

I'm 100% in favor of giving everyone equal opportunities. (However, I'm quite worried about pursuing equal outcomes.)

That said, I think that using the word "privilege" is a bad solution. It's divisive and semantically not quite correct. I would agree that some people (e.g. white males), have advantages. But to me a "privilege" is something that might be taken away. I don't think we want to take anything away from anyone, I think we want everyone to have equal opportunities.

 

[Stevicus]

I wouldn't say that's true at all. Conservatives tend to be more corporatists than free-marketists. They only really support the free market when it suits them.

For example, look at all the conservatives who support protectionist tarrifs.

Most of them didn't, although I think some are jumping on that bandwagon since it's a more a populist stance these days and it more closely aligns with Trump's position. (When NAFTA was passed, the Republicans were unanimously for it, while it was the Democrats who were resistant.) Although even Trump has argued that it's just in pursuit of getting a better deal, 0% tariffs for 0% tariffs across the board. That seems more in line with what conservatives claim they want in terms of free trade.

Likewise, they might say they want a free-market economy, but that doesn't mean they actually practice it.

 

[Anthem]

Because of two main parties.

Most people are neither racists nor well meaning citizens.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I can see your point, although I'm not sure if it actually clarifies what would constitute a "special favor." In previous discussions regarding this topic, many have brought up Affirmative Action - although that itself has been a can of worms in politics where a lot of misinformation has been propagated.

I've also seen arguments of a more petty nature regarding "special favors." I remember an old classic one being "Why is there a channel called Black Entertainment Television but no White Entertainment Television?" A lot of the arguments about "special favors" seem to be of a more superficial and symbolic nature, without really closely examining the nuts and bolts of who's getting what.

There can't really be any true equality (radical or otherwise) without first ensuring class equality - at least to some degree. I think the trouble we've had in these past decades is that there is inordinate fear of communism/socialism that any talk which challenges or questions the current economic system of the United States is met with suspicion and scorn.

Since people can't really discuss class differences without being branded a commie, all that's left to discuss are superficialities and symbolism.

Very thoughtful post and I think this is the crux of the issue but I thought the research which was very long brought up some facts. As far as the methodologies used such as the questionnaire (I believe he used this as a means to gather data) such as “special favors” I do believe that this is in reference to social programs that have been historically allocated to impoverished people of color.

Obama’s on the other hand was symbolic reference to the idea that “here we have you this” as if Obama was a gimme to black culture when in reality as Roland in the video alludes to Obama did nothing for the black community.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Because of two main parties.

Most people are neither racists nor well meaning citizens.

That is delusional of you

 

[Cooky]

I never knew there were different colored working classes.

 

[Cooky]

In growing research, it is interesting that racial attitudes and racial resentment overall, play an important role in the association of political party attachments, policy attitudes (e.g. welfare benefits/cuts), voting and other measures where political behaviors have significantly grown since the election of former president Obama. This of course relates to the following video:

The article in question is in the following link:

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

The article provides some compelling evidence of the socio-political trends, share your thoughts after the read (the article is short).

I think the article is based on the mistaken assumption that Donald Trump represents some kind of return to 'white America'. It's an extension of the media's labeling of Trump as "populist".

In the meantime, in the real world, blacks, Hispanics and Asian Americans have some of the highest employment rates in decades, since Trump has demonstrated sharp opposition to outsourcing, which is different than what we saw under the Obama administration where nothing was done to improve employment rates.

...All Obama did for blacks was to be a black president. It ended there.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I think the article is based on the mistaken assumption that Donald Trump represents some kind of return to 'white America'. It's an extension of the media's labeling of Trump as "populist".

In the meantime, in the real world, blacks, Hispanics and Asian Americans have some of the highest employment rates in decades, since Trump has demonstrated sharp opposition to outsourcing, which is different than what we saw under the Obama administration where nothing was done to improve employment rates.

...All Obama did for blacks was to be a black president. It ended there.

I agree with the very last sentence....

But Trump is riding the wave of the previous presidency

 

[Cooky]

But Trump is riding the wave of the previous presidency

If that's true, then the next president will be very fortunate. Bringing the jobs back was always made taboo by the globalists. Trump has quashed that misguided taboo. It's not the big scary monster they made it out to be. The sky is not falling.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

If that's true, then the next president will be very fortunate. Bringing the jobs back was always made taboo by the globalists. Trump has quashed that misguided taboo. It's not the big scary monster they made it out to be. The sky is not falling.

The fact you believe Trump is doing something to benefit America is scary.

 

[metis]

In regards to the OP, Donny Deutsch said exactly the same today on "Morning Joe", and he also is a multimillionaire. Generally speaking, as Chris Matthews said on his program some weeks ago, all too many of these guys are Good Old Boys, living in gated communities with limited contact with the outside world, who tend to want different rules for themselves.

A bit of a stereotype? Ya, I agree, but there is some truth to it as we've seen over and over again.

 

[Valjean]

If that's true, then the next president will be very fortunate. Bringing the jobs back was always made taboo by the globalists. Trump has quashed that misguided taboo. It's not the big scary monster they made it out to be. The sky is not falling.

Employment rates, however, don't necessarily correspond with prosperity.

Wages for the working and much of the middle class have been largely stagnant since the advent of Neoliberal 'Reaganomics,' ca. 1980. At the same time, money has been trickling up. Corporations have become 'people,' the 1% have been undermining the social safety net, health and safety regulations, trade unionism, &c, while the conservative working classes have been duped into abetting them; creating their own Road to (well-employed) Serfdom.