To have a plan which will dismantle structural racism.

It is hard to conceive of a life in which just walking down a street or knocking on the wrong door could end up with you getting shot but if you are black in the US the odds of that happening to you are infinitely greater than it happening to me. How can a candidate for POTUS ignore or neglect something like that? BLM seems to be insisting that their issue be treated like a matter of life or death. The record shows it is.

Four dead kids in Ohio back in the day kicked off a tremendous response. A young teen gunned down in a city park by cops gets a couple of weeks press and then that crime fades into the shadows.

If it was my kid who was murdered by the police people should only hope my response would be as mild as raising my voice at a political function.

In a way it was good that Bernie be exposed to a problem that can only indirectly be dealt with by economic ideas. If there is anyone out there who might have to nerve to propose the kind of structural changes needed to fight structural violence against black youth I suspect he might be the guy.

So, from my point of view, even if I don't like what BLM did at NetRoots I have to support the reasons that they did it. When each week brings another atrocity what do good manners accomplish?

We can have the debate whether we think one candidate or another would be better to solve problems, but we must first define the problems, and that requires listening to BLM.

who also get it, but somehow have difficulty admitting this.

Walking down the street while black--no one cares if you have a Bachelor's degree or earn a six figure income...or if you're Mike Brown or Eric Garner. All they see is your skin color. And assumptions are made for it.

This is something that we all need to come to terms with and deal honestly with.

I understand how important it is to address economic inequality and structuralism, but I'm sorry. Even if we dealt with all of that, people's prejudices still exist. And skin color still exist. We only need to look at how President Obama and his family are treated for an illustration of this.

We need to be honest about race in this country.

Nothing will change until we do.

I think the majority of the people want the talk of race in this country to go like the sex talk some have with their children.
Quickly, emotionless and once.


This is a dynamic conversation. We have to be willing to acknowledge that we have a lot to learn. Intentions and empathy alone are not enough.

"Sanders should not have treated the #BlackLivesMatter activists as a nuisance but rather as the very thing he was calling for: mobilization of the people for the issues they care about."

Last edited Tue Jul 21, 2015, 06:31 AM - Edit history (1)

Economic justice may very well fuel racial and social justice opportunities.

Economic justice may be why MLK was focussing more of his energies on the Poor People's Campaign when he was assassinated.

I certainly understand why POC want to hear about solutions that are targeted to them, but it seems to me that has been the status quo approach and its impact has been limited - perhaps sometimes because it was pandering by politicians. And I do appreciate the idea that if racial equality is achieved then economic justice will follow but it doesn't seem to be working out that way.

Of course I could be totally wrong.

The protest on Saturday didn't just want to hear long term proposals based on theory but immediate changes that can be made to keep people safe.

What a lot of people aren't getting is that Bernie playing the long game does not help now. As the article states, it is taking over the lives people are currently living.

...I'm hearing a long game.

But I do appreciate that many in the BLM movement are very concerned about immediate safety issues and rightly so.

What immediate changes can we make to combat racism? The thing we really can't afford to take the long game on is the environment. That's going to kill us all indiscriminately and there are immediate solutions we can take but don't to combat it. I'm on he side of BLM. I agree with making all politicians, even ones I support, squirm. We can propose body camera legislation, enforce police misconduct more severely, get rid of mandatory minimums, change the for profit prison system, end the drug war and demand better mental and physical training from our officers. What we can't do is make racist people not racist. Changing all that still doesn't end racism.

How does economic justice address racism in the employment area where a black man or woman can't even get an interview because of their race?

Social justice will not bring economic justice nor will economic justice bring social justice.

Both need to be addressed equally and fully by the candidates, imo, not putting economic justice as the primacy under which social justice is treated as a tertiary branch.

It may need to be primary for a while in order to catch up to certain social justice efforts.

I do believe that they go hand in hand, but as long as you have poor white and struggling middle class, targeted social justice issues can only go so far.

When you're wealthier you can live in safer neighborhoods where police are less likely to consider a POC a gangmember or thug, when you're wealthier you recreate in safer environments instead of the streets, when you're wealthier store owners remember when you dropped $200 on a paid of shoes and treat you with more respect on future visits, when you're wealthier collectively, you're less likely to be followed in a store, when you're wealthier you can get your taillights fixed and not be pulled over and subject yourself to a police encounter , and when you're wealthier you can afford better lawyers, etc. In general, wealthier people are considered more attractive and we treat them better.

Of course this doesn't eliminate racism or violence, but it can help reduce how they impact POC. Money can buy justice and otherwise empower individuals and groups.

"but as long as you have poor white and struggling middle class, targeted social justice issues can only go so far."

How is what I quoted from your post different than telling the black community to take a seat in the back of the bus until the needs of the "poor white and struggling middle class" are met? That kind of thinking is exactly why activists like BLM are voicing their concerns in every venue they can, they are NOT going to 'wait their turn' again, imo.

and I think they are less likely to make changes when they are struggling.

There is not back of the bus issue here because black american would be increasing in economic justice too at the same time.
There is not about telling black Americans to wait their turn. I was trying to point out how addressing economic issues with everyone might enable more changes from white Americans on racial issues.

who doesn't get a call back because of the color of their skin?

How would economic justice level the 'playing field' for those who aren't even allowed in the bleachers?

Economic justice helps those who already players, it does nothing for those behind the locked gates.

How does breaking up the banks help those who are being arrested and, all too often, killed by police because of the color of their skin?

How does regulating Wall Street help those who suffer discrimination every single day because of the color of their skin?

What is the difficulty in accepting economic solutions AND racial/social justice are of equal value and both should be given equal attention?

How would increasing economic justice enable a job interview for a black man or woman who doesn't get a call back because of the color of their skin?



How would economic justice level the 'playing field' for those who aren't even allowed in the bleachers?

Economic justice helps those who already players, it does nothing for those behind the locked gates.



How does breaking up the banks help those who are being arrested and, all too often, killed by police because of the color of their skin?



How does regulating Wall Street help those who suffer discrimination every single day because of the color of their skin?



What is the difficulty in accepting economic solutions AND racial/social justice are of equal value and both should be given equal attention?



I'm not expert on all this, but I'm beginning to see why Sanders is focusing on economic issues. And I'll leave it at that.

Your point: When black Americans have more resources they wouldn't be as dependent on those who discriminate to hire them. They may even have capital to form businesses.

My response: How do black Americans get more resources when they can't access the opportunities that afford them any resources? Would it not be better to put in place policies that address the lack of access which would then give them access to more resources?

Your point: When you have more resources you can protect yourself better, fight back better, and you care less who hates you. More government regulations and funded enforcement may be able to address discrimination.

Again, one cannot access more resources when access to any is the problem. Government regulations and funded enforcement to address racism and racist policies are definitely needed, they are social justice policies rather than economic justice policies, imo.

As to your final point, my response to the first two would be my response to this one as well.

Addressing income inequality, re-distributing wealth won't address the very simple truth that racism will continue to block black Americans until it is addressed through racial/social justice policies.

Level the playing field so those who can't even access the field will become equal players and then economic justice will benefit everyone not just some.

Thank you for your civil tone in our discussion, it was appreciated.

While Economic Justice is key, it doesn't really address the constant harassment that people of color face on a coninuous basis.

Bryant

You can't do that to any that walked the walk. You certainly can ask what are your plans to handle this.

There is no way to spin what netroots and blm did to Bernie as anything but wrong.

I am willing to listen, learn.

I want my candidate (O'Malley) to listen, learn.

be struck down as unconstitutional by the courts? Presidents do NOT have jurisdiction over police, local and state governments do.

What the President can do is empower federal law enforcement to try to provide some type of oversight over local law enforcement, but sometimes this is limited and needs some obvious corruption/malfeasance to be investigated first. Civil rights prosecutions also can be a crapshoot and sometimes aren't pursued at all, look at what didn't happen to Zimmerman as an example of this. But would a candidate laying out such plans be considered as doing enough. Outside of this, the President will have to rely on Congress passing appropriate legislation, and they can use their office a bully pulpit for advocating such legislation, and introducing it themselves. However, it must be pointed out that they would then rely on others to aid in implementing their agenda, and that Congress also doesn't have direct control over local or state law enforcement.

Even when people don't want to hear it. Because as long as as people keep looking for any excuse but corrupt law enforcement and institutional racism to justify these deaths we are going nowhere.

Civilian oversight boards, able to appoint independent, special prosecutors in cases of police/prosecutorial malfeasance/racism. Ability to subpoena witnesses and suspects, etc. would go a long way towards creating law enforcement accountability. Ending the drug war, federally and locally would also help a lot, etc.

Bernie Sanders is not "slacking" on fighting racism.

If one wants to argue that Bernie needs to maintain an ongoing dialogue with black activists in order to understand their fight, I'm in full agreement.