Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

PB57

(2 posts)
7. Further explanation
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:08 AM
Apr 2016

Dear all,

I am author of the piece which was originally published by Common Dreams. Thank you for taking the time to discuss and critique the article. Firstly, as I posted elsewhere on this site (I am new to Democratic Underground) the article was in no way meant to echo any previous posts that used the Stockholm syndrome as a means for reinforcing and perpetuating discriminatory stereotypes or assumptions. I was completely unaware of this history, and I apologize for any unintended offense. Further, 1StrongBlackMan I think you raise important points and again I appreciate your insights on the piece. My aim in writing the article was to highlight how if a grassroots progressive movement is going to achieve mass success, it must not dismiss the passionate feelings many people across demographics have for mainstream Democratic politicians and leaders. Rather, it should engage with them and offer a stronger affective narrative detailing why a different strategy would be more effective for achieving real tangible social change.

Indeed, I feel that this dynamic is not limited to Clinton supporters. It was profoundly disconcerting, for instance, how a large number of Sanders' supporters did not critique him for not taking more seriously Ta-nehisi Coates' call for reparations. Indeed Coates, both in his original article in The Atlantic and then in a wide ranging interview on Democracy Now - set out how the government could create a program of direct financial repreations for black citizens who due to racial discrimination were barred from buying a home in a certain area. Moreover, he ignored how universal programs such as the New Deal were historically always exclusionary to non-whites. The fact that so many people "feelin the Bern" did not press harder on him sooner and more forcefully to address these blindspots showed how their own passionate attachment may have limited the appeal of their "political revolution".

I would like to reiterate though my sincere apologies for any unintended consequences my article created as well as once again thank all of you for taking the time to constructively discuss this article.

Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»African American»*** Posted to the African...»Reply #7