Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

To Whom it May Concern: 'White Racism' as categorically stupid as 'Heterophobia'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 09:08 PM
Original message
To Whom it May Concern: 'White Racism' as categorically stupid as 'Heterophobia'
Edited on Fri Jan-09-09 09:08 PM by Political Heretic
You're going to be hearing about white racism more and more and more and more. Don't get suckered into this ridiculous stupidity.

There will always be individuals who are prejudiced against people for strange reasons. Some will be prejudiced against white people. There's probably even some people somewhere in this work who are prejudiced against straight people.

But what people who start talking about "white racism" don't get is that isn't not enough to find isolated pockets of individual strange prejudice. Discrimination against whites has never been and will never be a social or historical phenomenon at a cultural, political and institutional level. Thus all discussion of "white racism" as a "phenomenon" is bunk and ridiculous. An individual can be prejudiced and maybe you could use the term racist with a small "r" though I think that's unnecessarily confusing. But capital "R" Racism as a political, cultural and institutional reality does not exist and has never existed for white persons in America. White persons still dominate all political and social institutions.

Think about how stupid someone would sound trying to talk about the prevasive social problem of "heterophobia" and remember that it sounds just a stupid to talk about "white racism."

Again.... just because you can find a select example of some individual being biased against someone for their white skin will never ever be the same at as historical, institutional, cultural climate of social racism pervasive through society.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
avaistheone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 09:12 PM
Response to Original message
1. It is isn't stupid if it happens to you.
Maybe it isn't widespread. I really don't know. Color bias and hatred is ugly and unacceptable no matter who it is directed at - no matter if you are black, yellow, brown, white or purple.

It is unacceptable if it even happens to a just a single person.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 10:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
19. Sure it is.
Because it doesn't happen to you.

That's my point. Select instances of discrimination or bigotry are not the same thing as systemic, institutional racism.

It doesn't make it more or less acceptable. It just makes it different.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lint Head Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 09:12 PM
Response to Original message
2. Bigoted people have bigoted ideas.
:dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LaydeeBug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #2
21. Preach! ...and bigoted people can be any color of the human race, as can the color they hate..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marimour Donating Member (696 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 09:16 PM
Response to Original message
3. same thing with reverse racism (it doesnt exist)
I agree if you see Racism as just institutional racism. Whites have not and will likely never be subject to that in the US. There are prejudiced people of all races and most people just us the term racists for them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
marimour Donating Member (696 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. reverse racism = racism (they aren't 2 separate things)
Reverse racism is a charge that anti-affirmative action freeper types use to try to make themselves somehow equal victims. If a black person is "racist" against a white person, its not reverse racism its just racism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Wouldn't reverse racism be tolerance?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marimour Donating Member (696 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. yeah it would be
which is why I hate that Repubs co-opted the word.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rch35 Donating Member (658 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #7
44. thats not what reverse racism is, as i understand it anyways.
Edited on Sat Jan-10-09 03:50 PM by rch35
The way i have always used it termed around here in Cali is that it is when a person of one color (usually white) is unusually kind towards a person of another race solely because of the other persons skin color. They are so worried about being thought of as racist that they overdo it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marimour Donating Member (696 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 02:00 AM
Response to Reply #44
81. thats not the generally accepted definition
Edited on Sun Jan-11-09 02:01 AM by marimour
That may be a Cali term though, but reverse racism is usually used when talking about quotas or affirmative action policies. Whoever brings the suit usually claims that the quotas or policies are "reverse racism" as in racism against whites. Its a stupid term though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rch35 Donating Member (658 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 03:23 AM
Response to Reply #81
83. i see. just wanted to clarify, see if it was just me or not.
Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. There's no such thing as "reverse racism" because racism is all one thing.
Edited on Fri Jan-09-09 09:46 PM by lumberjack_jeff
If you think ones ethnic background (whatever that might be) confers genetic superiority, you're a racist.

edited to add: I read your subsequent post after I wrote this. I fully agree with you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
loyalsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #3
31. That term is awful!
Edited on Sat Jan-10-09 01:35 PM by loyalsister
"backward" racism implies that there is a correct form.
Aiming hate at inappropriate subjects as opposed to simply inapropriate ideas\actions\policies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texastoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
5. Okay, I'm confused
If I'm white and biased against black, am I suffering from white racism or black racism?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marimour Donating Member (696 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. lol. well if the guy is mixed then i guess its both.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Terran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #5
26. The OP means institutional racism *against* whites when he says
"white racism". Not the best choice of words, IMO, but I totally agree with his main idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marimour Donating Member (696 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 01:57 AM
Response to Reply #26
80. i think most people dont understand this thread
If they would look at my post about 4 posts down from the OP they would get that it is institutional racism the OP is talking about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 09:38 PM
Response to Original message
6. When my step father was dying in the hospital, he was treated poorly
because of his race (White). I don't remember what the nurses called it. 'Sucking up to whitey' or something like that.

Nobunaga Oda was legandary for killing Whites and Christians.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marimour Donating Member (696 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. well
well there is more than one definition of racism. One definition is basically used almost interchageably with prejudiced.

The other one "a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others; discrimination" can only be imposed by whites on others because whites have been in control of government. In that case, blacks cannot be racist against whites because they have no power or means (control of government) by which to enforce those views (in america). I think thats the racism that the OP is talking about. In places like Jamaica or many African countries where blacks are in control, then it switches.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
avaistheone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. I respectfully disagree.
There are pockets in this country where blacks control the levers of power in government. In those communities other racial groups not infrequently have a difficult time asserting their power.

So perhaps racism is a disease of power. Absolute power corrupts regardless of race.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. Since there are two valid definitions of the word, 'racism',
using one of those definitions is not stupid, as the OP suggests. There is nothing wrong with using words properly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marimour Donating Member (696 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. i agree
Edited on Fri Jan-09-09 10:16 PM by marimour
I use the 1st definition frequently to describe people. When talking about institutional racism I specifically say institutional racism.

ETA: i dont call it white racism or black racism, just racism no matter who it comes from.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LaydeeBug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #11
34. The "other" definition of racism? My God, you're full of shit.
You can take that blurb and interchange "woman" for "blacks" and "men for "whites". Now does that mean I can't be prejudiced against men?

That is a wafting load of bullshit and you know it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marimour Donating Member (696 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 01:54 AM
Response to Reply #34
79. so you obviously didnt comprehend my post
Edited on Sun Jan-11-09 01:56 AM by marimour
There are actual books written about it. It is actually an alternate definition of racism. Look it up before you blow something off just because you haven't been exposed to it. Its not surprising you haven't been exposed to these types of discussions b/c you may have not felt the need to delve into race related issues. In my college courses dealing with race, there were usually 1 or 2 white people max while the rest was filled with various minorities. If you actually take the time to look this up you will understand that i'm not saying that blacks cant be prejudiced against whites. Actually if you read my post you would notice that prejudice is a totally different thing from the type of institutional racism that I am talking about. Basically, some people say that racism= prejudice + power. (if you believe that then everything else is prejudice). Seriously take the time too look something up before calling bullshit just b/c you don't know about it. You may be surprised about the things you can learn.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow2u3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 10:04 PM
Response to Original message
13. Racism is racism...
...no matter who the racist is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PM Martin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #13
49. Correct!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 10:15 PM
Response to Original message
16. You can't pick and choose which groups you will and will not tolerate bigotry towards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
avaistheone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. Woohoo! Well said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. Excellent. Since I'm not doing that, I guess we agree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. Oh, but you are
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Two Americas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #23
42. no he isn't
You are arguing that reverse racism is a legitimate concept if you think that the OP is calling for persecution of straights and whites. Debate that. Support your position.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #42
53. My postion is supported by common sense
You can't say that you are a beacon of equality if you think its ok for anyone or group, even a single person, to discriminate against whites, straights or men based on their race, sexual preference or gender.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skip Intro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #53
57. Good Lord, I'm agreeing with Wolsh.
Guess the primaries are over, lol.

You are right on in this debate...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #53
61. Great. Since I don't think that, nor did I say that - at any point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #61
68. I think your first post made your feelings quite clear
no need to walk it back now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 01:31 AM
Response to Reply #68
76. There's no walking back needed for anyone who can read.
Edited on Sun Jan-11-09 01:34 AM by Political Heretic
My post says nothing about condoning bigotry toward anyone. It says there's a big difference between institutional racial oppression and select instances of experienced bigotry. What white people do not experience is institutional oppression - historical, systemic or contemporary - based on their skin color.

All forms of bigotry should be opposed. But conflating the two very different experiences as equal or identical is a trap, most frequently used by racists, frankly, to trivialize real discussion of the continuing effects of institutional oppression towards persons of color inherent in our social structures today.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Two Americas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #53
66. we all discriminate
Edited on Sat Jan-10-09 10:00 PM by Two Americas
We all discriminate all of the time, and it is not necessarily a bad thing. Can not a woman who is being abused by her husband discriminate and prefer to discuss it with a woman rather than a man? How would that harm or oppress men? Escaped slaves needed to discriminate and be much more cautious around whites. Did that harm whites or oppress them? Was that unfair to whites? Was the anger, fear, and resentment that Black slaves felt toward whites "reverse slavery?"

You are talking about people's personal preferences and feelings and ignoring power imbalances. Racism is a different subject, and if we leave power out of the discussion it is impossible to talk about racism at all.

Victims have every right to discriminate against their persecutors and abusers and choose to reject them and not associate with them. That is not "reverse persecution."

Prejudice and discrimination are an effect of racism, not a cause. First came the oppression and exploitation and enslavement, then came the negative stereotypes.



...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Terran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #16
27. You missed the point entirely. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 11:07 PM
Response to Original message
22. The trouble is that racism only goes away when we are all individuals
judged on the content of our character.

Then it would not matter who was in the majority or whose ancestors were the victims of racism.

We have to be careful here, because we fall right into the RW claim we are always trying to be victims because we think that will gain us something. "My race has been victimized more than your race," can be unsymnpathetic if in spite of that, I'm doing better that you in life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Two Americas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #22
47. not the way it works
Leave improving human nature on an individual basis to religion. Politics is about changing social conditions. The goal of the political battle against bigotry is not to get people to like each other, it is to enact law that prevents them from harming others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 02:39 AM
Response to Original message
24. Actually, I'm a little heterophobic.
Extremely assertive heteros, mustachioed macho men, guys that go to strip clubs, bars, cheat on wives and brag about it, get into fights, all that stuff... they scare me. :fear:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vektor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 02:56 AM
Response to Reply #24
25. Agreed.
Edited on Sat Jan-10-09 02:57 AM by Vektor
They don't so much scare me as sicken me to my very core. Kind of the same way a swarm of maggots feasting on a rotting deer carcass would sicken me.

Can't stand the sight, smell, or thought of it.

These oafs you talk about are, 100% of the time, suffering from crippling insecurity, social ineptness, and a grotesque overcompensation complex. You can see it from a mile away, and it will repel you instantly if you have even the merest hint of "creepdar".

:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BreweryYardRat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. Thank you.
Edited on Sat Jan-10-09 12:50 PM by seawolf
I'm male, and I never understood the urge to act like a chest-beating Cro-Magnon. (One of my roommates does that sometimes. It's aggravating.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vektor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #28
36. I don't understand it either...
But there is always some ulterior reason for it - they are always "making up" for something. Insecurity, poor social skills, bad manners all factor in, but I think the biggest issue they have is a closet case of self-loathing. In order to try to feel better about themselves, they disrespect everyone else.

Luckily, the "cro-magnon" is easy to spot (Usually red-faced and drunk, screaming 'Woo-hoo! nice tits!!!' at the top of his lungs while smashing a Pabst blue ribbon can on his forehead), so you can give them a wide berth should you encounter one. Also, they travel in pairs or groups, thus amplifying the effect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #36
45. They don't hang with women, they hang with other men....
...almost exclusively. They treat women like property. They love other men like themselves.

See where I'm headed?

I really believe that most gay-bashers are unawaredly afraid of their own attraction, the theory is not new.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vektor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #45
73. I think there is some truth to that...
But they are the ones that are both homophobic, and have tendencies at the same time. Therefore, the self loathing ensues...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
awoke_in_2003 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #36
50. "they are always "making up" for something"
you left one little "thing" off your list :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vektor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #50
72. Hahahaha!
Yes... I think you are absolutely right!

Likely, that is often the main issue, I suspect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
awoke_in_2003 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #72
74. Reminds me of my father...
one time a waitress told him "have a good one". He said "I have a good one, I just want a bigger one". I don't know who was more embarrassed, me or the waitress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #24
64. Not sure what that has to do with hetero anything.
Macho men need not be straight. Neither guys going to strip clubs. Partners cheating on partners then bragging about it, also not exclusive to heterosexuals, nor getting into fights....

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PurityOfEssence Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
29. Right. Straight white folk are the only ones that suck.
Go watch those tapes of Jeremiah Wright; the people in the audience were just being polite to him by agreeing so gleefully. There's no such thing as a gash-hating queen. Never was a lesbian the least bit annoyed by any male in a gender-related way. Koreans don't have any trouble with blacks, and even Spike Lee was making that up in "Do The Right Thing" because he knew that playing to a made-up stereotype would be good box office. Hispanic culture absolutely adores us here in L.A.; I can just feel it. There's no such thing as sneering at heteros in gay culture; the term "breeder" is one of the deepest respect.

Paul Mooney LOVES his pigment-challenged brothers and sisters. So does Louis Farrakhan. Sistah Soljah's met lots of white people who don't suck.

Assholiness is a cross-cultural affliction. What people TRULY need to understand is how really, really similar we all are, and that includes the crappy parts.

We all have our crosses to bear for shittiness of those who come from the same demographics as we do. Not admitting it leads to calls for a privileged status. Ignorance of it seems hard to believe. Outrage at it belies an expectation to be granted priveleged status.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #29
38. PurityofEssence, your post is exactly right. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Two Americas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #29
43. this has nothing to do with who "sucks"
Your argument defends and promotes bigotry and persecution by equating the mistreatment of a group of people by claiming that resistance and reaction to that mistreatment is somehow equal to the mistreatment itself.

This argument, by the way, was used at one time to defend slavery. "The slaves hate the masters just as much as the masters hate the slaves, so I guess it is all equal and people should not make slaves into saints and masters into the evil ones."

Politics is not about who likes whom, or who doesn't, it is about power - who has it and who does not. When people are denied power based on race, gender or sexual orientation, that is a social problem that we use politics to address, fight and overcome. That struggle is not invalidate because "some of them are not going about it the right way" nor because "some of them hate us as much as we hate them." In fact, seeing a "them" who presumably all feel and think and act the same way is the very essence of bigotry - judging the group by the individual and the individual by the group.

If we ignore power imbalances in these discussions, only then can we think that "these things go both ways." The systematic institutionalized abuse and enslavement of one group of people was not "equal" to the resentments, anger and resistance of those who were enslaved, and that is true today, as well. GLBTQ people are subjected to systematic institutionalized abuse and persecution and denial of equal rights and justice. Straight people are not. People of color are subjected to systematic institutionalized abuse and persecution and denial of equal rights and justice. White people are not.

The general public is now moving dramatically to the Left on these issues, and we have a once in a lifetime opportunity to make great progress. Why, as the public moves to the Left, as they reject the religious right, as they reject Reganomics, are there now progressives and liberals who are trying to revive and restore the discredited and repudiated ideas of the religious right and the the extreme political right wing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PurityOfEssence Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #43
51. I'm a big fan of causality
Such things simply exist. One of the sad things is how minority groups get at each others throats and further irritate the wound. The connotation to posts like the thread starter is that the downtrodden have some kind of monopoly on virtue.

I get around, and I'm not a kid; the spread of human qualities seems pretty even in this country, and to deny that they exist doesn't help a thing. White people have enjoyed great advantages, and they're seeing them go away, with many of them actively working to lower their privelege. This is all happening at a time when the United States itself is going through an analogous reorientation to the rest of the world. As things go up in general, our standard of living is by definition going down.

For the large part--especially among Democrats--people are actively working against their short-term self-interest (it'll be better for all for everything to be equal, but most people are VERY short-sighted) and should be treated as allies. To make them also swallow the horse shit that they're morally inferior because only they are the only ones who are filthy racists is not constructive; it's some kind of smug retaliation. It's a victim mentality, and is an expression of selfishness.

If people want to promote the premise that white people are more racist than others and that they are the only ones to take some heat for it, those people should be called out as either self-indulgently oblivious, racists themselves or both. Reality is reality. The mitigations you cite are fair topics of conversation, and it is very understandable for someone of a downtrodden group to despise those of the group that keeps them down, but it's not a virtue and that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. The problem is dealing with individuals as members of their group rather than as individuals.

Virtually everyone I've ever met has a few lingering whiffs of prejudice, and the ones who don't admit it are often some of the worst characters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Two Americas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 10:23 PM
Response to Reply #51
70. you are not talking about racism
You make some points about tactics and strategy for the political Left, but what you are talking about is not racism.

We cannot discuss racism without someone feeling put out that they have been - heaven forbid - "called a racist." That shuts down all discussion.

No one is saying that the victims of oppression are better human beings than those who benefit from or promote the oppression.

You are talking about who is and who is not a racist. Racism is not about personal qualities.

I can well understand why people might describe your arguments as arguments that support racism. That is not harming you or persecuting you. Could it be that it is having your arguments challenged that you resent?

I think that to be white in America is to "be" a racist, and I don't know why anyone would feel offended about that or resist it. Clearly, we are all part of the problem, we are all in this together, and we have all been raised in a racist culture and saturated with racist messages. But racism is not a matter of being, it is a matter of thinking, saying, and doing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
30. Everyone is cabable of hatred in some way
But I don't think I have to worry about being discriminated against as a young white woman in my early thirties. Maybe just the woman part.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 01:42 PM
Response to Original message
32. You ever get your ass kicked for being white?
You ever go to a school where white people were 2% of the population?

You ever have groups of people act nasty to you because you're white?

I didn't think so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LaydeeBug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #32
35. as a matter of fact, I have.
Edited on Sat Jan-10-09 01:51 PM by LaydeeBug
How absolutely WRONG of you to suggest that only black people can experience those things. I grew up for a time in the Virgin Islands, where whites are the minority. You think the black population was "tolerant"?

I didn't think so.

On edit: to fix toleratn to tolerant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #35
55. Apparently I didn't phrase my post correctly
I have experienced this sort of prejudice firsthand as a while kid growing up in Oakland.

I was intending to challenge the OP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LaydeeBug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #55
59. Oh, I am sorry then. ;) nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chulanowa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #32
41. I have
Actually, not so much because I was "white" as because I wasn't as brown as the majority population,... which by default made me "white". And out of a school of eight hundred there was myself and one white kid. So it was actually 0.25%. I got my ass kicked frequently until I learned how to kick ass back.

You didn't actually know there are plenty of places in the US where the "minority" is actually the majority, did you?

Didn't think so
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 08:02 PM
Response to Reply #41
54. I didn't know WHAT?
I'm from Oakland. There's a lot I know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chulanowa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #54
58. Well, that's good
If you're so knowledgeable, perhaps you shouldn't make stupid assumptions like the one I responded to. Have a good night.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chovexani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 01:45 PM
Response to Original message
33. Excellent post
Too bad it will sail over the heads of the people who need to hear its message most (and I see it's already started to).

K&R.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sniffa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 02:43 PM
Response to Original message
37. OTTGPYG
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #37
46. That's right, you tell em!
Huh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Two Americas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
39. excellent post
Thanks PH. Good work, and an important topic.

Paraphrasing Dr. King: "I don't care whether or not someone likes me, so long as they do not have the power to harm me."

I am stunned at how much traction the idiotic "reverse racism" arguments are getting among "progressives," as we can see on full display in all of its ugliness right here on this thread.

Only those from the dominant and powerful group, enjoying unexamined and assumed privilege, can see racism as a matter of which individuals like which other individuals, thereby stripping any consideration of power and abuse from the discussion. Only those who enjoy full rights and privileges can see it as reasonable and practical that the desperate needs of GLBTQ people as a nuisance and not a priority. This is power talking now, at the expense of principle.

"I like Black people, and I am not a racist, but some of them don't like me merely because I an white. That is as bad as racism against Blacks."

"I like gay people, and I support gay rights, but some of them seem to hare me because I an strength and are labeling me as a bigot. Hatred goes both ways."

If people can say that "hatred goes both ways," and that one is equal to the other, then they are arguing that there is no social problem, that it is merely a matter of our personal feelings. To deny that there is a social problem is to defend the way that things are now, and that means that bigotry and racism and homophobia cannot be challenged, cannot even be examined or discussed.

This has been very sad and frustrating to watch. As the Democrats are coming into power, too many here are now sidling up to power, using the arguments of those in power to beat down the rest of us, taking the authoritarian position on every issue, and reveling in their imagined association and identification with those in power even to the point of defending including bigotry in a misguide notion if "including people." The only ones being in included are those with power, and those without power or persecuted and abused are being attacked by their presumed allies and seen as the problem.

"We won! Get over it!" we heard from Bush supporters. Now we are hearing that from our supposed friends and allies.

Did you get a chance to see the Pew Research survey on this PH? As the general public moves to the Left and toward greater tolerance, liberals and progressives are moving the opposite direction. The public has overwhelmingly rejected and repudiated the religious right and Reaganomics, and Pew survey taken shortly before the election shows that. Yet liberals and progressives are moving to the right, as they now catch a whiff of power and start strutting an bullying and seeing themselves as "winners" and looking at the people, and those speaking out for the suffering and abused among us, with contempt and derision.

Majority now says "get religion out of politics"
Pew Research study
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=221x113168
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #39
40. Great post, TA.

I really hope you write a book someday. I think the concept of "privilege" as it is used in these discussions is often misunderstood by the casual reader. You have a good way of clarifying. :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #39
60. Thank you so much for getting it.
Edited on Sat Jan-10-09 09:38 PM by Political Heretic
I was shocked, in my obvious naivety, at the silliness of so many of the responses.

But then, white privilege is a strong, covert force.


Did you get a chance to see the Pew Research survey on this PH? As the general public moves to the Left and toward greater tolerance, liberals and progressives are moving the opposite direction. The public has overwhelmingly rejected and repudiated the religious right and Reaganomics, and Pew survey taken shortly before the election shows that. Yet liberals and progressives are moving to the right, as they now catch a whiff of power and start strutting an bullying and seeing themselves as "winners" and looking at the people, and those speaking out for the suffering and abused among us, with contempt and derision.


Incidentally, this is exactly what happened (part of what happened) in the 1960s that marked the beginning of the collapse of the Great Society and the War on Poverty. Initially, there was broad liberal/progressive/democrat (whatever label you choose) support for the War on Poverty. Liberals liked the "idea" of empowering people in poverty. Until poor people began to take them seriously, and tack the design of Community Action Agencies and Programs (CAP / CAA) seriously. The got on the boards, they began to organize - and pretty soon Democratic Mayors of local cities were clamoring to Party insiders that their power was being coopted, they threatened to be less supportive of Democratic Congressional races and Presidential bids and as a result, a Democratic Congress passed revisions which made it impossible for ordinary citicizens to control the boards of CAPS -- they required that only three seats be filled by community members and the rest be filled by party representatives and people appointed by people in power.

The point of this story? Democrats are like any other group when it comes to power. They like the idea of helping others, but only as long as those "others" stay other. They like the idea of a group of people who will quietly take whatever help is offered them - they do not like the idea of people who become awakened and empowered to advocate for themselves and organize.

It's so fascinating to study the history of Johnson and the Great Society. It seems fairly clear that he sincerely had a dream of seriously tackling poverty, but it was a depersonalized issue to him. As long as power remained in its traditional places, he loved the idea of "giving" aid to a quiet anonymous mass of people who would take it and stay silent. When poor began to access new capacities for empowerment and began to enter into the political process as an actual political force.... it became a problem for all the traditional power brokers, and things began to unravel.

It's always best for those with power when those without it just stay asleep...

EDIT - also, TA can you link me to this study because I'm very interested in it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Two Americas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #60
62. thanks PH
The work you are doing recently is just excellent - can't say enough.

Very interesting story about the 60's and the War on Poverty.

Here is the study I referred to:

http://people-press.org/report/?pageid=1361

"It's always best for those with power when those without it just stay asleep..."

By the way, I believe that is is always a good thing to get more people involved, and it is broader public involvement that those with entrenched power most fear, not any "ideology." That was what RFK did and also Dr. King. All things being equal, it is always a good thing when we get more people involved, and that has been Obama's greatest contribution to date, in my opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #62
67. Oh yeah I DID read that study (the summary findings) I had just forgotten
Stuff keeps falling out of my brain hah....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PM Martin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 06:46 PM
Response to Original message
48. Bigotry is NOT restricted to a single race, gender, religion,
ethnicity, etc...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #48
65. No kidding. I never said that.
Do people really read, ever?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nini Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 07:24 PM
Response to Original message
52. Don't confuse Racism with Discrimination
Anyone can be racist be they white, black, yellow, whatever.

To discriminate you must have some kind of power where you apply your racism, phobia etc.. against others.

They are NOT the same thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skip Intro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #52
56. Yes! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 09:55 PM
Response to Original message
63. One final attempt to clarify some of the confusion
Try to follow with me here....

If someone said "Heterophobia is the same as homophobia" - how would you feel about that?

I think that many people would first of all have trouble even taking the term "heterophobia" seriously. Heterosexuals are not getting tied to fence posts and beaten to death for being straight. They're not denied the right to marry. Their sexual orientation is not used as the butt of jokes or as a slur.

So I think a clam, objective person would want to say that, while it certainly is possible for a person to be bigoted against a straight person, we want to be careful that we don't conflate that experience with the systemic, institutional, culturally pervsive phenominon of homophobia. Homophobia is a term specifically because it is a pervasive cultural/social condition of power and privilege inequity based on prejudice. Heterosexuals, regardless of whether or not an individual person may be bigoted toward them based on their straightness, do not experience cultural/social conditions of power and privilege inequity because of their sexual orientation.

Okay?

Likewise, it is certainly true that a white person may experience bigotry and prejudice at the hands of an individual. That prejudice is unacceptable of course. It's not less acceptable because the target person is white, that much is obvious. However, institutional racism is different and has consequences that are more far reaching. A white person, due to the very nature of white privilege of American history and society and reguardless of whether or not an individual person may be bigoted toward them based on their skin color, do not experience cultural/social conditions of power and privilege inequity because of their race.

Thus the danger is to accept attempts to sort of "level the playing field" and act like persons of color do not experience specific hardships and specific institutional barriers because of their race, simply because some white person somewhere experienced the biogtry of some other person. Institutional racism is different than individiual instances of bigotry.

Some reminders about the reality of white privilege (and I live in Idaho and am white as the driven snow by the way):


Daily effects of white privilege

I decided to try to work on myself at least by identifying some of the daily effects of white privilege in my life. I have chosen those conditions that I think in my case attach somewhat more to skin-color privilege than to class, religion, ethnic status, or geographic location, though of course all these other factors are intricately intertwined. As far as I can tell, my African American coworkers, friends, and acquaintances with whom I come into daily or frequent contact in this particular time, place and time of work cannot count on most of these conditions.

1. I can if I wish arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time.

2. I can avoid spending time with people whom I was trained to mistrust and who have learned to mistrust my kind or me.

3. If I should need to move, I can be pretty sure of renting or purchasing housing in an area which I can afford and in which I would want to live.

4. I can be pretty sure that my neighbors in such a location will be neutral or pleasant to me.

5. I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed.

6. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented.

7. When I am told about our national heritage or about "civilization," I am shown that people of my color made it what it is.

8. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race.

9. If I want to, I can be pretty sure of finding a publisher for this piece on white privilege.

10. I can be pretty sure of having my voice heard in a group in which I am the only member of my race.

11. I can be casual about whether or not to listen to another person's voice in a group in which s/he is the only member of his/her race.

12. I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the staple foods which fit with my cultural traditions, into a hairdresser's shop and find someone who can cut my hair.

13. Whether I use checks, credit cards or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial reliability.

14. I can arrange to protect my children most of the time from people who might not like them.

15. I do not have to educate my children to be aware of systemic racism for their own daily physical protection.

16. I can be pretty sure that my children's teachers and employers will tolerate them if they fit school and workplace norms; my chief worries about them do not concern others' attitudes toward their race.

17. I can talk with my mouth full and not have people put this down to my color.

18. I can swear, or dress in second hand clothes, or not answer letters, without having people attribute these choices to the bad morals, the poverty or the illiteracy of my race.

19. I can speak in public to a powerful male group without putting my race on trial.

20. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race.

21. I am never asked to speak for all the people of my racial group.

22. I can remain oblivious of the language and customs of persons of color who constitute the world's majority without feeling in my culture any penalty for such oblivion.

23. I can criticize our government and talk about how much I fear its policies and behavior without being seen as a cultural outsider.

24. I can be pretty sure that if I ask to talk to the "person in charge", I will be facing a person of my race.

25. If a traffic cop pulls me over or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure I haven't been singled out because of my race.

26. I can easily buy posters, post-cards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys and children's magazines featuring people of my race.

27. I can go home from most meetings of organizations I belong to feeling somewhat tied in, rather than isolated, out-of-place, outnumbered, unheard, held at a distance or feared.

28. I can be pretty sure that an argument with a colleague of another race is more likely to jeopardize her/his chances for advancement than to jeopardize mine.

29. I can be pretty sure that if I argue for the promotion of a person of another race, or a program centering on race, this is not likely to cost me heavily within my present setting, even if my colleagues disagree with me.

30. If I declare there is a racial issue at hand, or there isn't a racial issue at hand, my race will lend me more credibility for either position than a person of color will have.

31. I can choose to ignore developments in minority writing and minority activist programs, or disparage them, or learn from them, but in any case, I can find ways to be more or less protected from negative consequences of any of these choices.

32. My culture gives me little fear about ignoring the perspectives and powers of people of other races.

33. I am not made acutely aware that my shape, bearing or body odor will be taken as a reflection on my race.

34. I can worry about racism without being seen as self-interested or self-seeking.

35. I can take a job with an affirmative action employer without having my co-workers on the job suspect that I got it because of my race.

36. If my day, week or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether it had racial overtones.

37. I can be pretty sure of finding people who would be willing to talk with me and advise me about my next steps, professionally.

38. I can think over many options, social, political, imaginative or professional, without asking whether a person of my race would be accepted or allowed to do what I want to do.

39. I can be late to a meeting without having the lateness reflect on my race.

40. I can choose public accommodation without fearing that people of my race cannot get in or will be mistreated in the places I have chosen.

41. I can be sure that if I need legal or medical help, my race will not work against me.

42. I can arrange my activities so that I will never have to experience feelings of rejection owing to my race.

43. If I have low credibility as a leader I can be sure that my race is not the problem.

44. I can easily find academic courses and institutions which give attention only to people of my race.

45. I can expect figurative language and imagery in all of the arts to testify to experiences of my race.

46. I can chose blemish cover or bandages in "flesh" color and have them more or less match my skin.

47. I can travel alone or with my spouse without expecting embarrassment or hostility in those who deal with us.

48. I have no difficulty finding neighborhoods where people approve of our household.

49. My children are given texts and classes which implicitly support our kind of family unit and do not turn them against my choice of domestic partnership.

50. I will feel welcomed and "normal" in the usual walks of public life, institutional and social.

http://seamonkey.ed.asu.edu/~mcisaac/emc598ge/Unpacking.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fearless Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 10:13 PM
Response to Original message
69. Feel better?
I hope so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
debbierlus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 10:41 PM
Response to Original message
71. Uhm. No...That is simply not true. I was a victim of white racism and so was my husband.

Me, I got beaten to smithereens in eighth grade by a group of black youths who attacked me because I was white.

And, my husband had his teeth knocked out during the Rodney King riots simply because he was at the wrong place at the wrong time.
A white man walking down the wrong street.

This was racism against whites.

People are people and racism, sadly, transcends all lines.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #71
75. You need to re-read.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 01:36 AM
Response to Reply #75
78. It won't help. People like that are *committed* to it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Two Americas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 02:19 AM
Response to Reply #71
82. sorry to hear that
Edited on Sun Jan-11-09 02:22 AM by Two Americas
You were assaulted. That is horrendous. That isn't racism, though. No doubt there are occasional assaults on white people that have racial overtones, and I am sorry that you and your husband were hurt. I don't think we can generalize from that, though.

I grew up in Detroit, went to integrated schools, and lived for decades in neighborhoods where most of the my neighbors were Black. I was never mistreated because I was white. While there were fights and trouble in school, I don't ever remember anyone being assaulted merely because they were white. My Black classmates and neighbors, however, were under relentless racially motivated pressures and harassment of various kinds. I was in the city in the summer of '67, and also when Dr. King was murdered, and there was lots of chaos and violence. The only people who hassled me, though, were the police.

I have performed in hundreds of small AA churches in Detroit, Chicago, Cleveland and many other cities and towns. I never hesitate to go into Black neighborhoods. There are bad areas, regardless of who lives there, and you need to be smart, yes. In 40 years of working and living in AA communities as a white person, I have never been mistreated because I was white, and I have never feared a person because they were Black.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 01:35 AM
Response to Original message
77. They get it just fine. They're simply lying.
They can't stand that history actually happened, and that to correct its unbalanced outcome, counter-balancing measures are required.

So they bitch and whine like racist little whiny ass titty babies about "reverse-racism" or "political correctness" or whatever cute name they come up with, specifically to maintain the results of America's racist history.

It also serves as a white unity rallying cry. One white guy moans "reverse racism!!!!" and then a bunch of other white guys commiserate and they all yell it in unison. It's really very touching.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 03:32 AM
Response to Reply #77
84. BlooInBloo, you're something else! :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 04:01 AM
Response to Reply #84
85. I get that a lot.
Edited on Sun Jan-11-09 04:12 AM by BlooInBloo
:P

On occasion it's even meant in a nice way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 05:03 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC