More on the Open Door For Bigots on the Economic Left

The Republican Party already lets all the racists in. The Democratic Party lets all sorts of bigots in, homo-bigots, feminazis, Black racists, Hispanic racists, Asian racists, etc. The Democratic Party is full to the brim with racists and bigots, but you’re only allowed to hate straights, men and Whites. Only Whites, males and straights are not allowed to be bigots in the party, instead, they may be victims of bigoted abuse and nothing else. They can’t even fight back. If they do, they’re thrown out of the movement.
Right now the Democratic Party throws out anyone who is a White racist, male sexist or straight homophobe. So all the White racists, male sexists and straight homophobes are marching off and voting Republican, because the Republican Party has opened the door wide open for them. This is insane and has to stop. It’s furthering rightwing economics which is ruining the country worse than any male sexism, White racism or homophobia is right now.
This is a matter of triage. What’s more important? Racism, sexism or homophobia or Left economics. Left economics trumps the other crap. We have to let the White, male and straight bigots back into the Left economics movement despite their bigotry. Some things take precedence over others. That’s what triage is all about. We don’t like their bigotry, but we won’t throw them out over it.
Before the 1960’s, it was no secret that many White workers were racists. Of course most were sexists and homophobes, since that was just normal back then. There are still many racist and homophobic White workers. It’s not the end of the world you know. But no one was drummed out of the US White labor movement or the Democratic Party for being a bigot. In fact, a large portion of the Party’s vote was the bigot vote (Southern Democrats, Arkies, Okies, Rust Belt working class, etc.).
An economic Left movement would elect economically progressive people. Anyone joining government as an economic progressive would be on board with rest of the Left anyway. Economic progressives are not going to vote to hurt women, gays and Blacks, and even if they do, that harm is less damaging that rightwing economics.
What’s being pushed that’s harmful to these groups anyway?
Don’t Ask Don’t Tell: Nice to overturn it, but Left economics takes precedence.
Lily Ledbetter Equal Pay Act: Nice for women but Left economics is a higher priority. Women have suffered pay discrimination from Day One in this country. It’s unpleasant, but it doesn’t seem to be killing them.
Pilgow Discrimination Against Black Farmers Law: It would be nice to address the discrimination that Black farmers suffered, but Left economics is higher priority.
We have to draw some lines in the sand.
No to overturning anti-discrimination laws against Blacks and other races.
No to overturning Roe v Wade.
No to recriminalization of homosexuality.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

0 thoughts on “More on the Open Door For Bigots on the Economic Left”

  1. Very sensible and rational. Also very never-gonna-happen-ever. Here’s why. Even if we ignore the unbreakable marriage between racism and me-and-my-shotgun-against-the-world libertarian conservatism in the U.S., you will never get these people to get past the idea that people of a different race are benefiting from the leftist economic policies. Even if they and other white people benefit more, they’ll never get past this. The bums (of a certain color) on welfare have been a staple of conservative propaganda since the 1960s. It is now firmly lodged in the conservative (i.e. typical white people) brain, and it’s not going anywhere, ever.
    The success and mainstream acceptance of policies before that date rested on the fact that most white Americans barely realized minorities existed. To the extent they did, they didn’t think about them much. Back in the 1950s or so, even acknowledging blacks (Negroes) in a non hostile way made you a liberal of liberals. Few associated social ills or militancy with minorities. Look at movies and television of the time. Even the criminals and derelicts were snow white.
    I know this sounds like white bashing. It’s not. It’s normal human behavior. If the positions were reversed, blacks would behave the same toward whites, only more so. Same with Hispanics or any other group. Asians? Forget it. If you’re even the wrong kind of Asian, they’ll see you as subhuman. Three words: Rape of Nanking.
    For these reasons, getting soft core racists on board with left economics is never gonna happen. I repeat: Never. Gonna. Happen. Ever.

  2. Ironically, consider this: The minorities are the very people you want for your non culturally Marxist leftist project. They mostly support redistributive economics, but they go to church, believe in traditional sex roles, and hate (really, really, really hate) gays and men who act like women. Marriage made in heaven.

    1. “Ironically, consider this: The minorities are the very people you want for your non culturally Marxist leftist project.”
      Not really.
      ” They mostly support redistributive economics,”
      Well, they’re okay with distributing whitey’s money. I doubt they would really be okay with redistributing there own kinds money is they could avoid it. I also don;t believe that asians will ever support tariffs or other measures to protect american workers from 20 cent an hour labor.
      ” but they go to church,”
      Yeah, at Jeremiah Wright’s church.
      ” believe in traditional sex roles,”
      Who’s tradition? Muslims marrying four women is not something I would support.
      ” and hate (really, really, really hate) gays and men who act like women.”
      At least openly. How many are on the “down low”? Actually, Al Sharpton and other have made the “case” that homos are a part of the civil right movement. I guess if you consider that the modern civil rights movement is basically a racket it makes sense.
      ” Marriage made in heaven.”
      Minorities tend to have lots of illegitimate kids.

      1. I was sorta being tongue in cheek, although I do think there’s something to it. First, they’re perfectly happy to “redistribute” other brothers’ money. Just ask any middle/upper class black you know who still has ghetto relatives. And there are a lot of blacks and hispanics whose religion is virtually indistinguishable from that of white evangelicals. They aren’t all going to Jeremiah Wright’s church. As for the social problems, lower income whites have them too, although not to the same degree. Look at red state stats on marriage, divorce, teen pregnancy, etc.

        1. It’s surprising that the social conservatives and the christian right don’t realize that they have potential allies in hispanics and that their cause could benefit from a massive influx of hispanics who would support their politics.

  3. “No to overturning anti-discrimination laws against Blacks and other races.”
    What do you consider an “anti-discrimination law?” Affirmative action? Forget it, that’s not really a concession.
    “No to overturning Roe v Wade.”
    That would actually be a lot easier for many to accept than you think. Many people on racist sites say that they’re for abortion because blacks get large number of abortions and they don’t want anymore violent blacks roaming the streets in 15-20 years.
    If you really wanted to make a movement based on left wing economics I don’t think integrating “racists” will be the best idea after reading this. The best idea would be for said “racists” to form their own movement and ally themselves with you when it came to economic issues. As americans we should have learned the lessons of failed integration.

  4. I believe that Joe Sixpack is far more concerned with his gun rights than he is with abortion. If the left would follow Howard Dean’s example in Vermont, that would take away one very large plank from the right wing.
    Let everyone keep their guns and mind their own beeswax.

  5. An “economic Left movement” will evolve into a formal party before it makes any meaningful political gains which can withstand reactionary onslaught. This party would have to do more than “tolerate,” it would have to foster a spiritual ethnocentricism.

  6. “Lily Ledbetter Equal Pay Act: Nice for women but Left economics is a higher priority. Women have suffered pay discrimination from Day One in this country. It’s unpleasant, but it doesn’t seem to be killing them.”
    I just want women to be judged by their qualifications rather than their appearance in the professional world.

  7. Wilmot Robertson “Dispossessed Majority” said it best. White women’s careers should be post stream-lined. (My term). This addresses feminism and Euro-American family values.
    White women should be encouraged to have at least medium-sized families early on, then streamlined into a professional career when the kids are nearly grown. By 40 or so.
    No fault divorce would doubtlessly have to go.
    Sorry-no other way to perpetuate progressive Euro-Am. Culture. For you sexual anarchists, let me put it this way. No other way to ensure enough societal stability to allow you to engage in rebellious anarchy in an otherwise safe and stable environment.

    1. “White women should be encouraged to have at least medium-sized families early on, then streamlined into a professional career when the kids are nearly grown. By 40 or so.”
      Even if I thought that were correct, I would not come out and say it. That is not feasible and could kill the whole movement in its infancy. I prefer the working mother, or rather, working family model.

      1. I respect women who prefer to be housewives and several of my relatives have done so. However, most of my female relatives have had jobs outside the home going back a couple of generations. This had more to do with being working class than with being feminists. Most of them liked working though and I don’t think most of them would want to give it up.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *