dagblog - Comments for "Class Over Race: The New Old Progressive Agenda"

Seems like it's always ticked

Michael Maiello — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 10:55:26 +0000

In reply to Class Over Race: The New Old Progressive Agenda

Seems like it's always ticked off the Occupy critics that the movement is made up largely of employed people, particularly employed white people. Means that the usual dog whistles won't work. It also means that you can have a job but still not be getting your share. Which means the myth of America as a classless society, unlike Britain, just isn't true. That's going to shake a lot of fundamental beliefs.

I don't have a problem with

Peter Schwartz — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 08:22:34 +0000

In reply to I believe when the new

I don't have a problem with the religious dimension in the present movement, but I'm not sure you're right about the history.

Perhaps with American utopianism and transcendentalism and the civil rights movement (or some of it)...

But the union movement wasn't particularly religious, as I recall. Maybe a better way of putting it, there wasn't much friction between folks who were in the movement from a religious standpoint and those who weren't.

So, for example, non-religious people had NO problem marching with King or working with the black churches. It's now more of a problem because of the anti-gay and anti-abortion positions of some chunk of the black church community.

I am reading a book "The

rmrd0000 — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 07:49:24 +0000

In reply to I strongly believe that this

I am reading a book "The Negro's God" written in 1938 by Benjamin Mays who was then a Professor of divinity at Howard University and later became President of Morehouse. The book did a scholarly look at how black authors from Revolutionary times to 1937 viewed God. There were three general categories; 1) God as the ultimate compensator (Your reward is in heaven), 2) God as supporter in combat (Ex: Joshua and the battle at Jericho was a message to fight for your rights), and 3) the communist view (Frankly meaning that there is no God). It appears that the view as communism = Godless was not uncommon.

Yes, he became more a

PeraclesPlease — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 07:30:33 +0000

In reply to MLK, I think, was moving in

Yes, he became more a champion for the oppressed everywhere, and did have a sense that it was a class issue.

A few comments: 1) William

PeraclesPlease — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 07:29:20 +0000

In reply to Class Over Race: The New Old Progressive Agenda

A few comments:

1) William Jennings Bryan would make a strange progressive by today's standards. (Even his Silverite position was just another metal substitution for gold, not a free currency system, and his ultra-religion in the Scopes monkey trial is well-documented)

2) The Irish dominated immigration all through the 1800's, so they weren't exactly a minority in 1900, nor were they powerless.

3) There were people in the early ACLU like Helen Keller who favored unsurprisingly rights for minorities and the disabled, such as her early support for the NAACP.

4) The racism of 1900 was tied to imperialism, class distinction, and the crumbling view of what was owed to whites. Mark Twain headed the Anti-imperialism League in 1901, while being publicly anti-racist, including his support for black newspapers and supporting Chinese in the Boxer Rebellion, blacks in the Congo, Filipinos in their fight against US troops.

5) The problems for the black community have shifted from legal prohibitions to rampant economic injustice. Blacks can pretty well go anywhere they want, work where they want (yes, still racist limitations) - but they are much more likely to be ripped off for mortgages, loans, and other opportunities. So taking the MLK birthday opportunity in the middle of our economic crisis years to note that blacks too are part of the 99% is not unreasonable.

Note - this is not particularly "class" - no one's asking rich basketball players to give back their money, and people like Soros, Buffett, Gates are still admired - in part because they support a balance of earned income and paid responsibility. While 1% unfairly points to the top of the wealth, the cry is distinctly focused on those who've rigged the deck and are dealing from the bottom - likely a much bigger threat to the livelihood and happiness of US blacks than overt racism at this point, as you can escape the ghetto, but you can't escape the theft coming from government and some of our largest, most crooked corporations.

Embarrassing. I always do

Michael Wolraich — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 07:06:20 +0000

In reply to Pssst Genghis, note

Embarrassing. I always do that with Bryan for some reason. Thanks.

European socialism never took

artappraiser — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 06:56:23 +0000

In reply to I believe when the new

European socialism never took root here, in part because of its militantly atheist orientation.

I strongly believe that this is not a reason except for a small minority, like the minority who preferred to decry "godless communism" rather than just decrying communism.

The majority of Americans of European heritage have a proud family narrative passed down of leaving "the old country" because of the lack of self-determination in the old country. Those that came because of discrimination of religion is played up in old style history books and when someone wants to debate freedom of religion. But the religion thing is only one of the many "lack of self-determination" reasons and is actually minor in comparison to many of the others.

There are far more who came because of hidebound class structures or government rules about the ability to own land, start a business, educational opportunity or similar in the OLD countries. The European brand of socialism was often as not seen as just another version of the old country government bureaucracy, where certain people get ability to advance and others do not, and there are always a lot of rules about what everyone can do and what they can't, often as not related to the written and unwritten rules of earlier days.

When you figure out some types of socialism that don't get involved with social engineering and don't include government jobs that are more concerned with following thousand-page rule books than serving citizens, I think that is when you will win over a majority of Americans (see Social Security or GI Bill.) And the majority will be also quite happy with it being administered regardless of religion or creed. Just don't carry the big government uber alles too far

P.S. Reading some of your recent essays, it was hard for me not to be reminded of the dismal historic record that utopian communes have in the U.S. Not only do they not last long, they do not retain much mythic status; there are no romantic equivalents of the Israeli kibbutz story here. Usually the story is: people got fed up with the power games developing in such communities and left to try something else, saying something along the lines of: thank god (small g,) it's a free country.

And as far as you seeing the global OWS movement as a sign of fondness for the communal rising among the younger generation, I will just note that contrary to a lot of spin, Mohammed Bouazazi immolated himself over frustration with government regulation of his tiny one-man business, where those in government treated him like he was many steps below them as a human; it's pretty fitting that he was posthumously awarded the "Sakharov Prize"

Pssst Genghis, note

artappraiser — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 06:53:14 +0000

In reply to Class Over Race: The New Old Progressive Agenda

Pssst Genghis, note misspelling of William Jennings' last name, not good for an author on the era; feel free to delete this comment after editing

This resonates with me. I've

Verified Atheist — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 06:40:48 +0000

In reply to Class Over Race: The New Old Progressive Agenda

This resonates with me. I've often had similar thoughts. As you say, racism hasn't been banished, but it's at least been tarnished. Almost no one anymore openly admits to being racist. It's all dog whistles. On the other hand, many people see nothing wrong with being classist/elitist; I often have to struggle with it myself. It's easy to see with race (or sex) that you're born with it, so it seems obviously unfair to discriminate based on it. With sexual orientation, there's also truth to that, but it's obviousness varies from person to person. With class, however, many people think that anyone could be upwardly mobile if they just worked hard enough, and that's true for some people. Of course, the best time to work hard is when you're youngest, and the reason you're most likely to work hard is because you have a good support system, which usually comes from being born into the "right" class, so…

Pardon my ramblings, but I find it hard to talk about this without getting either too long winded or too hand waving.

Even his Silverite position

Dan Kervick — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 06:40:20 +0000

In reply to A few comments: 1) William

Even his Silverite position was just another metal substitution for gold, not a free currency system, and his ultra-religion in the Scopes monkey trial is well-documented.

A free currency system would hardly have progressive results. It would remove the monetary authority of the people of the United States from public hands, and permit the banks to form an oligopolistic private sector replacement in which monetary "policy" decisions would simply be the corporate decisions of plutocratic leaders.