I know. But the statement from the Counterpunch article. . . . Is exactly that.
Yes, that decontextualized sentence alone can indeed be parsed that way. But let’s not ignore please what the piece’s author means by “substance,” that is, policies that will effectively counter our decades-long slide into the noxious muck of late capitalism/neoliberalism.
Oh. Well, I suppose the original claim here-- that identity politics as a term/conceptshould be consigned to the dustbin of history-- hasn’t been settled. Nor has what I wrote about front stage and backstage political reasoning been acknowledged.
These things can indeed be tough to juggle and parse through in comment threads, especially when typing super fast.
The Veep is almost never picked for their politics - those are always reflective of the top of the ticket. Given that we’ve always had white Protestant guys (With one exception for race and one exception for religion 60 years ago) - I’m sanguine about expanding who gets included in the identity politics picks.
The top of the ticket determines what the policies are. Harris’s campaign website policy pages no longer exist.
I don’t think the quote from Orphan’s article is decontextualized. The whole article talks about his disappointment in going with neoliberalism over progressivism. His objections to Harris have everything to do with policy and nothing to do with identity. Why throw it in there? It has no place in the argument he makes - except as a dog whistle.
Why? Well, to spell out parts that didn’t need spelling out for me, they wrote:
US American liberal friends seem thrilled . . . . Biden and Harris have been forgiven or, better yet, not even noted for their centrist, rightwing past.
And a bit later:
The Democratic establishment is once again banking on identity politics in favor of substance. It is digging in its heels to the noxious muck of late capitalism, as it always has.
Many US American liberals are especially thrilled, and all too willing to forgive or overlook the “centrist, rightwing past” of both Biden and Harris, because Biden chose a person who ticks several identity boxes. Sounds like objectionable “identity politics” to me, when having a minority face in a high place is more thrilling than having a candidate actually willing to fight for explicitly stated progressive policies (which, liberal moderates seem to think, are too much to ask for right now, don’tcha know).
This is a tactical difference of opinion. Are you more effective complaining about the results of the election at this stage in the process or by gaining some leverage with the option most amenable to your views?
That seems like a cop out. Criticizing people for celebrating that a woman of color has been selected as a VP candidate for a major party and assuming that’s the only reason they will vote for Biden/Harris is shitty. People can be happy for the historic step, while still evaluate her policies, her past, and the Dem platform aside from that. It doesn’t signify that Biden and Harris have been “forgiven” for their past. The assumption that such people are one dimensional is a bad-faith rhetorical construct that is all too often utilized by the dirtbag left.
For instance, I can hold the thoughts in my mind at the same time that, 1. I’m glad Biden picked a woman of color; 2. It’s really tone-deaf to pick a prosecutor in the context of BLM; 3. It’s a defensive move when the Dems should be on the attack, 4. There were many better choices available, 5. I can’t wait to see Harris pick apart Pence in debates, 6. Progressives have to keep the pressure up to make sure Biden/Harris implement at least part of our priorities.
The problem with citing Harris’ selection as “identity politics” is, even the writers who acknowledge that there are more important reasons why Harris was chosen still obsess about her race and gender. She’s clearly much more than that - she’s a person with a fierce intelligence and strong will - and even if I don’t agree with her on everything, I can respect her for both of those attributes. How do we ever get past race and gender as bias against people when even so-called progressives throw it at them as a criticism? That’s a Catch 22. Pick a white dude = that’s white supremacist business-as-usual. Pick a Black woman = identity politics, even when she’s smart and strong and aligns with the candidate’s politics.
And I think that’s what it comes down to: it’s not really about Harris at all. It’s just another round of whinging about Biden, and his politics. That’s fair, and I agree he’s not the choice to move the country forward. But that question’s already been settled. Using Harris’ selection as a proxy for the same old argument is not only disingenuous, it is sometimes (as we’ve seen from other posters, in other threads) racist in itself.
This. But also build up some leverage and access for after the election by putting effort into getting your best option elected. And making connections with people who’ll end up being appointed- maybe even yourself or someone you push for. There’s a reason a black woman was selected this time - because you dance with the one who brung you.
And I applaud you for that. I also haven’t been lumping you in with the liberal Dem fan base that I and others (on the “dirtbag left”?..okay…) are talking about. Show me another Dem voter who thinks about these issues with a tenth (wait, i guess a sixth) of the complexity of your list, and I’ll show you a member of a group that surely constitutes a tenth or less of Dem voters.
I’m not saying she isn’t, and I’m tired now of repeating that.
Oh come now. I would’ve been happy ideologically with someone like Sanders, or with a – gasp! – white woman like Warren. As I said (to repeat myself again), what matters most to me is what politicians do (and to add to that, believe), not who they are. Which is NOT to say (being a somewhat complex thinker myself) that it’s not a great thing that Harris represents underrepresented identity categories.
Hoo boy. . .
Okay, I’ll just say again, yeah, my dismay about the selection of Harris is not really about Harris at all. It’s about her past, and likely future, efforts toward maintenance and even furtherance of the neoliberal status quo.
As I read these threads, this is where I’m lost. Past behavior (especially with all of the unforeseen things happening now) isn’t even on my radar, because we’ve seen behavior that didn’t reflect what came before when people get elected to positions of power. Who is more likely to bring about change for the better? Who represents a shift from the current mess to competent leadership? At this point, those are the major points I hope are getting through to voters.
Well if I thought any future members of what I hope will be a new administration read tjis here bbs, I’d be saying different things here!
I dunno, we mostly all just kinda speak our onions here, don’t we? I don’t see a lot of trying to convince others to go out and do different things going on here.
You never do know. Some people I worked with on campaigns did end up in the admin. Back when the Local Hatch Act didn’t apply to me & I could be more involved in campaigns.
I would definitely not lump you into that category. I know from past discussions you have deep roots in progressivism, and I’ve learned much over the years from your posts. We have some other posters here, though…
Take your pick from the major nightly comedy show hosts (Myers, Colbert, Noah), much of their audiences, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, etc. I had a conversation with my mom (a lifelong Dem, retired public schoolteacher, an activist in the Civil Right Movement when she was a teenager). Once she was winding down celebrating Harris’ selection, we went through all of the above points. Her #1 reason for liking Harris (who she supported during the primaries) is that she’s a strong, outspoken, unapologetically smart woman. And there’s nothing wrong with that. But it’s not just that.
Listen to Colbert’s interview with April Ryan from a couple of days ago.
In it, Ryan points out that Harris helps carry forward that vision that Biden is trying to get across of a “We The People” America. Will that look like what we want? Probably not. But it is an opportunity to jam in some important steps forward. Harris jumped on the M4A bandwagon in the primaries. Was that just jockeying for position or a real policy change? We don’t know yet.
I believe you. But I don’t believe it’s the position stated in Orphan’s article. It neglects Harris’ embracing of M4A (assuming it’s real, which we kinda have to do at this point) and lumps her in with Joe’s positions entirely. It highlights the bad things she did as CA AG, but ignores the good things.
So, I guess what I’m saying is that, if people don’t like her policy positions, then great - I don’t either. But by bringing up identity politics, that undermines the point. Because it says that Harris is not qualified for the position. And that’s blatantly untrue.
I think this is a healthy attitude. In my experience, when a person changes their strongly-held beliefs, political or otherwise, they tend to hold the new beliefs far more strongly than the old ones. Harris’s Senate record is cause for hope.
Biden of course notoriously changes his political positions the way people change their socks. This suggests that his political views are not strongly held. Again, that too can because for optimism, especially if the cabinet he puts together is similar in spirit to the campaign staff he put together.
The Post Office has used these locking red caps for several years when there have been incidents of theft. I’m not saying I have any knowledge that that’s what’s happening here, but I think it is too easy to jump to conclusions about this photo. You can bet your sweet bippy that this phase of Trump’s assault on the USPS isn’t going to be touched off in beautiful downtown Burbank. (Even if it is Adam Schiff’s district.)
FWIW, he’s now deleted the tweet. Apparently these drive-up slots have been sealed since the Covid outbreak began, but the mail slot on the building is still open.
That doesn’t mean there aren’t genuine administration attacks on the USPS, but these mailboxes don’t seem to be connected to them.
