If you think you’re supporting your argument about sexism or racism by saying Bill Maher agrees with you…
11 Likes
It’s not sexist or racist to say we shouldn’t have some liberal purism test to be the nominee. Try again, your argument is nonsense.
Fyi, using an opportunistic self-serving bigoted pseudo-liberal like Maher to emphasize your point doesn’t lend any cred to your argument.
12 Likes
For me it’s self-driving vehicles. Commercial driving is the number one career in most states for people with a high school diploma or less, so when we see self-driving vehicles becoming the norm as opposed to human-operated ones then automation in general will definitely have the kind of catastrophic impact on the labour market that Yang is talking about. However, for the technology to become that prevalent will requires overcoming some difficult technological hurdles (e.g. the “snow problem”) as well as the creation of a regulatory and safety and legal liability framework. I’m not saying that’s 20 years off, but I’m also not saying it’s 5 years off as Yang is implying.
I do think that a UBI is going to be a central solution to the externalities of automation, but I’m looking for the FALC kind rather than the exploitative neoliberal UBI I’ve envisioned elsewhere.
6 Likes
Again, that’s not what anyone here or the creator of the composite image is saying. What’s being pointed out is simply that white males still dominate American politics and that we should be making more room for people who aren’t white males – especially when we want to get the epitome of the horrible variety of white male conservative politician out of the White House.
You may consider stating the obvious to be counterproductive, but I’d argue that it still isn’t all that obvious to a large number of Americans, including too many Democrats.
Policy is often informed by the personal assumptions and priorities of the politician. If most politicians are white males, even well-meaning ones, what do people think the policy outcomes in general will be for women of colour? (trick question: we already know)
10 Likes
George H.W. Bush was a white guy and a republican. Authored and passed the Americans with Disabilities Act. 1980’s
Lyndon B. Johnson was a white guy and a democrat. Co-Authored and passed the Civil Rights Act. Also helped create the Democratic Black Caucus.1960’s
Abraham Lincoln was a white guy and republican. Authored and passed the Emancipation Proclamation. 1800’s
No bigots would have objected to that, especially because there are a lot of white guys with disabilities out there.
On the clear understanding that his party lost the South for a generation, along with many white male Dixiecrat politicians. Although the consequences for going up against the prerogatives of other white males could be more … fatal:
All you’ve shown (at least in the second two cases) is that it takes a truly courageous white male politician to “betray” the interests of his fellow white males. That becomes less of an issue when a party starts allowing for more diverse voices and candidates and explicitly rejects the idea that “white male” should be the default (which happened to a certain extent with Obama, and no-one is really arguing that the right-wing backlash to him is the direct fault and inherent flaw of that decision).
9 Likes
[Sees that somebody is listing off random great achievements of white guys as an argument that we should not point out sexism or racism]
9 Likes
12 Likes
People are literally liking something that generalizes that entire disabled population in the US? isn’t that discriminatory and/or bigoted? You’re arguing about racism and/or sexism but, making discriminatory generalizations about Americans with disabilities? wow, takes all kinds I guess.
How does that generalise the entire disabled population of the U.S.? The ADA was an important piece of legislation in part because it acknowledged the varied nature of disability.
My point is that white males didn’t see the ADA as a threat to their prerogatives. If for some reason they had, Bush the Elder would have binned it as another example of government over-reach.
10 Likes
The whole idea that there is a “purity test” is just a way dismissing people’s concerns. Would you vote for a candidate who wanted the death penalty for abortion? Who wanted to eliminate taxes on the top 1% earners to reward “job creators”? Who wanted to close the southern border?
If the answer is no, is that a “purity test” that a candidate has to pass to get your support?
When people talk about purity tests they seem to usually be referring to:
- Some people would like to see more diversity instead of all cishet white christian men with no disabilities (etc)
- Some people don’t want to vote for a candidate who they believe has sexually harassed or assaulted people
- Some people don’t want to vote for a candidate who supports the economic status quo
And I honestly don’t know what to say back to that. The first one is an illusion conjured by people who still can’t get their heads around which way racism flows despite the fact that the highest polling candidate in the primaries in a white guy who isn’t even in the primaries. Everyone who would like to see more diversity at the top will get up early in the morning to vote for a loaf of Wonder bread to beat Trump. The latter two are serious goddamned issues, not “purity tests”.
I’m struggling to read what you read in @gracchus’ statement. The statement was that there are many white men with disabilities, that is true and doesn’t generalize about people with disabilities at all.
12 Likes
You literally just wrote this.
It’s not though, a quick search garnered this: “According to the 2000 U.S. Census, the African American community has the highest rate of disability in the United States at 20.8 percent, slightly higher than the overall disability rate of 19.4%.[27] Given these statistics, it can be suggested that African Americans with disabilities experience the most severe underemployment, unemployment, and under education compared to other disability groups”. (2000, US Census). https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1P3-4502795/brown-v-board-of-education-and-the-american-with
Yes I did. Is it factually incorrect? Is it excluding the fact that lots of women and people of colour also have disabilities?
10 Likes
It has to be admitted, you found examples of three white guy Presidents doing some pretty cool things.
Now do three examples from other kinds of US Presidents (and not white guys this time, to be fair).
12 Likes
Who knew a flame war could blow up over @beschizza merely pointing out the obvious? Aside from Rob, of course.
13 Likes
“There are a lot of animals that are rabbits out there”
Does not claim that non-rabbits are not animals.
“There are a lot of flowers that are red out there”
Does not claim that non-red things aren’t flowers.
“There are a lot of white guys with disabilities out there”
Does not claim that non-white people (or non-guy people) don’t have disabilities.
10 Likes
I always thought that Devo guy looked like randy Travis
2 Likes
Except it seems like he’s not interested in taxing the upper classes, but in putting MORE burden on the rest of society. So there’s that. Any solution to our society which does NOT include taxation on the upper classes is dead in the water for me.
11 Likes
