Resignation

[defacto7]

From the git go let me say that at this point Northam should resign . He should resign first of all because of the pain he has caused the black community. He should also resign because he wasn't forthcoming about his past from the beginning, forgivness or not. He also should resign just because of the political baggage that this situation has created.

/But/ we must not loose the reality that we have been attacked by a ploy that has been used for thousands of years, divide and conquer, and it works. He may be guilty as hell but he was used to divide us and the enemy won this battle.

I'm not saying we give up principle. I am saying that we are up against a unified adversary who are unprincipled hypocrites and don't care if they are. No doubt they will continue to win more of these attacks as they sift through the archives to take advantage of our principles and exonerate their own guilty thieves, misogynists and racists.

We have to find a decisive and unified plan to defeat this tactic. And if we take the high ground we had better not find ourselves divided; we'll be falling into that overly traveled pit to insignificance. No, we can't afford the luxury of eating our own.

[snowybirdie]

1. Well said

You said it better than i tried to. We can t be torn apart now by the real racists GOP.

[defacto7]

2. Thanks. I try.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

3. Someone taking advantage of a deep, deep vulnerability is not an "attack" in politics.

We have to find a decisive and unified plan to defeat this tactic.

Seems like not tolerating racism is a pretty good place to start?

No, we can't afford the luxury of eating our own.

Please see this excellent thread about eating our own: https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211762298

[defacto7]

5. Thanks for the input WG.

When you say "taking advantage of a deep... vulnerability is not an attack..." I think the words taking advantage automatically make it an attack. I sincerely doubt the rw is being benevolent. You could use other words but it's the same conclusion if something is used as a device to take advantage of an opponent. We attack our opponents to gain a political advantage as well. Being a deep vulnerability doesn't change much when one has no moral affinities.

Seems like not tolerating racism is a pretty good place to start?

I agree 100% but that's the goal not the plan. How do we go about not tolerating it in a decisive way and not become divided just because of the process? What the rw would love is for us to get caught in a divisive process they don't have to deal with. They can say they are against racism and be racist, they can just come out and say they are racists and yet still be united. Why? They have no problem with lying, cheating and the destruction of the nation; they actually seem empowered by an ideology that allows the ends to justify their means. We do have a problem with that kind of warped thinking and we need to know how to combat their tactics with tactics that are devastating yet don't compromise our values or our unity.

Eating our own is an overused cliché and I probably should not have repeated it in this context. I was referring to us eating each other as a group.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

6. Hmmmm.

I agree 100% but that's the goal not the plan. How do we go about not tolerating it in a decisive way and not become divided just because of the process?

Addressing, unpacking and unlearning racism is inherently divisive, because some people will always resist it. Always. White people have a lot to lose if privilege goes away! It's going to be uncomfortable for a lot of people, which is why it's so difficult to address.

What the rw would love is for us to get caught in a divisive process they don't have to deal with.

And what black people would love is for the party they vote for as the lesser of two evils would be for it to stop taking them for granted. Who would you rather make happy?

They can say they are against racism and be racist, they can just come out and say they are racists and yet still be united. Why?

Because their base is also racist. And?

They have no problem with lying, cheating and the destruction of the nation; they actually seem empowered by an ideology that allows the ends to justify their means. We do have a problem with that kind of warped thinking and we need to know how to combat their tactics with tactics that are devastating yet don't compromise our values or our unity.

Seems to me that not putting up with a racist governor just because he's a Democrat is a great start!

[defacto7]

8. I agree with everything you say.

As I said at the beginning, he needs to go. What are we going to do now that this is settled?

Your point about the difficulty of undressing, unpacking and unlearning racism is an understatement. How are we going to stay united behind the goal to defeat the right wing and not splinter internally? Do we route out our own political demons exposing and disposing of them? Do we wait for the rw to do it? Do we find the thing that divides the rw and splinters them? These are only a couple of possibilities but we have to decide between righteousness and survival and I want both... for all of us... and although I will always choose the first the latter is looming.

[better]

4. My personal take

is that we need to come up with a plan that does a better job of taking into account the complete picture, and does not conflate conduct well in the past being forgiven with it being excused. I think it is vitally important that we stand strong on the idea that racist conduct must not be excused, but we also need to remain willing to tolerate forgiveness of horrible conduct long past, when and where such forgiveness is warranted.

Thus far, I think my position is that Northam should resign. But not because his conduct from three and a half decades ago is inexcusable (which it is) or unforgivable (which it might or might not be), but rather because stepping down and allowing his Lt. Gov. to take over is in the best interest of mending race relations, and bolstering the chances of us achieving what must be achieved in the 2020 election.

I think we need to have a broad and frank discussion about the fact that the road away from racism is one that people travel one step at a time, not one on which one is permanently at one position, or instantly teleports from one end to the other. Where one has been can certainly be informative, it is not on its own determinative of the merits of where they have been since, and where they are now. We need to give honest assessment to the complete picture, acknowledge where people have made conscious decision to change for the better, and condemn where they have not.

I think we should also be mindful that exposure to the real world is one of the most powerful agents of change, especially when it comes to racism. I know that in my own youth, I held what I now know to be false and racist views, because those views were the prevailing ones in my formative environment, and I did not yet have contradictory evidence to show me otherwise. What taught me the truth of those views was having enough exposure to the black community to recognize for myself that (and why and how) those views were wrong. But then, I also grew up in Memphis, so I had the opportunity to amass that experience for myself quite early in life, because I had the opportunity to learn about black people from black people, not just from what racist white people said about them, or how things were presented to me in the media. That's an advantage I had in the evolution of my views that many did not.

Also, I think we should be mindful that the sheer scope of what we can be expected to have witnessed, encountered, and come to more personally understand is vastly broader today than it was in 1985. Back then, there was what you saw in the media, and what you witnessed with your own eyes. If you lived in a segregated environment, that was likely to be all you knew, unless and until you got outside that environment, where you could observe the raw truth of reality for yourself. There was no internet over which to come to know and understand people with whom you had no direct physical interaction.

Now again, that does not excuse conduct in the past, but it does at least plausibly justify forgiveness of it, when supported by events and conduct in the time between that inexcusable conduct and the present. And I do believe we need to do a better job of giving that entire picture more reasonable consideration, and temper our reaction to what was with a fair analysis of what has since been and now is. All of them deserve honest judgement.

[defacto7]

7. What a well thought through reply.

I appreciate your point of view. Moderation with strength and devotion to facts comes to mind. I don't think moderation and strength contradict. To the contrary, think they solidify the stance and prove the facts.