Before 2016, NO ONE said there was a conflict between "social justice" & "economic justice"

[Ken Burch]

Before this election, it was simply accepted that anyone who fought for economic justice was, in backing that, fully committed to backing social justice.

Before this election, economic justice was never dismissed as "a white thing".

Before this election, social justice was just as much about fighting poverty and unemployment as about fighting bigotry.

Before this election, it was accepted that, while the economic justice struggles were not identical, they were intrinsically linked.

Before this election, we all knew that it was impossible to truly defeat of racism, homophobia, trans phobia, sexism, religious and cultural bigotry, and any other form of prejudice without also defeating exploitation, unemployment, want and the fear of want.

Before this election, progressives knew that there was never any reason for the fight for social justice and the fight for economic justice ever to be treated as if they were not working towards the same goal: Justice For ALL.

It is unforgivable that anyone would ever decide to treat those two great struggles as if they could or should be pitted against each other.

[Recursion]

1. Tons of people did. It was a common trope among black and Asian writers, at least

Just because you didn't read it doesn't mean it wasn't said...

[Ken Burch]

2. What they said was that there had to be a harder push against bigotry.

Everyone who supported economic justice was in full agreement with that argument.

And economic justice activists were there in every anti-institutional racism fight there ever was.

Meanwhile, hardly anyone who was against fighting economic injustice gave a damn about fighting bigotry or defending choice.

It's not possible to fight bigotry in complete isolation from a struggle against economic injustice.

Corporate power wants bigotry to prevail. Capitalism depends on it.

We all know that, because the Sixties taught us that.

[Recursion]

11. Well, no, I'm thinking at least of liberal South Asian writers

who are frankly skeptical of the left's economic policies in general but also tired of being beaten to paralysis by cops or enraged mobs.

This isn't a new division; it's beem stewing for quite a while. Lots of white liberals want a level economic playing field and many people and seem to think that will solve everything.

[Ken Burch]

19. A level playing field won't solve everything(although most POC want a level field as well).

But bigotry can't be defeated on a field tilted towards the rich. The rich will always do all they can behind the scenes to preserve prejudice.

The backlash against the freedom movement after 1965 was driven by corporate manipulation of working-class white fears of falling into want. If it hadn't been for things like the real estate industry using fear of declining property values to manipulate working-class whites into a paranoid rage about blacks and latinos moving into white neighborhoods, the backlash likely wouldn't have happened.

And those South Asian writers(Amartya Sen and Arundhati Roy are also South Asian, and adamantly opposed to the whole neoliberal project) may just be trying to flatter the South Asian corporate sector by defending austerity and privatization. They seem not to notice that, as neoliberalism has spread through South Asia, nationalist racism(and beatings by mobs and cops)have massively increased in those countries, as police violence and greater austerity and privatization have always gone together in this country.

Profit and justice can't coexist.

[dsc]

3. that is flat out, gold carat false

To name one example Dennis Kucinich had to deal with this a whole bunch during both of his runs. To this day Nancy Kaptor is a down the line economic progressive but pretty much horrible on abortion and gay rights. Tim Ryan just recently announced he was no longer pro life. There has been a huge strain of economically progressive socially regressive politicians in our party for decades.

[Ken Burch]

5. Dennis was already pro-choice when he ran.

And a handful of people like Kaptur don't outweigh the 99.5% of economic justice supporters who are also sociak progressives.

[dsc]

6. he converted six months before his run

for good reason people who cared about those issues didn't trust him.

[boston bean]

4. Bernie Sanders separated the two issues pretty clearly, and there was a lot of support for him and

his comments. Which caused what you are writing about. We need to be at least honest about that.

Well, here's what you got. What you got is an African-American president, and the African-American community is very, very proud that this country has overcome racism and voted for him for president. And that's kind of natural. You've got a situation where the Republican Party has been strongly anti-immigration, and you've got a Hispanic community which is looking to the Democrats for help.

But that's not important. You should not be basing your politics based on your color. What you should be basing your politics on is, how is your family doing? ... In the last election, in state after state, you had an abysmally low vote for the Democrats among white, working-class people. And I think the reason for that is that the Democrats have not made it clear that they are prepared to stand with the working-class people of this country, take on the big money interests. I think the key issue that we have to focus on, and I know people are uncomfortable about talking about it, is the role of the billionaire class in American society.

http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2014/11/19/365024592/sen-bernie-sanders-on-how-democrats-lost-white-voters

[virtualobserver]

10. The point of that quote is that working class whites are voting against their own best interests....

because Democrats have abandoned working class people for big money interests and billionaires.

[boston bean]

13. good try.. from same article...

On why he says Democrats are losing white voters

Well, I am focusing on the fact that whether you're white or black or Hispanic or Asian, if you are in the working class, you are struggling to keep your heads above water. You're worried about your kids. What should the Democratic Party be talking about, Steve? What they should be talking about is a massive federal jobs program. There was once a time when our nation's infrastructure — roads, bridges, water systems, rail — were the envy of the world. Today that's no longer the case.

I would say if you go out on the street and you talk to people and say, "Which is the party of the American working class?" People would look to you like you were a little bit crazy, they wouldn't know what you were talking about, and they certainly wouldn't identify the Democrats.

[virtualobserver]

14. your new quote serves to reinforce rather than refute my point

Democrats have abandoned working class people for big money interests and billionaires

[boston bean]

15. have you read the OP? My responses are to that, and these quotes perfectly

display how Sanders feels economic issues are more important.

ie, you shouldn't be basing your vote on your color, it doesn't matter if you are black Asian, etc... it's how your family is doing economically.

[virtualobserver]

18. what his quote actually says is that black and hispanic people are voting in alignment...

with their interests and that white people are voting against their interests.

His point is that Democrats have abandoned economic justice, not that social justice is unimportant.

Democrats have sold their souls , and everyone is paying for it .

[GoneFishin]

7. Everyone who watched that episode unfold knows it was a sleazy attempt to draw a fake division

line custom tailored to create the appearance that Bernie was standing on the wrong side.

The faux outrage and attacks on anyone who pointed out that Bernie has always been the right side of the issue is proof that it was a simply a cheesy campaign tactic which has been replaced by even "nuttier and sluttier" tactics.

[baldguy]

8. Bullshit. Politics has been about making trade-offs for at least 25 centuries.

That doesn't change simply because Bernie Sanders can't seem to grasp the concept.

[Hortensis]

9. Idealism is great, but it's simply not true.

Not within the Democratic Party even. And HUGELY in the different ways liberals and conservatives view morality and justice. Look up "belief in a just world," and while you're at it remember that many people hold various mixtures of conservative and liberal positions.

[NCTraveler]

12. Patently false.

From beginning to end.

[libdem4life]

16. I'm stunned we are even having this conversation, let alone arguing about it.

But thanks for the Reality Check.

[Sancho]

17. Not true...I've known the difference for decades

Not to date myself, but we talked about social justice and how it was not purely economic in the 60s and 70s.

In fact, Bernie's speeches haven't changed much in decades. There is a swing towards inequality that has been explained by some international economists, but Bernie's positions are not new and the current inequality is not caused exclusively by US economic policies or tax policies or US regulations.

Heck, even in the days of Kennedy the recognition of economics as a subset of social justice was described by scholars and by activists.

Bernie's problem is that his plans for economic justice often miss the mark on social justice. If there's a higher minimum wage, it doesn't matter to an undocumented person (or even someone born here to undocumented parents) since you're off the books anyway. There are many other examples.