Classism

cross-posted from SavagePolitics.com

I have rarely read anything on the subject of class that was worth the effort it took to get to the end of the article. Defining class usually requires endless dry paragraphs, and no one is ever satisfied by the outcome. Raise the subject of class in conversation and someone from across the room will scream that class in America is dead. And yet class is as palpable to me as how I walk and talk, who I find funny and why, where I went to school, how I speak and to whom. Class is today's invisible prejudice. It is the cut no one sees or worse still, thinks is funny. It is a million dirty jokes, the last place you can put your disdain for others and no one will think less of you.  Class is also the issue that is gumming up this primary campaign like crazy glue.

After the Democratic primary results in Ohio on March 5, 2007, Heidi Przybyla on Bloomberg.com wrote:

Barack Obama has an Archie bunker problem. The white, blue-collar voters personified by the 1970's fictional television character cost Obama yesterday. His Democratic presidential rival, Senator Hillary Clinton of New York beat him 54 percent to 44 percent in industrial Ohio and 58 percent to 40 percent in heavily Catholic Rhode Island. In Ohio's 10th district of Cuyahoga county, a suburban enclave on Cleveland's west side that includes a large population of Polish-Americans, Clinton trounced Obama 61 percent to 37 percent, according to exit polls. In the state's Belmont county, an economically depressed Appalachian border area that is predominantly white, she had a 50-point lead over Obama...

Przybyla reported Joe Trippi, a former senior strategist for John Edwards, as saying:

Obama has had a problem with lower-income, downscale, blue-collar democrats from the beginning. He typically appeals to better educated, upscale Democrats.

Obama's chief strategist, David Axelrod, has denied this. But how he could do so is a puzzle to anyone who has followed Chicago politics.

Since he began running for public office the challenge Obama faces in working-class, white ethnic neighborhoods is well known. Richard Dorsch, a 53-year-old paramedic Fire Chief from Chicago's Edison Park  told Przybyla he supported Clinton in the Illinois primary, but he will vote for John McCain if Obama wins the nomination. This is why:

When he talks to you, it's like he's talking down to you. He doesn't have the experience to talk like that.

This is not racism which is the popular reason asserted for Obama's poor showing with white working class voters. It is class. And class is the elephant in the room that some pundits reference but always pejoratively. One can almost hear them saying, 'don't you get it? These ignorant racist stumblebums are the clods keeping Obama from sweeping to victory.'

Unfortunately, this demonstrates how little pundits do their homework. The issue of these voters is a huge, and perhaps insurmountable problem for the Democrats in November if Obama is their standard bearer. Kent Redfield, a professor of political studies at the University of Illinois in Springfield says:

When Democrats win national elections they really do put that old New Deal coalition back together. The have to get that Reagan Democrat.

The last time Democrats pulled this off was the election of Bill Clinton. After that the coalition was lost. This contributed to the unsuccessful bids by Carter for a second term, and then by Kerry and by Gore. All three it should be pointed out  were  perceived by the white working class of this coalition as wimpy, wordy or nerdy, out of touch, and not sympathetic to the needs of working people. It is critical to realize that race played no part in these decisions. And I do not believe racism from this constituency is playing a role in this primary process either. Rather, white working class people are going for Clinton over Obama because Obama doesn't `get them.' Moreover, he insults them.  It isn't only the infamous `bitter' remarks made to an affluent, audience in San Francisco where he characterizes this constituency--double whammied  by unemployment and hard times-- as "clinging to religion, guns and a distaste for people not like themselves." It is much, much deeper and since it has dogged him from his earliest days, it would seem apparently irreparable. Pryzybyla writes:

Chicago's 41st Ward is a classic white working-class neighborhood of bungalows, modest two-flats and Dutch colonials that shuts down on Pulaski Day, the March holiday celebrating Casimir Pulaski, a Pole who found in the Revolutionary War. An informal survey of employees at a local bank, gym, library and neighborhood restaurant turned up no Obama supporters. Some residents said they were concerned that he might not take into account the concerns of whites. `If Obama gets in, its going to be a black thing and its going to be all blacks for blacks,' said Victoria Mikulski, a 63-year-old clerk in Edison park. `Everything's got to be equal.'

Some might call this racism, but it is nothing of the kind. After decades of affirmative action which has promoted  AA `s over white working class candidates, these voters are wary. They have seen the way the Clintons have been assaulted and demeaned as racists. They have listened while Obama supporters have called them old and out of touch.  They know the jokes made at their expense, and they understand they have been scapegoated for decades as ignorant and prejudiced. They also know that the deck in terms of race and class has all been stacked on the side of race. No one wrote of their plight when  thirty-five years ago, a growing AA population on the city's west side pushed whites north into Edison Park. No one stood up for them when their jobs went south or overseas. And no one has cared much to talk about a standard of living that is sliding backwards.

Is it any wonder these people don't trust Obama? Veiled references to bigoted and  white trash voters, code for racist, has emanated like fumes off a garbage heap from the Obama campaign  from the outset. Al Sharpton on Feb. 17  called Hillary supporters, "uneducated, redncked white trash." And On April 24 Rhandi Rhodes, an Obama supporter and radio host, called Hillary voters "white trash." So lets take a moment and look at that terminology.  White trash is a noun. It is offensive slang. It is used as a disparaging term for a poor white person or poor white people/ and or as a disparaging term for a white person or white people perceived as being lazy and ignorant. Even now, in our age of political correctness, it is considered tolerable and even appropriate to ridicule  white persons of the lower economic class as ignorant, unintelligent, eccentric, crude, unattractive, lazy, racist, alcoholic, religious to the point of absurdity, inbred, and prone to violent behavior. Trailer Trash and Redneck of course are other equally demeaning terms.

On  Wednesday, April 23, David Axelrod explaining Obama's nearly 10 point loss the day before in Pennsylvania said on National Public Radio:

"The white working class has gone to the Republican nominee for many elections, going back even to the Clinton years. This is not new that Democratic candidates don't rely solely on those votes."

This is factually inaccurate.

It is also not helpful to the Democratic Party's chances in November if their candidate cannot carry this vote.  In  a 2006 piece for "The American Prospect" John Halpin and Ruy Teixeira write:

Keep in mind that Bill Clinton actually carried white working-class voters in both his successful presidential campaigns (by a single percentage point in both instances)... Progressives' difficulties here are underscored by the large size of this group. According to the 2004 Current Population Survey (CPS) Voter Supplement data, white working-class voters are a larger portion of the electorate than indicated by the exit polls -- 52 percent, rather than 43 percent. Based on educational attainment trends and population trends by race, a reasonable guess is that the size of the white working class in another 10 years, even though it is shrinking, will still be around 46 percent to 47 percent -- a very large group among which to be doing very poorly. In fact, a progressive majority coalition is simply not possible if that poor performance continues, despite the many ways in which demographic change and growth favor progressives, including the increasing proportion of single women within the white working-class population.

 http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?arti cleId=11443#4

But everywhere so-called progressives who decry racism in any form are rushing to malign and demean this core Democratic voting group. Perhaps nothing demonstrates this better than this picture in the Huffington Post which accompanied an article by Thomas Edsall titled: "On Course For Another White Guy Election"  

huffpo photo

As if the picture were not offensive enough. Edsall writes:

The prominent role of more centrist and conservative white men in the Democratic primary process is confounding to some. Just last year, Democratic political scientist Thomas F. Schaller was breathing a sigh of relief over the prospect that white men were a steadily diminishing factor in the political landscape. In an essay titled "So long, white boy" published September 17, 2007 on Salon, Schaller wrote:
Could 2008 be the year that Democrats finally admit an old sweetheart is never coming back, and stop pandering to the white male voter? The Democratic obsession with the down-home, blue-collar, white male voter, that heartbreaker who crossed the aisle to the Republicans many decades ago, may finally be coming to a merciful end....it's a waste of time and resources for the Democrats to pursue them -- a classic sucker's bet...Democrats finally seem to realize that cultural contortionism in the pursuit of Bubba produces little more than smiles on the faces of Republican consultants.

Inotherwords the progressive prejudice against the white working class has reached an apotheosis wherein the best one can do is wish they would just hurry up and die off. And yet in his article Schaller has to give the devil his due:

Yet centrist Democrats continue to urge the party to find new ways to lure white male voters back into the fold. Bill Galston, former domestic policy advisor to Bill Clinton and one of Washington's sharpest analysts, is a proponent of a Democratic reinvestment in white male voters.

Well, somebody gets it. But most do not. And our impervious and elitist attitude to class is the element that will lose Democrats the election.  It is more than I can bear, let alone understand, to see my parents and my friends ridiculed and written off as worthless, good only for dying off.  When death reigned out of the sky on 9/11, 2001, and stock brokers and financial analysis's were running downstairs out of the burning towers, firemen were running  upstairs to rescue the wounded and the helpless. Close to 350 white guys gave their lives that day in the service of their country.  And the whole world took their hat off to them. It is about time the Democratic Party did the same.



Display:


Absurd. (1.50 / 6)


by dystopianfuturetoday on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 07:36:38 PM EST

Re: Absurd. (2.00 / 5)

baseacid

How perfectly typical.


by Nobama on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 07:56:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Drink all the kool aid you like. (2.00 / 1)


by dystopianfuturetoday on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:21:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Drink all the kool aid you like. (2.00 / 5)

According to Gallup, 32 percent of Americans think Clinton "looks down on average Americans", compared to only 26 percent thinking the same thing of Obama.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/106744/Only-2 6-Say-Obama-Looks-Down-Americans.aspx

When "average Americans" is changed to "working-class Americans", the numbers are 32 for Hillary Clinton again, while Barack Obama and John McCain are at 25 and 24 percent, respectively.


by Mostly on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:29:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

But the evidence says otherwise.. (2.00 / 6)

Uncovered Healthcare expenses for technically insured people are the single greatest cause of formerly midle class people being stripped of their equity. Obama's healthcare plan will NOT ADDRESS THAT ISSUE ADEQUUATELY, Hillary's will.

Health disasters do not discriminate. However, Obamas healthcare plan DOES discriminate BY NOT ADDRESSING CURRENT DISCRIMINATION.

Hillary's healthcare plan, by ADEQUATELY covering everybody will make a HUGE difference to poor and middle class people. Rich people, who can afford to self-insure (go without insurance) aren't as threatened by sudden accidents or illness.

Why are poor abd middle class people voting against their best interests?

Why is anybody voting for Obama?


Universal healthcare IS a Democratic value
It's been defeated
Obama has the best $PIN that money can buy.
by architek on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 09:29:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: But the evidence says otherwise.. (2.00 / 3)

Way to stay ON TOPIC with your replies.

"This issue is a bigger problem for Clinton than Obama, and here's some facts to back it up."

"Obama's healthcare plan sucks!"


by Okamifujutsu on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:31:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Drink all the kool aid you like. (2.00 / 1)

Get out of here with your pesky facts - this is a Linfar diary, let's keep it a fact free zone :)


by interestedbystander on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:32:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Drink all the kool aid you like. (2.00 / 2)

nyit


by Nobama on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:31:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Texas Cracker is my Favorite Flavor (none / 0)

tex
by edmandspath on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:59:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Admitting you have a problem is the first step. (2.00 / 1)


by dystopianfuturetoday on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 11:07:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ayatollah Clinton Issues Fatwa Against Wright (none / 0)

... and the residents of North Carolina for their fire and brimstone preaching.


by bernardpliers on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:31:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Obama doesn't seem to .." (2.00 / 3)

In the comments below Linfar makes the claim that "Obama doesn't seem to like white people".  Isn't it time she was banned again?


by interestedbystander on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:52:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Obama doesn't seem to .." (2.00 / 1)

Sounds good to me, please do it (ban linfar).
I'm new here so don't know the process. How does it happen?
by dawolfe on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:15:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Obama doesn't seem to .." (2.00 / 3)

It's up to the mods - she's near the line at the moment, she'll be over it soon - then goodbye linfar.


by interestedbystander on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:26:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 5)

So when a voter says:    `If Obama gets in, its going to be a black thing and its going to be all blacks for blacks,' said Victoria Mikulski, a 63-year-old clerk in Edison park. `Everything's got to be equal.'

You say: Some might call this racism, but it is nothing of the kind.

So what would be a racist comment then?


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 07:40:24 PM EST

Re: Classism (1.00 / 2)

Yeah that woman is racist trash.


by Democratic Unity on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 07:45:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

well, they don't get it? (2.00 / 4)

The reason race shouldn't be brought up isn't that there is no racism, it's because things have to really change, blabbing doesn't help.  Of course black Americans have suffered the worst of the injustices. I think pretty much every immigrant group has overcome prejudice by pecking down and blacks have always been the downest and easiest to peck.  If there were enough to go around, then affirmative action wouldn't be controversial.  The pugs have won on racism since Reagan, and he's now seen as a great guy, weird?  I'm for Hillary but there is no way if Obama's our candidate that he'll do 'too much' for black Americans. Hillary's plans are more far-reaching, she'll invest in disadvantaged communities, and both universal pre-school and free post high school training or college will be a big help. People do need hope, that they can get ahead too, that's real.  It's not maybe fair that obama had to be a 'better' candidate to win, and here I don't mean more qualified, more knowledgeable, or more prepared, he's not the best of the two. I mean he ought never to have mentioned race, and he ought never to have said or implied that Bill Clinton and Hillary are racists. They aren't, and saying they are gives cover to real racists one's that really don't understand the reality in black communities, the garden variety injustice that black Americans experience daily, when they're stopped by police, for example. Racism needs to sleep until there is a level playing field for all poor black kids and all poor non-black kids.  Otherwise you get those who wrongly think blacks vote for him because they're racists in order to cover over their own lack of trust.  He's their favorite son, for goodness sake, why wouldn't blacks vote for him, whites too do, he's not a bad candidate, he's just not in my opinion anyway the best one.  And i'd say most all Democrats would be glad to have a president of color.  I know I would.  I want her because I agree with her most on the issues, and because Bush has left such a huge mess we need a workahholic wonk to make a dent in it. I'm not, however, against him.  If he were like her only him I'd be for him, and really if he were a her.  Hey, I'm also voting my sex, does that make me sexist?   I don't like admitting I'll campaign for him if he's the nom, cause I want her to win, but right now I must admit it. Yes, if he's the nom I'll work to get him elected. Not just because McCain would be a disaster either and he'd be the only plausible choice. I'd really like to see a president of color, and if I can't have her, I'll want him.  Does that make me a racist?  


by anna shane on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:51:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: well, they don't get it? (2.00 / 4)

I'm still old fashioned enough to think that giving disadvantaged groups a leg up is a good thing and not the same as promoting the old-boy network.

I'd promote a female candidate over a male one all other things being equal.  People have to get used to the idea of women and black people in positions of power before it's routine which is what the goal is.  I don't think that makes me racist or sexist.


by Mostly on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 09:05:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What little poor people have WILL be taken away.. (2.00 / 4)

if we dont band together to defend it.

For people of all backgrounds, black and white, poor and middle class.

Despite his lies, Obama represents the status quo far more than Hillary does. And for poor people, both black and white, what little they have is under attack. Its clear to me that Obama represents denial and silent acceptance of those forces.

Like his pal, slumlord Rezko, many of the forces that back Obama exist by exploiting high profit niches, in a form of modern colonialism. Its very profitable to exploit the poor and the powerless, because they can't defend themselves.

Poor people have very little but what they have will often be taken away if they have nobody to defend them. Obama has shown by his deceptive marketing of his helthcare plan that he is not above lying about important issues to get elected. Even if those lies hurt, or even destroy the lives of thousands or even millions of people.

As gas prices rise, urban real estate is becoming far more valuable. Public housing is no longer defended in Washington as it was in the past. Working class neighborhoods are threatened by predatory lenders and predatory healthcare costs and debt collection. An entire generation is being stripped of its equity and the good jobs that enabled its creation wont come back to help people rebuild it without pro-active intervention.

Urban housing is valuable to poor people because it is their homes. But its too valuable for poor people to occupy without active intervention by government to prevent it from being taken away from them, by one method or another. Thats another area where Obama's past scares me.

Nobody who had a well developed moral sense would have had such a close association with a slumlord like Rezko and then lied about it.

Nobody who cared about working people would steal our chance at a workable healthcare plan after the Bush fiasco by bait and switch as Obama is doing. That is why i think he is a pretender, a sham, and he should not be the Democrats' presidential candidate.


Universal healthcare IS a Democratic value
It's been defeated
Obama has the best $PIN that money can buy.
by architek on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 09:48:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Really? (2.00 / 1)

blacks have always been the downest and easiest to peck. tell that to all the Native Americans we herded off to reservaions where their completed education level is the lowest, alcoholism is among the highest, as well as unemployment. Ask them what Affirmative Action did for them... and how AAs are the downest and easiest to peck. I am so sick of the race BS in this campaign. If BO did not look like an AA (instead of Bi-racial) he wouldn't even still be in this race. It would probably have been been Clinton and Edwards. BO brought nothing to the campaign except an inspiring speech that he dragged out from 1 1/2 yrs ago from Duval Patrick thanks to scumbag Axelrod. But bless his heart. Of course he's entitled" to use race as a wedge issue--after all, as a black man he could get shot just going to the gas station ---in his multi-million dollar earning neigborhood.


Take it to the Convention! Hillary '08"
by JHL on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:01:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Trash? (2.00 / 1)

Can we come up with better words than trash?


Atdleft's co-blogger opposing John McCain
by psychodrew on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 10:24:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Trash? (2.00 / 3)

trash I think gets at how pejorartive the thinking is You don't agree? And of course, it is waht people say. Unfortunately.


by linfar on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 10:29:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Trash? (none / 0)

The comment certainly was trash, but to call the person trash?  


Atdleft's co-blogger opposing John McCain
by psychodrew on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 12:14:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 5)

No she isn't. You are sliming her because you don't understand her. The point of this diary is that white working class people have quite an axe to grind of their own at this pt. And the dems need to recognize this. What she is saying is, Can I get my share of the pie with this guy. What give it away is when she says, "Everything has to be equal" I know this hard for many Obama supporters to understand but many white working class people feel that they have been kicked aside in the war on racism and that they have paid the most.


by linfar on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 10:32:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 4)

Yes, and they are mostly Pat Buchanan voters.

I see this crap in Appalachia all the time. And you know what? It's bullshit. It's based on the old fashioned entitlement thing: this is a white man's country and whites get their share first. That a white woman would complain about blacks getting a better share than whites is just pure ignorance. Look at all the black CEOs! Blaming her struggles on affirmative action is classic GOP race baiting and she fell for it. If she opposes Obama because she thinks he'll just "give everything to the blacks" then she is nothing more than a racist.

Perhaps you don't know much about Chicago politics, but these are the kinds of people who lined up in Marquette Park in 1966 and threw bricks at Martin Luther King for demanding open housing. Why should we let the blacks into our neighborhoods, the working class white Lithuanians asked?  They believed they were entitled and blacks should live only in slums.  Chicago has a horrendous history of this and the woman cited is a perfect example.

Don't pander to this racist crap and call it concern for the white working class. It's the politics of fascism - displacing economic anxiety on to matters of race and culture. And it's disgusting when Democrats aid and abet this strategy.


by elrod on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 02:17:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 3)

well said elrod.  Methinks that linfar knows about Berkeley, USC and Greenwich Village but is not such an expert on Chicago's working class.  

I am someone who had lived amongst the fearful blue-collar whites in Chicago for thirty years, and your description is far closer to accurate than linfar's rosy "classism" description.

As for learning to bring working class whites into the fold, I will defer to David Axelrod who helped Harold Washington get elected the first black mayor of the city of Chicago and will help put Barack Obama in office too.


by dannyinla on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 03:30:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (none / 0)

If a white, middle-class voter had said that, would you still defend it? Thought so.
by Jay R on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 03:40:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 3)

That wasn't a racist comment.  It was a comment about how the man predicted Obama would behave as president.  About policies or practices he would implement.  It basically said he doesn't trust Obama because he is afraid he would indiscriminately favor black issues over American issues.

Go to our friend Wikipedia:
"Racism has many definitions, the most common being that members of one racial group consider themselves intrinsically superior to members of other racial groups."

If the man said in some way that he has a better, superior person, or that all whites were, because he was white and Obama is black, he would have made a racist comment.  If he had said that a black man can't/shouldn't be president because he is, by the nature of being black, somehow incapable, that would be racist.
And it would be reprehensible.

That is one of the things that has made the dialog in this election so darned frustrating.  Differing with Obama about his beliefs on race has been cast as making a racist comment.  Same with some of the class discussions.  Let's not confuse them.


by mbolack on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:13:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 1)

It  would be akin to someone saying that if Lieberman was elected President he's be all for Israel.


by handsomegent on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:23:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 5)

Except that Joe Lieberman has a voting record to back that up.

Barack Obama shows no evidence of favoring "black supremacy".  It's not a racist statement, but I'd argue that only a racist would be that paranoid.


by Mostly on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:30:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

A recist comment is one (2.00 / 1)

that demeans a black person because of his skin.  Thus a Latino is referred to as lazy or a thief because he is a Latino.  An AA is referred to as one who is shiftless, irresponsible, etc.  Stating that you believe one would favor one race over another is simply stating an opinion that things would be handled unfairly.


by macmcd on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 11:26:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A recist comment is one (2.00 / 0)

Well, to get technical, Racism is a belief that one person is inferior/superior based upon the color of their skin. This person has come to the belief that he would be an inferior president simply because he is black. The rationalization as for why his being black makes him an inferior president is irrelevant. Its textbook "closet" racism, where the speaker is making racist remarks while not realizing that its actually racist.


John McCain wants to make abortion illegal
by Lost Thought on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:33:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A racist comment is one (none / 0)

or treating or identifying any human as "trash".

"White trash" is the language of the Confederate, the slave holder, and the hater.

Racism is a kind of hate. Lots of hate in this diary and in the comments.

Please don't rec.

thanks.


by redwagon on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:14:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A recist comment is one (2.00 / 1)

I take offense to that as a African American

although I don't think you meant to be offensive or racsist let me clarify you may disagree with the term racsist in this context but how about if we subsitute the word Racsist with PREJUDICE??

(1): preconceived judgment or opinion (2): an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge b: an instance of such judgment or opinion c: an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics

****************

she basically thought that Obama would show favoritisism to blacks simply because he is black. no facts to back it up  she came to the judgment JUST ONLY on his skin color and his SKIN COLOR alone.  that is the Uneducated that Clinton appeals to


John McCain's pick-up line is, 'Did you know that 150 is the new 130?'"
by wellinformed on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 12:02:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's racial paranoia, (none / 0)

which usually is a good indicator of racism. If there were any evidence that Obama would be excessively favor blacks, then I wouldn't say it is paranoia.

Rev. Wright is guilty of exactly the same kind of racial paranoia.


We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate or bow before the altar of retaliation. Martin Luther King Jr.
by fairleft on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:46:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 7)

Funny how Obama, the candidate worth the least out of all the original candidates of both parties, is the one getting tagged as an elitist.  McCain married into a fortune, literally over $100 million.  The Clintons have made that much over the past eight years.

The Obamas have only 1% of that, just one million dollars.

This is ridiculous.


by Skaje on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 07:44:11 PM EST

Re: Classism (none / 0)

elitist |əˈlētist; āˈlētist|
noun
a person who believes that a system or society should be ruled or dominated by an elite.
* a person who believes that they belong to an elite : designers are a bunch of elitists who don't live in the real world.

elite
noun
hobnobbing with Southport's elite best, pick, cream, crème de la crème, flower, nonpareil, elect; high society, jet set, beautiful people, beau monde, haut monde, glitterati; aristocracy, nobility, upper class.


by Nobama on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 09:06:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 1)

un·found·ed [uhn-foun-did] -adjective

1. without foundation; not based on fact, realistic considerations, or the like: unfounded suspicions.

2. not established; not founded: the prophet of a religion as yet unfounded.  


Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing glove.
by fogiv on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 02:46:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Elitism has nothing to do with how (none / 0)

much money one has.  It has everything to do with the way the individual values other human beings.  Obama showed by his actions in Chicago that he valued his wealthy friends, employer, etc. over the needy people who were being used to skim profits out of the system and to leave them in just as bad a condition as they were before you "organized" for them.  The only people who were helped were the Rezkos, Davises, Ayers, Auchis, and Obamas.


by macmcd on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 11:29:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Right! (2.00 / 4)

It's why he went to work for a Wall Street firm right out of Harvard, rather than working as a community organizer in Chicago's poor neighborhoods at a mere $12,000 a year.

Oh, wait.  No, he didn't.

Yeah, your cunning elitists always take low paying jobs with no social status as a way to sneak up the ladder into the elite.


by ogre on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:14:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Right out of Harvard he worked for Rezko-connected (none / 0)

law firm. He worked as a community organizer for three years before he entered law school.


We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate or bow before the altar of retaliation. Martin Luther King Jr.
by fairleft on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:49:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Reagan Democrats (2.00 / 4)

"The last time Democrats pulled this off was the election of Bill Clinton."

Ummm. No. Perot got the Reagan Democrats. Twice. Bill Clinton never broke 50%....

The REagan Democrats ran kicking and screaming away from Bill and Hillary in 1994 and gave Congress to the Republicans.

Thanks for playing, though!


by Democratic Unity on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 07:45:05 PM EST

Re: Reagan Democrats (2.00 / 3)

So quickly people forget Ross Perot.


www.thingsyoungerthanmccain.com
by LandStander on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 07:53:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Reagan Democrats (2.00 / 2)

What a perverted sense of history. The reason the Dems lost Congress in 1994 was because of the Dems in Congress, not because of Bill Clinton who had very high approval ratings. You ignore that fact that it was Congress that had low approval ratings, not Clinton.


by Nobama on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:00:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Reagan Democrats (2.00 / 3)


   Nobama...you are simply wrong.

  Clinton's approval in 1994 nationally was in the low 40's.

  In some states, it was in the 30's.

  Get your facts straight. You are dead wrong.


by southernman on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:07:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Reagan Democrats (2.00 / 1)

The Dems lost in '94 first of all because it's quite common for a first termer's party to lose seats.  The Repugs had a lot more money.  They had a unifying message. And let's not forget the Brady Bill which a lot of southern Dems opposed, and gays in the military.  Bill C was running against a powerful tide. This is NOT a liberal country for the most part. That's just a fact.


by handsomegent on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:26:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Reagan Democrats (2.00 / 2)

It's not common for Democrats to get wiped out like that.  Prior to that, they had controlled congress for 50 years - all the way back to the Eisenhauer Administration.


by Mostly on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:32:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Reagan Democrats (2.00 / 1)

Just to quibble--there is a strong strain of liberalism in this country, even in rural areas and the South.  But it's tactically incompetent and the Democrats aren't comfortable with representing it.


Yes, I'm aware there's a possible misogynist reading of the myth. Sorry.
by Endymion on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 02:08:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Reagan Democrats (none / 0)

Yes! It's quite common to lose more than 10 Senate seats!


by Democratic Unity on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:14:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Blame everything on the Clintons. (2.00 / 3)

His approval ratings were low in 1994, but Congress's approval ratings were even lower.

From Gallup:

President Bill Clinton's approval rating before the midterm elections in 1994 was 46%, and three weeks later it was 43% -- a decline, but within the poll's margin of error.

The Congressional Approval Rating the two weeks before the 1994 midterm elections was 23%.

The Democrats lost Congress because they were corrupt and innept.  There was a scandal in the House Post Office and the Chair of the House Ways and Means committee was indicted and ultimately spent 15 months in prison.

Blaming the Clintons is a very convenient excuse.  The Clintons destroyed the party.  The Clintons ruined health care.

You know what?  The 1990's was an era of relative peace and prosperity.  We had fiscal restraint and a growing economy.  Health care failed because the House and Senate Democrats were too chicken shit to fight for it.  They ran away from it and made Hillary a scapegoat.  Like the loyal Democrat she is, she took the beating, she took the fall, and she stepped out of the spotlight.

The Clintons made a lot of mistakes in the 1990s.  Bill and Hillary both acknowledge that.  But don't make them a scapegoat for a corrupt, innept, and out of touch Congress.


Atdleft's co-blogger opposing John McCain
by psychodrew on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 12:30:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Blame everything on the Clintons. (2.00 / 2)


  I wasn't scapegoating anyone...merely pointing the factual inaccuracies of his statement.

  Nobama sounds like Clinton had soaring approval ratings and Congress was in the ditch.

  Congress was in the ditch...but so was the President.


by southernman on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:20:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

What were Bill Clinton's favorability ratings (2.00 / 1)

again even in the middle of the impeachment?  Many of those who claimed to have hated Bill Clinton and who proudly voted for Bush are now pining for the Clinton days and they say they intend to vote for Hillary if she is the nominee.


by macmcd on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 11:33:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

White working class voters (2.00 / 4)

"Keep in mind that Bill Clinton actually carried white working-class voters in both his successful presidential campaigns (by a single percentage point in both instances"

Ummmm....he won a plurality. Again...Ross Perot split the white working class vote...


by Democratic Unity on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 07:46:55 PM EST

Re: Classism (none / 0)

hmmm.. I might agree with the notion, sort of. Only cause my parents are some of these working class peeps that dont like Obama and will vote McCain in Nov. They are dems for sure but dont have good feelings about the man, they are centrists and feel uneasy about him just like they did about kerry....


--++++Stay Gold, Ponyboy!++++--
by amde on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 07:48:12 PM EST

Re: Classism (2.00 / 1)

They're your parents, damn it!  If you love them, you have a responsibility to keep them from making a mistake!


Yes, I'm aware there's a possible misogynist reading of the myth. Sorry.
by Endymion on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 02:11:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (none / 0)

I actually think centrists are the only ones with a logical, rational reason to potentially pick McCain over Obama.  Hillary is a centrist on pretty much every issue but health care.  I love her health care proposal, more than I like Obama's.  But the rest of her positions are centrist.  If you are a centrist, it's not ridiculous to potentially favor McCain.  Now McCain has all sorts of issues going on, because he used to be a centrist (sort of) but is now portraying himself as a hard-core conservative to some people while also trying to sort of retain his "centrist" reputation.

What's ridiculous is when liberals and progressives who are to the left of Hillary ALSO say they will vote McCain.  That doesn't make any sense in any scenario to me, even if health care is your top issue (because McCain definitely doesn't give a crap about health care).


by ProgressiveDL on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:40:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 2)

My oh my.

And the similar comments about women wouldn't be misogynistic, and should be the basis of our choice for president?


by wrb on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 07:48:15 PM EST

Re: Classism (2.00 / 4)

Seriously.  I hope everyone would do a mental experiment where they substitute 'black' for 'female' and 'Hillary' for 'Obama' and see how much sense it makes.

"I think everyone should be equal.  If Hillary Clinton gets in it's going to be woman this and woman that..." or whatever that person's statement was.  And they'd have a better reason than they do in Obama's case, as she's promoted her gender as a reason she should be elected.

The only thing is it's absolutely absurd to suddenly be concerned about white guys getting a fair shake when it looks like for fucking ONCE someone who isn't a white guy might get elected president.


by Mostly on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 09:09:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 6)

Let's remember that the vast majority of African-Americans, the stalwart base of the Democratic party, are working class.

I wonder if black blue collar workers feel that they are being talked "down to" by Obama.

And claiming that this quote from your article has nothing to do with racism, is beyond ridiculous:

"If Obama gets in, its going to be a black thing and its going to be all blacks for blacks,' said Victoria Mikulski, a 63-year-old clerk in Edison park. `Everything's got to be equal."

Lately I've been noticing a lot of odes to the white working class on this board.  Some of which have come from people who said they pay $400 a week for day care.  Please excuse me if I believe some of these diaries seem less like legitimate concern and more like political axe grinding.


by emptythreatsfarm on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 07:49:25 PM EST

Re: Classism (2.00 / 2)

Yeah - I was stunned that anyone pays $400 a week for day care - and even more stunned that saving $325 a week when the child entered kindergarten (because she would still pay $75 for after school programs)would enable her to go out to eat once in awhile.  $325 a week for going out to eat?


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 07:54:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 5)

Polls show not even white Americans believe that Obama looks down on them.  I'm going to keep posting this until it sinks in that this is a Clinton/McCain talking point that has no basis in reality.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/106744/Only-2 6-Say-Obama-Looks-Down-Americans.aspx

Nearly a third of Americans believe that Hillary Clinton "looks down on" or "does not respect" average Americans, compared with only a quarter for Barack Obama and John McCain.  When you change "Average Americans" to "working-class Americans", the numbers are identical.


by Mostly on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:35:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This white American does (2.00 / 1)

believe he looks down on me.

And I've listened very closely, I never hear him ask for our votes. On his website he only asks us to believe.


by catfish1 on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 11:30:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (1.50 / 2)

"Barack Obama has an Archie bunker problem"
..

Archie was a Nixon Republican
I have NO problem with losing that vote.

yep Sen. Clinton can relate..
I would venture to say she has not filled up the tank on her car in 20 years....


"If you want to end war and stuff, you gotta sing loud"...Arlo Guthrie
by nogo war on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 07:50:57 PM EST

Boris Yeltsin was a bubba, bonded with Bill C. (none / 0)

over this. Hillary writes about this in her book.

She also writes that after Monica Lewinsky, while she wanted to stay in bed she stuck to her schedule, because a forklift operator would do the same.


by catfish1 on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 11:32:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Boris Yeltsin was a bubba, bonded with Bill C. (none / 0)

Because as we know, books published by politicians running for political office never contain any politically motivated anecdotes, particularly when they are unverifiable.


John McCain wants to make abortion illegal
by Lost Thought on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:42:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Dorothy Rodham's childhood (2.00 / 1)

was very harsh. She had to move out and become a live-in maid at age 14 or 15. Her own mother gave her up when she was just 8 and her sister was just 3.

She was accepted at Dartmouth but could not afford to go so did not go to college. Hillary speaks often that children do not get the opportunity to meet their full potential - it's almost an obsession with her, at least in her book.


by catfish1 on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 11:35:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 1)

That is firefighter, Linfar. You are correct that there were 200 "white guys" who died on 9/11. NYC has had a patronage/nepotistic old style union system in the fire dept. for eons. I read that only .4% of NYFD are women (that is 4/1000). I live in a city of 200,000+ where over 20% of firefighters are women. Your point is well taken, because you include gender, race, and class in your example. But who says all those white guys are Bubbas? NYC firefighters are solidly middle class, they're not working stiffs on hourly wage and subject to layoff, etc.
I am all for Democrats and a Democratic Party who take the high road. Enough of the pandering, the compromising, the caving to the elites, the Republofascists, the Christianists, AND Archie Bunker. Vote for Meathead!
by dawolfe on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 07:54:34 PM EST

Re: Classism (2.00 / 3)

a LOT of black firefighters died on 9/11.  And a lot of transit workers, who in NYC are overwhelmingly black, disobeyed city orders and drove directly to the site to help out and ferry people out of the area.


by Mostly on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 09:11:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 5)

A lot of white working class men work for me.

They, to a man, dislike Hillary but are intrigued by Obama.

There might be some misogyny there- several have been tormented by ex-wive & girlfriends.

However, all seem to  to see him see him as a stand-up guy who happens to have a tan.

I think you are projecting.


by wrb on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 07:55:11 PM EST

Re: Classism (2.00 / 2)

So all working class people are white?  Considering the nexus between race and race, that makes no sense.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 07:55:47 PM EST

We are democrats (2.00 / 4)

Everything we do should be about inclusion, about lifting those less fortunate up- certainly not about cutting out those that the system has failed or is failing.


by linc on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 07:56:36 PM EST

Re: We are democrats (none / 0)

i totally agree with you, inclusion should be the democrats main goal right now.


--++++Stay Gold, Ponyboy!++++--
by amde on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:03:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yep (2.00 / 1)

the fact that it isn't just a 'matter of fact' and something that we are finding ourselves fighting for... well its disturbing- to say the least.


by linc on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:18:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yep (2.00 / 3)

If you want someone that most Americans believe doesn't look down on them, then don't choose Hillary Clinton.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/106744/Only-2 6-Say-Obama-Looks-Down-Americans.aspx


by Mostly on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:37:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary has a class problem (2.00 / 2)


   she somehow sees poor people as living in boutique states, unless they vote for her.

  She's got a lot of class..but it's all low. As evidenced by being the first Democrat to use 9/11 as a fear tactic.


by southernman on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:05:28 PM EST

Re: Hillary has a class problem (2.00 / 1)

You just proved the pooint of the diary!! You don't even know how insulting it is to say "she has a lot of class, but it's all low." What on earth is the matter with your ability to see prejudice? If I substituted black you would get it just fine. Jeeesh


by linfar on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 09:00:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary has a class problem (2.00 / 2)

As someone who works for a union, who's the child of someone who worked for the same union, I can't help but laugh at this sudden patronizing and studious concern for the working class, with diaries like this and the other one by NewHampster where he announced that his elitist days are over and he's going to start shopping at walmart from now on.  You guys sound like tourists.


by Mostly on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 09:15:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary has a class problem (none / 0)

I'll match my union credentials against yours anyday--and so now here's the deal. Why not discuss the issue the diary raises. Or is that not touristy enough for ya.


by linfar on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 09:18:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary has a class problem (2.00 / 3)


   Nice. Just assume I'm black.

  For the record, I'm a southern white male.

  And yes, it's classless what Hillary has done. The first Democrat to use 9/11 as a scare tactic...and against a fellow Democrat. We should hand her a plaque, shouldn't we?


by southernman on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:21:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 5)

When he talks to you, it's like he's talking down to you.

A recent Gallup poll found that more Americans think Clinton looks down on working-class Americans than Obama does:

It's worth pointing out that this poll was conducted last week, after all the coverage of Obama's "bitter" comments.

He may be getting tagged as "elitist" by some people, but more average Americans feel that Clinton is the one who doesn't get them.


by jdusek on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:07:12 PM EST

Re: Classism (none / 0)

You posted partial poll results so you're being selective. The same poll asked of a different group showed Obama with 26% and Hillary 32% and a margin of error of ± 5%.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/106744/Only-2 6-Say-Obama-Looks-Down-Americans.aspx

The survey method of that poll says nothing about the gender or racial mix.

The PA primary demonstrated conclusively that Hillary won the blue collar vote. IOW, the primary was somewhat at odds with that Gallup poll.


by Nobama on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:25:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 7)

I'm sorry, you're correct.

The second group also found that more people think Clinton looks down on them (32%) than Obama does (26%).

I wouldn't want to give the false impression that only one of the groups thought Clinton was more disrespectful of average Americans. They both did.


by jdusek on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:32:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

But Obama IS the REAL elitist.. (1.00 / 1)

Hillary is working to reverse stratification, as shown by her UNIVERSAL healthcare plan, her support of expanded student loans, and her forward looking economic plan.

Obama is lacking ideas, his healthcare plan is designed to fail, which will really HURT poor people, and his economic plan is basically focusing on pork.

Obviously, Obama is the elitist because he is showing that he doesnt care about very real issues. This isn't some kind of statistical game.

Hillary understands how people are falling off the map. Obama is helping the powers that be sneakily push them off.


Universal healthcare IS a Democratic value
It's been defeated
Obama has the best $PIN that money can buy.
by architek on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 09:55:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 2)

The numbers don't lie - Hillary Clinton has an elitist problem.

Appalachia is VERY conservative; Barack Obama is going to have a hard time with the white vote in: PA, OH, KY, and WV.

Outside of that small strip, Barack Obama carries the working class just fine.  He wiped out Hillary Clinton in Wisconsin and Maryland, polls ahead of her in Michigan, and consistently does better than her in the midwest.


by Mostly on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:40:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 4)

Very thoughtful diary. As one of those "white trash racists" that hasn't supported Obama in this primary I would like to say a few things.

First, race has no bearing in me not supporting Obama. Obama has not reached out to me and does not lead with policy. He has been given a free ride by the media and has not been vetted. Then given his association and defending of people like Rev. Wright and William Ayers who hate me specifically because I am white, I think it is a joke that he blames ANYONE of racism.

If he really wants to win white men like me he should try to reach out to us with policy, not by calling us racists because we expect more than objects that shine to win our vote.

My family never owned slaves. We came over from Ireland because we were starving during the Potato Famine and many people forget we were discriminated against mightily then. Because of that I don't feel any guilt from slavery, because I never was part of it, nor where my forefathers.


by RDemocrat on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:13:45 PM EST

Re: Classism (2.00 / 5)

William Ayers is a white guy, genius.


by Mostly on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:42:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Notice how the Obama folk.. (1.00 / 1)

ALWAYS change the subject...

...NEVER answer the questions...

...NEVER address the issues.


Universal healthcare IS a Democratic value
It's been defeated
Obama has the best $PIN that money can buy.
by architek on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 09:57:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notice how the Obama folk.. (none / 0)

You made me laugh. I know exactly what you are saying.  I guess they think that is being smart or something. But it is just so dumb. We are supposedly all democrats here.


by linfar on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 10:12:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notice how the Obama folk.. (2.00 / 1)

You're still an unapologetic, admitted liar, so I doubt anyone cares what you think at this point.

Or have you retracted your bald-faced lies yet?

by Jay R on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 03:47:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (none / 0)

Thankyou for this comment. If we cannot get this issue out into the open, I believe we are doomed in November. Also, one Irisher to another--hardly anyone knows the Irish were treated worse than slaves in many parts of the south because slaves were an investment. The Irish you could use up and not give a damn.


by linfar on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 08:57:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Classism (2.00 / 3)

Hardly anyone knows it because it's absurd on its face.  Sharecropping sucks.  I'm the children of southern sharecroppers.  Got an old family bible which has an early dagguerotype of my hardscrabble ancestors, all rawboned and Scottish looking.

Thing is, they never revolted.  You never hear of sharecropper rebellions or sharecroppers having to be "broken" like horses - taken to a woodshed and beaten within an inch of their lives until they understood in the most instinctive way that it was pointless to refuse.

Slaves did not like to be slaves and escaped whenever they could.  If they were caught they were killed or hobbled.  And their owners had every right to do it - a slave's body didn't belong to them.  Their owners could do with them what they pleased - rape them, kill them, whatever.

But I'm sure some of them were fed real nice.


by Mostly on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 09:22:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

A letter that explains how most poor American came (none / 0)

to America..

Read this - its an eye opener.. I'm quoting the first three paragraphs here.. read the rest at the URL below.

http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/D/1601-1650/ mittelberger/servan.htm


Gottlieb Mittelberger

On the Misfortune of Indentured Servants (1754)

Both in Rotterdam and in Amsterdam the people are packed densely, like herrings so to say, in the large sea-vessels. One person receives a place of scarcely 2 feet width and 6 feet length in the bedstead, while many a ship carries four to six hundred souls; not to mention the innumerable implements, tools, provisions, water-barrels and other things which likewise occupy much space.

On account of contrary winds it takes the ships sometimes 2, 3 and 4 weeks to make the trip from Holland to.. . England. But when the wind is good, they get there in 8 days or even sooner. Everything is examined there and the custom-duties paid, whence it comes that the ships ride there 8, 10 to 14 days and even longer at anchor, till they have taken in their full cargoes. During that time every one is compelled to spend his last remaining money and to consume his little stock of provisions which had been reserved for the sea; so that most passengers, finding themselves on the ocean where they would be in greater need of them, must greatly suffer from hunger and want. Many suffer want already on the water between Holland and Old England.

When the ships have for the last time weighed their anchors near the city of Kaupp [Cowes] in Old England, the real misery begins with the long voyage. For from there the ships, unless they have good wind, must often sail 8, 9, 10 to 12 weeks before they reach Philadelphia. But even with the best wind the voyage lasts 7 weeks.

(continued at URL above)


Universal healthcare IS a Democratic value
It's been defeated
Obama has the best $PIN that money can buy.
by architek on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 10:02:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The point I am trying to make is that powerless (2.00 / 1)

and poor people who came here, both slave and free, had TERRIBLE experiences. The survival rate was also very low for indentured servants, a large percentage of them, especially children died on the sea voyage and did not even make it to America, so they could not even be sold to satisfy their families debts.

As everyone knows a very large percentage of slaves died too, a very high percentage. Its less well known that the conditions of indentured servants were similar, and the numbers of them were far higher.

The coercive nature of the experiences of both of these groups was similar. Many boats arrived in the New World holding half as many people as had departed Europe or Africa. Only the strongest survived these long sea journies, often with very little food and on ships rampant with disease.


Universal healthcare IS a Democratic value
It's been defeated
Obama has the best $PIN that money can buy.
by architek on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 11:18:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Point being? (2.00 / 2)

My ancestors include those indentured servants.  

That the trip over sucked (and it did) doesn't begin to suggest that it was equivalent to what the poor bastards who were shoehorned into the blackbirding ships suffered.

That indentured servants were treated like shit and indistinguishably from black slaves in the early colonies (and they were) doesn't paint the whole picture.

Indentured servants got free.  Slaves didn't.

My umpty-times great-grandfather ended up married to the widow of the farmer who held his contract, and possession of the farm in NJ.  Show me any--any--black slave who ended up in a similar situation.

Didn't happen.

They're not analogous.  The full picture of the suffering and condition isn't the same.  That there was a stretch where they suffered very similarly and might (and did) conspire to steal food or run away together--and saw each other as comrades in suffering (in the early days, at least) doesn't mean that their situations were equal, that their suffering was equal or that one's lot wasn't vastly worse.

My forebear's son inherited a farm... and his descendants (some of them) flaunt their DAR status.  The slave's son was still a slave, and so was his grandson...


by ogre on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:30:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Point being? (none / 0)

There have, at times, been black freedmen who were able to find some sort of good fortune.  For the most part, they don't have descendants.


Yes, I'm aware there's a possible misogynist reading of the myth. Sorry.
by Endymion on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 02:30:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Point being? (2.00 / 1)

"they don't have descendants."

I think that makes the point well enough.

You made the assertion--but it's mighty vague (Faux News vague even--some people say...).  But even so.  Notice that you sideslip to "black freedmen" who managed to find "some kind of good forture."

Which avoided acknowledging that it didn't happen to slaves.


by ogre on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 12:33:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]