Support NeoGAF

[kirblar]

The "excuse" is that Democrats did try repeatedly and racist whites stopped them. Truman tried to pass universal healthcare in the 40s! Racist southerners helped kill it to avoid integrating hospitals.

Our social programs have actually moved steadily backwards since the 70s, except for the ACA. This is not an accident. The Republicans put together a coalition of whites with racist dogwhistles and told them that social programs needed to be cut to make sure minorities wouldn't benefit. That's exactly what happened.

I'm not offering some justification. I'm explaining why public support for social programs in America is so low. The answer is that many white people don't support social programs if people of color will benefit.

The closest we've ever gotten to actual UHC was f'ing Nixon. And Ted Kennedy shot it down because he thought the next pres (who turned out to be the incompetent Carter) would be able to get a better deal.

 

[StormKing]

Playing identity politics as a Democrat is a dead end tactic because it is guaranteed to fail due to the electoral college and the white majority population. Republicans play identity politics all the time but they benefit from it because they pander primarily to the white majority and rural population that is favored by the electoral college.

 

[Raven117]

The closest we've ever gotten to actual UHC was f'ing Nixon. And Ted Kennedy shot it down because he thought the next pres (who turned out to be the incompetent Carter) would be able to get a better deal.

Yup. Kennedy later said "we really should have taken that deal." (or something to that effect).

Edit: Nixon actually wasn't a terrible President...he tried to get Healthcare Reform past, created the EPA, and a host of other programs. He just...well...we know what happened.

 

[Suikoguy]

I considered myself a peopleist, so I never played the game of labels.

I thought I was LIBERAL. Yaknow, progressive in all caps. And that it was that progressivism versus centrism with the Dems and the ends of sociopathy with the Repubs.

Wanting a society on accountability seems intrinsically leftist, if Dr. Benton Quest's post is any metric to go on.

We need more UBI evangelists.

I typed up a huge thing on it, but i'll save it for another thread.

 

[The Technomancer]

That is a specific charge. Do you have link you could share showing that exact point? I know the second sentence is true, but I have some doubts about the first sentence.

I oversimplified that in ways that I shouldn't have, but I'm digging for some stats that art part of the larger argument now. Poor people who are more likely to receive aid in some form still largely vote Democrat, but you have red state enclaves...

 

[excelsiorlef]

Lost in all this is that left folks need to present better candidates too.

Sanders did not actually run a campaign that put him in a position to win and the lets not forget his nonsense with Planned Parenthood, Nevada and that AIDS organization. Ironically he made a lot of the same mistakes Clinton did in the GE. The weirdest thing about 2016 will always be to me the stark contrast between how Clinton campaigned in the Primary and how she campaigned in the General. But that's a degression

You want Pelosi out from her role as minority speaker? I disagree, but there needs to be better people clamoring for the job than Tim Ryan.

You want Pelosi out of Congress entirely? I disagree, but you need someone better than a 71 year old lawyer who's claim to fame was suing the Democratic Party in Federal Court prior to the California Primary because he believed that Sanders would win it if only it wasn't rigged against him.

You want DWS out? I agree actually, but she's popular in her district so maybe don't run a literal crackpot nobody who simply ran on "I like Bernie" and then oops turned out to be a Seth Rich was murdered by the Democtats conspiracy theorist.

These are the biggest examples of who is stepping up to take on "Establishment Dems". You want them gone, you need to do better.

Also folks need to avoid propping decisively not progressive Dems just because they like some of Sanders' economic ideas... yes I'm talking of Tulsi Gabbard.

 

[Angelus Errare]

Tulsi needs to go away. I used to like her way back before she went full Islamophobia. Now I just want her to go away forever. Like just go get a job as like a Starbucks manager or something.

That is a specific charge. Do you have link you could share showing that exact point? I know the second sentence is true, but I have some doubts about the first sentence.

Read

Don't forget when America's social welfare system was first it was pretty much only for white Americans for the longest time. And the moment it was granted to African Americans, white America's views on social welfare did a 180 and how conservatives capitalized on that racial animosity. The same views and issue are present current day.

Everyone should read The Color of Welfare: How Racism Undermined the War on Poverty .

Also Dorothy Roberts wrote a thesis on it called "Welfare and the Problem of Black Citizenship" that's worth reading as well.

 

[The Technomancer]

Read

This supports the broader claim that white america hates welfare because it helps black people, but I don't think it addresses my specific claim that white welfare recipients specifically feel the same way. I'm basing that on a lot of interviews and some longer texts I've been reading, but I'm trying to find stats

 

[Sianos]

"Identity politics" is absolutely what won Trump the election - he appealed to white "identity politics" with his useless wall and calls to ban Muslims. Trump did not have any consistent plans and skated by on racists intentionally deluding themselves that he wouldn't steal their healthcare because they believe he's a "good man" - aka also racist.

My prediction was that this would cost him the election. I was obviously wrong.

We should galvanize the base with a grand vision and leave the implementation details up to the experts unless directly asked about a specific detail. Get these politicians some object-oriented coding experience, haha.

 

[Foffy]

We need more UBI evangelists.

I typed up a huge thing on it, but i'll save it for another thread.

PM me when you do this. I am happy to see more UBI discussions, even if we're still in the ideology phase of "left thinks it harms welfare, right thinks it harms effort" part.

 

[Sianos]

Is universal basic income a "liberal" policy or "leftist" policy? I mentally file it under the "regulations acknowledging the human element and accounting for it or correcting for harmful incentives resulting from greed, racism, etc." category, which sounds more like a "liberal" suggestion since it works within current framework. But I also know that UBI is not yet very well received by the general public, so does that make it a "leftist" idea?

I guess the answer to that is whatever label I belong under, because I believe that technological progress is not only what would enable distribution problems to be solved, but that there must be adjustments to current paradigm to account for the effects of this progress. I believe UBI - or some other equally robust social welfare program - will be critically necessary going forward. I also recognize it's a hard sell for America because of antiquated social beliefs, most prominently racism - and this is why we will not be able to implement these economically progressive changes without also being socially progressive. Of course, we should be supporting social progressive ideals because it's the right thing to do, but that's extra justification for those who are not directly effected by racism or sexism.

 

[pigeon]

Is universal basic income a "liberal" policy or "leftist" policy? I mentally file it under the "regulations acknowledging the human element and accounting for it or correcting for harmful incentives resulting from greed, racism, etc." category, which sounds more like a "liberal" suggestion since it works within current framework. But I also know that UBI is not yet very well received by the general public, so does that make it a "leftist" idea?

I guess the answer to that is whatever label I belong under, because I believe that technological progress is not only what would enable distribution problems to be solved, but that there must be adjustments to current paradigm to account for the effects of this progress. I believe UBI - or some other equally robust social welfare program - will be critically necessary going forward. I also recognize it's a hard sell for America because of antiquated social beliefs, most prominently racism.

The distinction is meaningless. I know people who call themselves libertarians who advocate for a UBI.

I think UBI should be a primary goal for both "liberals" and socialists moving forward -- the liberals because softening the contradiction is a good idea, and the socialists because it's a step towards freeing labor from wage slavery and allowing them to accumulate the capital necessary to seize the means of production without violence. I guess if you are a vanguardian this will not appeal to you.

 

[kirblar]

Is universal basic income a "liberal" policy or "leftist" policy? I mentally file it under the "regulations acknowledging the human element and accounting for it or correcting for harmful incentives resulting from greed, racism, etc." category, which sounds more like a "liberal" suggestion since it works within current framework. But I also know that UBI is not yet very well received by the general public, so does that make it a "leftist" idea?

I guess the answer to that is whatever label I belong under, because I believe that technological progress is not only what would enable distribution problems to be solved, but that there must be adjustments to current paradigm to account for the effects of this progress. I believe UBI - or some other equally robust social welfare program - will be critically necessary going forward. I also recognize it's a hard sell for America because of antiquated social beliefs, most prominently racism - and this is why we will not be able to implement these economically progressive changes without also being socially progressive. Of course, we should be supporting social progressive ideals because it's the right thing to do, but that's extra justification for those who are not directly effected by racism or sexism.

UBI would be liberal, I believe- you get support for it across the entire bow from the Socialist crew all the way to the Libertarians.

 

[Sianos]

The distinction is meaningless. I know people who call themselves libertarians who advocate for a UBI.

I think UBI should be a primary goal for both "liberals" and socialists moving forward -- the liberals because softening the contradiction is a good idea, and the socialists because it's a step towards freeing labor from wage slavery and allowing them to accumulate the capital necessary to seize the means of production without violence. I guess if you are a vanguardian this will not appeal to you.

I agree that the distinction does not matter.

I'm just curious what those trying to create a distinction - I guess they're trying to create their own subgroup identities within the spectrum of the left (identity politics is important because identity matters a lot to humans!) - would consider UBI to be. I wonder where the battle lines of the future will be drawn.

 

[Foffy]

I agree that the distinction does not matter.

I'm just curious what those trying to create a distinction - I guess they're trying to create their own subgroup identities within the spectrum of the left (identity politics is important because identity matters a lot to humans!) - would consider UBI to be. I wonder where the battle lines of the future will be drawn.

If we are to take a look at the American populace, many quickly assert UBI as Communism and thus automatically bad.

Nearly every major person in the last few years supporting UBI has been given this label. Well, except Bernie Sanders, but he has the "toxic label" of Socialist, and only has talked about UBI to non-Americans.

I agree much with Scott Santens in that "it's not left or right: it's forward." That sentence says it all.

 

[Cyrano]

UBI would be liberal, I believe- you get support for it across the entire bow from the Socialist crew all the way to the Libertarians.

UBI is neither liberal nor socialist - it is a human need caught in political posturing, much like universal healthcare.

There will be a time within our lifetimes where there are not enough jobs for everyone, simply because the availability of jobs continues to shrink. And in all likelihood, we won't have done enough to actually address it. I say this because the current trajectory of our politics and our markets continues to ignore it, even though it's already an issue many are currently experiencing. Maybe there will be a radical upheaval of our current political and economic landscape, but it seems unlikely.

 

[Ekai]

Despite what hillgaf would have you believe Bernie Sanders had a 72% approval rating amoung African Americans last time I checked. The idea that minorities hate Sanders is objectively not true.


http://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...nders-countrys-most-popular-active-politician

But if we can't paint leftists as the ones who truly hate minorities then people might start looking elsewhere in the party for said hate! The horror....the horror

 

[Hello? This is Hailun!]

.

 

[Platinumstorm]

Democrats shouldn't be panicking, they should be thrilled right now. There should still be concern about the potential for a Constitutional Convention, but that is a long-standing fear due to not being able to grow political candidates in many states due to years of mismanagement.

Democrats need to focus on the plights of people, and less on the focus on Trump. Right now there seems to be a complete lack of focus on governing, and more of a focus on creating drama.

I am in medicine: I don't choose who my patients are, but I care for every single one that walks in the room whether they're from a small farming community, or from the urban metro, whether they're tolerant of others, or if they aren't. Our elected politicians have that responsibility to us, and they're not upholding that end of the bargain.

Democrats need to show that they're there for everyone. Not just the 3% of the population that is gay, not the 13% of the population that is black, not the 70% of the US that identifies themselves as Christians. Everyone.

Introduce bills to committees that will get shot down. Get coverage on these bills. That is their damned job. Show they actually care about people from all walks of life. So much of this is pandering to group A, group B, or group C on behalf of the Democrats, that the plight of the whole is lost.

Right now everyone is caught up in a political game of "how can I look more angry about Trump" or "how long can I keep Trump from being impeached before turning on him to look like a good guy". I don't see anyone fighting for the people right now. That's the problem, and this isn't hard. The majority isn't governing, so the minority should try to govern from a point of weakness, and then let people know about it.

 

[Dr. Benton Quest]

I agree much with Scott Santens in that "it's not left or right: it's forward." That sentence says it all.

I agree as well. It's only 'leftist' in an academic sense. Morally there is no other option.

Guess I'm a leftist. Goddamn.

Welcome to the fold

UBI is neither liberal nor socialist - it is a human need caught in political posturing, much like universal healthcare.

There will be a time within our lifetimes where there are not enough jobs for everyone, simply because the availability of jobs continues to shrink. And in all likelihood, we won't have done enough to actually address it. I say this because the current trajectory of our politics and our markets continues to ignore it, even though it's already an issue many are currently experiencing. Maybe there will be a radical upheaval of our current political and economic landscape, but it seems unlikely.

This is a great way to sell it to liberals and I agree with you. The idea that automation will create a situation that either results in violent revolution or UBI is inherently leftist though. Marx says as much in Capital.

You better calm down with all this talk of job cults though. Foffy gonna get all hot and bothered lol.

 

[water_wendi]

Democrats shouldn't be panicking, they should be thrilled right now. There should still be concern about the potential for a Constitutional Convention, but that is a long-standing fear due to not being able to grow political candidates in many states due to years of mismanagement.

Democrats need to focus on the plights of people, and less on the focus on Trump. Right now there seems to be a complete lack of focus on governing, and more of a focus on creating drama.

I am in medicine: I don't choose who my patients are, but I care for every single one that walks in the room whether they're from a small farming community, or from the urban metro, whether they're tolerant of others, or if they aren't. Our elected politicians have that responsibility to us, and they're not upholding that end of the bargain.

Democrats need to show that they're there for everyone. Not just the 3% of the population that is gay, not the 17% of the population that is black, not the 70% of the US that identifies themselves as Christians. Everyone.

Introduce bills to committees that will get shot down. Get coverage on these bills. That is their damned job. Show they actually care about people from all walks of life. So much of this is pandering to group A, group B, or group C on behalf of the Democrats, that the plight of the whole is lost.

Right now everyone is caught up in a political game of "how can I look more angry about Trump" or "how long can I keep Trump from being impeached before turning on him to look like a good guy". I don't see anyone fighting for the people right now. That's the problem, and this isn't hard. The majority isn't governing, so the minority should try to govern from a point of weakness, and then let people know about it.

After the election there was about a week when i thought this would happen. This is what needs to happen but i doubt it.

 

[Adam_Vania]

anti-war?

actual policies that dismantle the military industrial complex?


hello?

we do exist. people that would vote solely on the issue of being anti-war. there are tons of us, far more than who care about "but her emails"

unfortunately centrist Dems are wholly invested in corporate supremacy.

 

[Steel]

After the election there was about a week when i thought this would happen. This is what needs to happen but i doubt it.

There were several healthcare bills put up by the dems and then murdered in committee since the election. One was even sponsored by Bernie IIRC.

If you're saying they should've made a show out of that process, I agree. But the dems suck at that sort of thing. It's not that they do nothing, it's just people don't pay attention when they do.

 

[UnemployedVillain]

If we are to take a look at the American populace, many quickly assert UBI as Communism and thus automatically bad.

Nearly every major person in the last few years supporting UBI has been given this label. Well, except Bernie Sanders, but he has the "toxic label" of Socialist, and only has talked about UBI to non-Americans.

You're seeing what you want to see, because this is ridiculously untrue

 

[Future]

anti-war?

actual policies that dismantle the military industrial complex?


hello?

we do exist. people that would vote solely on the issue of being anti-war. there are tons of us, far more than who care about "but her emails"

unfortunately centrist Dems are wholly invested in corporate supremacy.

That mentality conflicts with a lot of people that want the USA to continue carrying that big stick and be the best. If someone runs a platform on being anti military, they will need to have charisma off the charts and have many other policies that motivate dem voters and voters in battleground states

 

[Giant Panda]

UBI seems unnecessary at this point, as a lot of money would be going to middle class folks. Just roll all of the means-tested welfare programs into one credit that gradually gets withdrawn as income rises.

 

[grumble]

Diet Republican is not going to cut it any more. Maybe after there is no change of course in 2018 and 2020 there will be enough to get something new going. Also keep in mind that when the Democratic Party moves right it forces the Republicans to move even further right. Who knows where the US will be in 2020. Hopefully ill be dead by then.

Political is all about expanding your tent. With the republicans so far right, the democrats can be the centrist 'default' party.

 

[Phoenix RISING]

Yup. Kennedy later said "we really should have taken that deal." (or something to that effect).

Edit: Nixon actually wasn't a terrible President...he tried to get Healthcare Reform past, created the EPA, and a host of other programs. He just...well...we know what happened.

I actually don't. Never took the time to read about Watergate.

This is interesting.

 

[water_wendi]

Political is all about expanding your tent. With the republicans so far right, the democrats can be the centrist 'default' party.

The country is the most desperate for change its ever been in my lifetime. Half of the voting population doesnt vote. They dont vote for several different reasons but i would say that most of these voters are not doing well. They are being worked to death to make ends meet with no hope for the future or their childrens future. They are one crisis away from living in a tent city. We dont need to get all of the 50% that dont vote to break the Democrat/Republican stalemate. Just a few would do it. The good news is that the GOP hasnt figured out why they won. The bad news is neither has their opposition.

 

[kirblar]

UBI seems unnecessary at this point, as a lot of money would be going to middle class folks. Just roll all of the means-tested welfare programs into one credit that gradually gets withdrawn as income rises.

Means-testing is very unpopular and would never work if trying to implement it. (We already have your suggestion in the form of things like the EITC, and we should definitely still expand those.) UBI is also there to provide a cushion to allow people to leave jobs if they so desire.

 

[Quixzlizx]

Hey guyzzzz...

First, we DO NOT have capitalism in the US as envisioned by Adam Smith or Keynes. We have a state-sponsored oligarchy, and it has been like this for over 40 years now. If you want to read the actual blueprint for corporations taking over our government since the 1970's (including funding/propping up Third Way Democrats like the Clintons and Obama), look up The Powell Memo. It was the birth of neoliberalism, and it was the beginning of the decline of the American middle and lower classes.

The answer is a candidate that will re-BALANCE the power AWAY from corporate cartels and lobbyists, and towards the American worker. The pendulum has swung MASSIVELY in favor of the wealthy since the 1970's (again, it was a rather coordinated coup by corporations), so all we see in the rejection of the failed status quo as we reach extreme levels of inequality, a severe lack of social mobility, and general anxiety (anxiety reflected in things like our opioid epidemic, and inter-racial tensions).

We also need a candidate, in these times of crisis for so many American families, (as in near 60% don't have $400 to survive the next emergency) that promises BOLD steps to accommodate and favor all those struggling Americans. Health care, education, student debt reform, etc. etc. etc. Who pays for it? how about the corporate welfare queens who have robbed our state of TRILLIONS UPON TRILLIONS of our dollars over the last 4 decades (facilitated by government at every step of the way). Imagine a candidate that promises a bottom up approach to American prosperity for the next 40 years!! Centrists utterly fail in thinking that all these American households have the patience (or the resources) to outlast "pragmatic slow progress" that amounted to SHIT under Clinton and Obama, and was being touted by Clinton as her basic message. She lost. We are at a point in American history when solutions need to happen NOW.

The FAST surge of Corbyn, the enthusiasm of young voters for Bernie and Corbyn, the snoozefest of a centrist Democrat promising the heavens without actually tackling the special interests that run our government... all the indications are clear on where the party needs to be. Corbyn made it despite his very own party, and the UK pro-corporate press. Unfortunately for us in the US, our pro-corporate press and the pro-oligarch Democrats were able to keep a tight lid on the progress Americans under 45 are clamoring for.

We need to go back to a time before the 1970s, when inter-racial tensions didn't exist.

 

[JP_]

Political is all about expanding your tent. With the republicans so far right, the democrats can be the centrist 'default' party.

 

[Brandon F]

Yup. Kennedy later said "we really should have taken that deal." (or something to that effect).

Edit: Nixon actually wasn't a terrible President...he tried to get Healthcare Reform past, created the EPA, and a host of other programs. He just...well...we know what happened.

True. Nixon at least had a semblance of care and respect for public service and the legislative system. Granted it also led to paranoia and abuse, but it's quite a staggering difference comparing his tenure at large across his political career to the fuckery the GOP is doing today.

 

[PlayALLtheGames]

Well I consider myself a centrist. I don't want higher taxes but do want universal health insurance. There are plenty of things to cut in the government (defense spending being the biggest of them). Instead of saying fuck centrists how about working with them on goals you both agree on?

I'll work with them when they stop voting in crazy Republicans while claiming they're centrists. How about that?

"Don't want higher taxes." And I don't want to have to work. Anyway, unless you're making serious bank higher taxes probably won't affect you. If you are, "don't want" is not really an argument. The rich in America don't pay enough taxes. My parents are both doctors and they agree, reminding all of us that there are wealthy people in this country who aren't greedy pieces of shit.