Barry? I don't have the context for this discussion from the snippets given, but nothing is phonier than the white--and it's white white white!--feminist fanaticism for Hillary. If this were how "feminists" think, what greater indictment of white middle class feminism could there be? It's identity politics at its dumbest and most fraudulent. And while all identity politics is dumb, if one must be played off against the other--blacks vs women--I'd pick the black side in a second, since "women" only means white women anyway. Once one begins to recognize black women--one is in a different realm from all of this BS. If anyone wants to moan about the plight of women in the USA--the black woman is the alpha and omega of the woman question.
(For Evelyn, in memoriam, d. 13 May 2005) At 10:19 AM 5/15/2008, Charles Brown wrote: >shag > >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >this hurts obama. how does it hurt the party? > >^^^^ > >If Barry were the Party's nominee, it would seem that what hurts the >Party's nominee, would hurt the Party. She also hurts the party by >lessening the chance that she could be the vice presidential candidate. >Black person/woman ticket would be real good for "the party". > >^^^ > >also, i don't see that she's carrying a feminist banner. there was a >report >on NPR recently showing how she's never really played that up -- in >much >the same way obama has tried to play down race. > >^^^ >CB: Yes, Barry carries the banner for Black people whether he plays it >up or not. He doesn't really have a choice whether he represents Black >people. That Black people are endorsing him so tough corroborates this >point. They wouldn't support him if they didn't see him as representing >them. Barry knows this, by the way, I am sure. With all the talk of him >being so smart, for me this is prime evidence of his cunning.( in the >good sense of cunning) Any firster is seen as representing the group >regardless of whether they explicitly and publically acknowledge it. >Clinton has the banner thrust upon her, whether she plays it up or not. >Toward the end she has been saying it more, though. She says she's >staying in the campaign , not giving up, for all the women who have >supported her. Too late. Women are the majority of the voters. If she >had done that from the beginning , and stayed away from racism, she >might have got the nom. > >^^^^^ > > > >and the fact is, it doesn't besmirch the (corporate) feminist banner >many >other supporters wave. they never did anything good in terms of race >issues >anyway. the rest of them, from my observation, have _always_ been of >the >gender is the primary contradiction sort anyway. e.g., radical >feminists >like robin morgan. in the blogging world, most of the radical feminists >(of >the gender is primary sort) are clinton fans. > >^^^^ >CB: Agree. Thanks. Now I see how they don't get it on Feral Scholar >blog on this either, as you tried to explain to me last year. The Pres. >campaign is writing large the fundamental weakness of the so-called >radical feminist thinking on this point. (as you say below) They are >actually liberal, not "radical", feminists in substance, because they >don't acknowledge the critique of feminism by Sojourner Truth, bel, >hooks, Angela Davis, and you i.e. it's a political weakness to try to >subordinate class and race struggles to gender struggle. By dropping >the ball on racism, Clinton undermines her potential contribution to >gender struggle, ( and she doesn't have a choice as to whether she >impacts gender struggle by her conduct in the campaign; she carries the >banner whether she wants to or not, as a firster) and falls into the >most fundamental error in class struggle ( workers of different races, >disunite , Yikes !) Of course, surprise, surprise she's not really on >the workers' side in the class struggle. >^^^^^^ > > > > > > > >i've written at length about their idiocy -- specifically their >complete >and utter failure to deal with racism. > >i know i'm going to regret even responding. > >*sigh* > >^^^^^ >CB: You'll be fine, hon. And your use of "idiocy" is precise. >Hopefully, Clinton will make up for all her missteps by some kind of >"reconsideration" of her pronouncements, plead duress. Black people can >be very forgiving. She had a flash of insight in the Pennsylvania debate >when in response to a question as to whether Barry could win she said >"yes, yes, yes". Maybe she could still be vp. >By the way, Barry was at an autoplant in Detroit suburb, Macomb County, >the original Reagan Democrat county , and called a reporter "sweetie". >Then he called her and apologized. Like a Senator from Chicago , who >used to organize laidoff steelworkers can't relate and identify with >bluecollars. The story is all over the sports stations. White workers >are calling in saying "leave him alone". I think it's going to be a >landslide for Barry among White and Black bluecollars. > >http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080515/NEWS15/805150398 > >http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080515/NEWS15/805150448 > _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
