Not intended as sarcasm at all. Du Bois, Douglas, Morrison, Hughes, Wright, 
Walker, Hurston, Ellison, Baldwin et all constitute a genuinely rich literary 
tradition. I thought the article was quite balanced in how it dealt with the 
dual strands in the history of the black struggle which is why I linked to it.


> On Jan 27, 2016, at 1:45 PM, raghu <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 9:17 PM, Marv Gandall <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Darryl Pinckney reviews Coates’ new book against the backdrop of the 
>> “opposing visions of the social destiny of black people” expressed in its 
>> rich literary tradition.
>> 
>> http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/02/11/the-anger-of-ta-nehisi-coates/
> 
> 
> Hi Marvin,
> Thanks for the link, but I can't tell if you are being sarcastic in your 
> reference to "rich literary tradition".
> 
> I noted with disappointment that in his interview with Adolph Reed, Doug 
> Henwood joined his guest in a mocking reference to Coates' “literary writing 
> style”. In the same interview, there is another unfortunate accusation of 
> pandering to “guilty white liberals".
> 
> It is sad to see this sort of lazy caricature in places where you'd expect 
> intelligent and thoughtful discussion.
> -raghu.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
>> > On Jan 26, 2016, at 10:45 AM, Maxim Linchits <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > And Coates expects a deeply racist, fragmented and economically stagnant 
>> > society to pay meaningful reparations to one politically marginalizes 
>> > group? What do people even mean by reparations? Cutting a one-time check a 
>> > la Friedman, Murray et. al. (which is still utopian, but ideologically 
>> > appealing in some quarters)?
>> >
>> > I don’t see any meaningful rebuttal from Coates. Wheread Reed is blunt and 
>> > to the point – Coates twists and turns and it’s just painful to read.  The 
>> > racial wealth and income gap is enormous in both Europe and America. 
>> > Unless the redistributive policies are thoroughly racialized – as they 
>> > were during the New Deal – redistributive and class-affirmative policies 
>> > will be a major boon to oppressed racial minorities. And not just Blacks – 
>> > but also American Latinos.
>> >
>> > Coates asserts that meaningful class-first policies are a mere “band aid” 
>> > for racial problems. Why? He cites the example of “failed policies” of 
>> > European social Democracy and Clintonism , both of which have failed to 
>> > address the plight of racial minorities. Guess what – they also 
>> > SPECTACULARLY “failed” to address the plight of working people in general, 
>> > in the past decades.  And calling class-first policies  a “band-aid” for 
>> > anything is a truly Orwellian turn of phrase.
>> >
>> > As for the Sanders campaign – what would be the point of him calling for 
>> > reparations? Just to pander to black voters, making a promise he cannot 
>> > possibly keep? To fragment his base and distract people from the problem 
>> > of wealth inequality – which hits minorities ten times as hard?
>> >
>> > From: [email protected] 
>> > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of raghu
>> > Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 7:24 PM
>> > To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]>
>> > Subject: [Pen-l] Coates on Sanders and Clinton
>> >
>> > Coates directly addresses the stupid claim that anyone criticizing Sanders 
>> > is a Clinton stooge:
>> > http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/01/bernie-sanders-liberal-imagination/425022/
>> > -----------------------------------snip
>> > What candidates name themselves is generally believed to be important. 
>> > Many Sanders supporters, for instance, correctly point out that Clinton 
>> > handprints are all over America’s sprawling carceral state. I agree with 
>> > them and have said so at length. Voters, and black voters particularly, 
>> > should never forget that Bill Clinton passed arguably the most immoral 
>> > “anti-crime” bill in American history, and that Hillary Clinton aided its 
>> > passage through her invocation of the super-predator myth. A defense of 
>> > Clinton rooted in the claim that “Jeb Bush held the same position” would 
>> > not be exculpatory. (“Law and order conservative embraces law and order” 
>> > would surprise no one.) That is because the anger over the Clintons’ 
>> > actions isn’t simply based on their having been wrong, but on their craven 
>> > embrace of law and order Republicanism in the Democratic Party’s name.
>> >
>> > One does not find anything as damaging as the carceral state in the 
>> > Sanders platform, but the dissonance between name and action is the same. 
>> > Sanders’s basic approach is to ameliorate the effects of racism through 
>> > broad, mostly class-based policies—doubling the minimum wage, offering 
>> > single-payer health-care, delivering free higher education. This is the 
>> > same “A rising tide lifts all boats” thinking that has dominated 
>> > Democratic anti-racist policy for a generation. Sanders proposes to 
>> > intensify this approach. But Sanders’s actual approach is really no 
>> > different than President Obama’s. I have repeatedly stated my problem with 
>> > the “rising tide” philosophy when embraced by Obama and liberals in 
>> > general. (See here, here, here, and here.) Again, briefly, treating a 
>> > racist injury solely with class-based remedies is like treating a gun-shot 
>> > wound solely with bandages. The bandages help, but they will not suffice.
>> >
>> > There is no need to be theoretical about this. Across Europe, the kind of 
>> > robust welfare state Sanders supports—higher minimum wage, single-payer 
>> > health-care, low-cost higher education—has been embraced. Have these 
>> > policies vanquished racism? Or has race become another rubric for 
>> > asserting who should benefit from the state’s largesse and who should not? 
>> > And if class-based policy alone is insufficient to banish racism in 
>> > Europe, why would it prove to be sufficient in a country founded on white 
>> > supremacy? And if it is not sufficient, what does it mean that even on the 
>> > left wing of the Democratic party, the consideration of radical, directly 
>> > anti-racist solutions has disappeared? And if radical, directly 
>> > anti-racist remedies have disappeared from the left-wing of the Democratic 
>> > Party, by what right does one expect them to appear in the platform of an 
>> > avowed moderate like Clinton?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pen-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to