On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 3:57 PM, Marv Gandall <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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. > Thanks again. It is an interesting read, especially the part about the lynching poetry. -raghu. > 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 > >
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
