Yeah its really odd.

I loved it! It had a good beat and I danced to it.

Just wanted to point out that I was a child in the 70's and remember free health care, free community college, a welfare system people that people in need could actually pay rent and bills with in the Bay Area until they got back on their feet, social security alone was enough for my great grandmother to rent a house and live comfortably, one person with a full time (40 hrs per week) *minimum wage* job could afford to *buy* their own house even just a 20 minute drive from downtown San Fransisco, the U.S. had the #1 public school system in the world, and the wealthiest Americans had never paid less than a 70% tax rate since WW2. Then in 1981 our country was afflicted by the reagan administration. Yay?.. 🤕

Also, I suggest keeping the _neo_ part of the term _neo-liberal._ They are absolutely not the same thing, and this is creating a lot of confusion these days. They are in fact, near opposites.. A Liberal seeks liberty and justice for all. A Neo-Liberal seeks liberty and justice for those who can afford to buy it. Edit: My bad, I forgot to mention that Malcom X was ofc correct, but he was not specific either and let these people who were in fact not actually liberals, get away with labeling themselves as such. No actual liberal ever stops seeking liberty and justice for all. No real liberal was not marching with their more melanated siblings and standing up for the freedom of everyone. Even though they were seen as "liberal" by the standards of their day, our "founding fathers" were mostly still bigots, and therefore not really liberals, even by the definition of the times. Indeed, many who these days think they are not, are actually bigots. When you get right down to it, most if not all humans have at least some small form of bigotry we don't yet recognize. One day, even the zoomers will be the "new boomers," and my generation X will be viewed by some as we ourselves viewed the Victorians. And that makes me very happy, because a progressive is someone who does not fear the evolution of their own species. ❤🌍🌎🌏

You sound good, and thanks for making this video! As a white cis het lefty, I think this is an incredibly important topic. Ether we all win together, or we lose separately. It is aggravating that a significant number of people on the left don't seem to recognize this. It's not a coincidence that racial mistrust has been exploited to prevent solidarity among workers, etc. I do support reparations, land back movements, etc. Historical wrongdoings should be addressed, as not only is it the right thing to do, it is also the only way to move past them. It's not an instant solution, but I think it can really make a difference. My only quibbles with this video would be in the explanation of socialism, but that isn't the point of this video, nor does this seem in any way malicious. You pretty much nailed the reasons why black people are under-represented by at least a factor of 4 (should be higher than that, IMHO, considering history). So thanks again for your excellent video!

Don't worry, you'll get used to it real quick like. Come sit over here and squirm with the rest of us. 😬🙂 We're in the back, so the light bouncing off us doesn't distract everyone...

That line... whew!

I am a white trans lady, and I, too, get that apprehension, lol.

When Fiq, T1J, Khadija, Foreign, Lexual or any of them call out "the fake white people who think they get it but don't," or the "preformative," types, I cringe a little. Not all looks in the mirror are a fun time, lol

It's good that you feel awkward, rather than defensive. A lot of people (not just white people) just accept a lot about the society they're born and raised in, without much consideration of how things should be. And more than a few will get defensive when the status quo is criticized, particularly if they don't see themselves as having been harmed or hindered by the status quo. If you feel awkward, rather than defensive, you can take the next step and consider why entertainment is such a prominent avenue for black people to become affluent in the U.S. And from there, you can consider what changes should be made in order allow more viable opportunities for black people, Latinos, low income people, etc. If I'm preaching to the choir, please forgive me.

hits hard. my dad had 2 MLB tryouts but his parents couldnt afford the gas to drive...

So much talent squandered.

@@Sarah-cn6fn that's so rough to hear 😥 so hard to get ahead in this damn hellscape

This is so sad. 💔

And the other side of that, too, is that's only IF you can Sing and Dance like Beyonce. And she's the only one from Destiny's Child still doing stuff. Lol.

That's true too, a lot of black people's political maneuvering is partly done out of fear.

This man gets it.

I live in a overwhelmingly white and English town, and seeing how they treat me as a socialist along with how they treat non socialist PoC I can absolutely imagine each hatred would reach a zenith if combined

Black people are too smart to fall for all the commie gobbledygook

Great point!

I feel kind of hopeless sometimes as a white person who doesn't' fully understand but DOES give a sh-t about black liberation since such huge voices on the left (Vaush, DemonMama) don't just treat black liberation like it's extraneous but like it's bad or ridiculous. Vaush once literally used the term "race cucking" and he has a really young audience. I think you're doing the only thing that will work, just find people who do get it and keep trudging, keep nose to the grind stone.

Ew, yikes. That's awful. I'd be hard pressed to imagine what they could have possibly said or done to be run out of a union event. Even if they're absolutely shilling for the company, it would be so much better to publicly debate and show how those ideas are bad than have such an ugly and unproductive reaction. We can and should be gaining allies in marginalized demographics - the only people worth fighting against are those who engage with us in bad faith.

Why would you just assume they had done or said something wrong, I think if that was the case the commenter wouldn't have brought it up.

“Democratic socialists” This is why we should arrest the DSA

It started as a case of mistaken identity and then then the union members started getting violent. It wasn't DSAs fault but it's not like the problem has been fixxed. You should go see the first hand account from Dixieland of the Proletariat if you want to know more. I only saw part of it.

x2 agreed

Why are you reacting on your own video? 😉

🙏🏿 brothers and sisters

Idk if you wanted to spend 30 minutes getting nothing right about Bernie Sanders and finishing the rant with "we don't want socialism we want Wakanda" like y'all won't live to see the bomb drop let alone build infrastructure on the graves of pale skinned people who had as much to do with your perceived oppression as you did

@@adamconover8950 so you just missed the entire point and are trying to do what exactly besides the racist talking points?

and probably something to do with King

I was thinking about adding "you might get murdered" as a potential reason there aren't more black socialists, but didn't want to seem sensationalist

@@T1J Considering what they did to Paul Robeson, they don't need to actually kill you to shut you up. But the feds killing folks is definitely not off the table when Black socialists get organized enough.

@@T1J black panthers downfall definitely made it an aspect as well. Being a target and martyr for a cause shouldn't be the bare requirement for someone being socialist.

Most Underrated Comment Award 🥇

Rich people supporting ideas that are helping the less fortunate is empathy. I myself am doing pretty okay when it comes to my financial situation and I can see the benefits of more people experiencing this level of financial stability. I rather vote for politicians that are trying to aid the people under me than the people above me.

That's why throughout time the upper classes and the totalitarians have often targeted education and the intellectual. Not just American conservatives now, but also the monarchies of the past or the communist Khmer Rouge. The educated can point out what is wrong in the world and how it can be changed. For an authoritarian in power this is of course a threat.

This really falls in line with a trope from the 60s. That socialists are academic whatevers. I mean, I also see black capitalists deriding socialism.

ya, because the new left lost touch with the working class.

Brandon you are right. The few black socialist I know where also radicalized in college. However on problem is that with many issues the interplay bewteen class and race becomes very hard to disentangle.

I agree. I don't really like the racism predates capitalism timeline and prefer an analysis of co-development/co-emergence. We encounter the spectre of workism if we define the transition to capitalism as the alienation of the laborer from the product of their labor, and forget the chattel slave, alienated not only from the products of their labor, nor even simply from their labor itself, but from their total possibility of being.

I agree, and I think part of the problem with current socialism representation is that is very reminiscent of the white person who states that “they don’t see color” or “race doesn’t exist”. Race as a social construct used to disfranchise, marginalize and oppress absolutely exists and “not seeing it” is just dismissiveness and willful ignorance. Socialism can and must do better.

Yes. Also anti-racism without class analysis is ultimately self defeating, at best you get a section of the minority group that manage to level up within capitalism while leaving the system untouched and their 'hood behind to get worse or at worst see for example Eldridge Cleaver's Reaganite arc.

The more I learn, the more I see the social and economic problems reinforcing each other.

socialism is a pipe dream because the average socialist does bare minimum yet demand maximum reward. Every socialist I know barely scraped school, work low skilled jobs and very much anti upskilling.

Sorry for being ignorant of the situation but I always thought the Caste system was a class system and therefore should matter to socialists. I feel like anyone who calls themselves a socialist and doesn’t focus on the caste system is lying

Thank you for the insight!

This is the 4th reference to Ambedkar i've seen in the last few weeks. Before that i'd never heard of him. i'm not making a point. It's just a little weird.

@@leek6927 ur right that caste is a class system but there’s things like people not being allowed to marry out of caste or because of anti-blackness in india those of lower castes features r compared to African descent people in a way that poor Brahmans won’t. And most caste people practice a different form of Hinduism or diff religion from what Brahmans preach. There can be poor Brahmans but they’ll usually be separate from lower caste ppl anyways. As u said a serious socialist can’t call themselves one if they don’t care ab caste or race but we see ppl try to do otherwise plenty of times

@@BrianMarshall1 he wrote the indian constitution!

Not to diminish your point, I lived in a place where about 99% of the people who lived in my town were white. Our trailerpark was being visited often. The rest of the town? Maybe a couple times a year. This is just a snapshot though. Class is huge but it's only a proper lens to use in a largely homogenous environment.

Appreciate this post and class has also been used to erase issues to other intersectional identities such as gender

I imagine the reparations thing is mostly about optics, and trying to convert people. When most people are already anti-socialist instinctively socialists need to do their best to be appealing to Libs. And the idea of reparations makes Libs super uncomfortable. While Libs have mostly moved on from their belief that we're post-racism, they are still really touchy on a lot of solutions to race issues. Any attempts to talk about reparations using that word is a no go.

@@epididymis3794 I think what he meant to say was that even though cops came to the white trailer park, it wasn't as frequent as when cops went into the hood. Essentially, cops don't judge based on a class first basis, but rather through race first basis. When race isn't on the table, then class is next on the list, hence why when YOU compare cop visits to the white trailer park to the other 99% that didn't dwell in it, it makes it seem like cops judge on class first.

A lot of black people don't look at reparations through a socialist lense though. It's just a huge hurdle on their way to becoming a billionaire like any other American. Black excellence and "just do better" politics are more popular than ever.

i didn’t read it that way but your interpretation is funny

great read, thx for sharing. :D

You've hit the nail on the head my friend it's amazing the clarity an outside perspective can bring. Having to argue that you don't hate America as a concept when you have a legitimate criticism of an aspect of American society is how most of leftist talking are shut down. People say things like "If you don't like the way it is, then just leave." If you're talking about anything else it makes perfect sense that you can love something and still want it to improve.

"There is no Socialism without black socialists." Matou a pau, cara.

Pretty accurate. This is why the black youth of today need to stop buying what mainstream democrats like Biden are selling: racism and capitalism aren't the same thing, but they're intertwined. Capitalism is the mechanism used to keep power in the hands of the few. The vicious inequality it creates prevents people of color from gaining the political momentum we need to advocate for ourselves. I think the question of which we deal with first is a false choice: it will take countless years to dismantle both systems - we need to start on both, simultaneously, as soon as possible. The good news is that, because racism and capitalism depend on one another, an attack on one can become an attack on both. We should turn the complex interdependence of our oppression into our advantage.

I’d add that a lot of nationalism is bolstered by religious leaders, blurring the lines between church and state. But you have all the right ideas, which makes sense, since Brazil has some similar history and cultural issues. Huge economy, diverse population, class divisions mirroring race, and governmental corruption on both sides of the aisle. They say Brazil is not for beginners. Well, turns out “America” is not for beginners either.

No. Every single time Bernie was asked about his agenda SPECIFICALLY for black people he’d yell and change the subject to “DISTRESSED COMMUNITIES”. Whenever a BLACK person brings up our material conditions as BLACK people in this country there’s ALWAYS a white man waiting in the wings to say ALL LIVES MATTER!!! There’s video of him being confronted by BLACK voters for him being scared to say BLACK.

He's trying to do that, yeah, but he's not really doing a great job at it. He just went from one topic to the next, without making any point at all on the connection between the two. He just kinda assumed that we'd get the connection on our own.

Castro was really good at introspection like this, and always eager to improve and iterate on the movement he was a part of. His apologies and change of stance around gay rights is another great example.

That is such a painfully violent and familiar narration of white supremism in the left space. Some of the worst imo. Hope you're doing okay now because these are very toxic, violent encounters and we take constant hits

Omg. Awful. Seriously just so upset people can be so blind and hypocritical because their racism is greater than their understanding of the cause. I've had limited exposure to people like this and they're almost more frustrating than the far right we oppose, because they can have just as ugly beliefs and behaviors but they hold up the same cardboard signs as us

Fair point.

I seriously don't understand mocking people who marched with Dr King. He was on the right side of history and he wasn't popular with whites at the time. Every single leader of the democratic party should have marched with Dr King if they are of that age. It's sad that it's something to brag about. It should be common. Unfortunately we've got Hillary Clinton who was pushing for Barry Goldwater and we've got Elizabeth Warren who was a republican until the 90s. I live in Florida so I'm going to have to vote for Charlie Crist in order to try to oust DeSantis. I don't understand why we have to uplift people who just figured out that the klan was bad within the last few years. Democratic Leadership should be people who ALWAYS recognized that gay people existed, people who ALWAYS recognized that the klan was bad. And why are the only black people who are allowed to succeed cops at this point? I'm tired of seeing Val demings and Kamala Harris promoted and Nina Turner sabotaged. Pointing out that you marched with Dr King is definitely a flex, because most Democratic Leadership unfortunately would have marched against him and the Republicans are fascists.

Apparently it’s not good enough.

So was Hilary Clinton, so that shit doesn't mean anything

@@saninpain what are you talking about? Hillary Clinton did not march with Martin Luther King.

@@saninpain Bernie made one deposit at the Bank of Black Trust. He’s been trying to make that same exact $5 withdrawal for the last 50 years.

I'd recommend you watch andrewism.

@@dominicgunderson Thanks for the recommendation!

what turned you off from socialism when you were younger? The free healthcare, livable wage, worker-focused approach? I am just confused at what the negatives could here

@@AMReed8 Check out the work of Angela Y Davis. Former Black Panther, she's a black lesbian socialist who has been advocating for prison abolishment for half a century. Actually, while you're at it, check out some of the things other Panthers have said. "We're going to fight racism not with racism, but we're going to fight it with solidarity. We say we're not going to fight capitalism with black capitalism, but we're going to fight it with socialism." -- Fred Hampton.

@@vghsfan You gotta meet people where they're already at, man. That's a major issue with Leftist politics these days. If the DSA looks like Wonder Bread, then there really isn't much reason for BIPOC to think that the DSA is talking about anything that affects BIPOC. It's not always about the policies and ideology. You can't just intellectualize Revolution like that. You have to put the people before the theory.

What's "40 acres and a mule" adjusted for inflation?

@@HollowGolem 6.4 quadrillion with a 6% interest rate. The figures have legit been calculated and could be paid for by MMT but socialists are too racist to support reparations

@@HollowGolem The mule is still valued at one mule, but the real estate is where the real money comes in. Don't forget interest.

Probably the most prominent overtly communist party in this country was the Black Panther Party, and I feel like that's a part of civil rights history that often gets overlooked (partially because our history textbooks deliberately omit talking about the BPP at all)

This!

Not to insult anyone who wants to excel in a sport, at all. Just... That particular con, with all the inspirational sports movies and uplifting news stories and a quietly ignored body count, is infuriating.

And on top of that, athletes at the college level aren’t unionized and only the college is able profit off their image/likeness

@@fredericomolina1692 This is no longer the case. College athletes can profit off of NIL.

better at the DSA meeting than at the grocery store i guess. i think it was everyone's hope that social media would take up the slack on some of that. i think a lot of these ideas are just new and people are trying to wrestle with them, though. and i've always thought social media helps us socialists more than anybody else at the end of the day.

Bro that's honestly a huge part of it. I've noticed the Left tends to try and group the LGBTQ with BLM a lot. It's almost impossible for me to see one without the other nowadays. What I think the Left doesn't understand is how much a large portion of the Black Community doesn't even support groups like the LGBTQ. A lot of us are religious, or hold onto strong religious values. There was this study done (I forgot the source) but it showed that there's still a large portion of Black Americans who go to Church and hold strongly to religious values and beliefs. I think it's important to firmly distinguish the line between different issues. All forms of oppression are not, in anyway shape or form, the same. If you were to eliminate sexist ideologies and laws several American women face, there would still be racial issues Black women alone deal with, that most white women couldn't even comprehend of encountering.

The DSA focuses on the LGBT because most of them are white. When they do target the black lgbt it’s mostly for tokenism, but even when it isn’t the black lgbt doesn’t make up a significant majority in the black community so they support a small sun group of black people and then get to pretend to have supported the community overall. It’s all a shell game to get MORE resources into WHITE families.

Agreed. This is one of the few places where I feel like I get a well rounded explanation of the larger context AND then a well thought out opinion! I really appreciate how you parse through it all with consideration for the complexities that we sometimes overlook.

@@mirandahein5344 and I also feel he speaks from a place of compasion and empathy, which is rarely seen. I gotta say, I mostly agree with him in general but his videos always make my point of view a bit deeper. I specially learnt a lot, bear in mind I don't leave in the US and our political and societal experiences are widely different. And yet...

.... and accomplishing this with brevity. which is awesome!

Bernie is old as hell, he's been on the right side of history and fighting for people rights his whole career, Biden record has shown he's voted wrong almost his entire political career, the democratic party backed the candidate they thought could appeal to both sides, even if he would likely do very little to actually reform anything and just try and maintain the status quo. Bernie has hired people from BLM, he is pretty genuine in wanting to better life for everyone, but he has been outcasted by many, and his base is pretty terrible at turning out to vote, so he's in a difficult spot, and can't be doing the leg work he should be doing anymore because of his age.

(Edited Aug 30 22 because I'm still getting replies making it obvious how badly I expressed everything I thought I was saying.) When it comes down to it, I wouldn't blame any Black, indigenous or other person of color for being uneasy about Bernie ‸ _if he has given them any sign that he is less invested in racial equity than he was in his youth. _*_This is only speculation,_*_ but perhaps if there are folks who thought they perceived such a shift, they may have voted Clinton or Biden just to avoid the Gore Effect._ Vermont is one of the least racially diverse states in the US, with a 90% white population, and Sanders has been living there since 1968, according to Wikipedia. ‸ _I am not suggesting that I believe Sanders is any less committed to racial justice than ever. I haven't investigated his words or actions on the matter over the last 8 years, so to argue one side or the other would be dishonest of me. However, I speculate about the following because, _*_if_*_ such a shift has taken place, I can't imagine any other reason._ I mean, one can have all the most benevolent intentions _theoretically_ for a group of systemically marginalized people, but once he stopped working with them on a daily basis and they were literally out of his sight, I'd guess it -was- ‸ _may have been_ easier to let himself forget, bit by bit, how essential anti-racism is to any functioning society, regardless of its economic model. The land and the old buildings are gorgeous to me, but I couldn't see myself feeling comfortable in Vermont -- and I tried to imagine it, when I was looking to escape Florida -- purely because it's so very, _very_ white. I'm white myself, but I've always lived in a very diverse area, and something about being surrounded _only_ by white people just... feels eerie and wrong to me.

Did he Botch it or did the media and mainstream discourse within the DNC merely make it appear that he had by being more scornful and analytical of his statements than Clinton or Biden who have shocking records when it comes to Black and other POC? I wasn't following it that closely, I'm not based in North America, but my recollection from what I did was Sanders was meeting and actually paying attention to BLM activists through both campaigns and doing a site more than Hillary or Biden to acknowledge and support the movement.

@@kohhna I can't speak for anyone but myself, so I don't know if he "botched" his outreach. I can only confirm that most of the people I encountered who were supporters were white males. 🤷 That doesn't mean there weren't plenty of others who also would have elected him, given the chance. The DNC and the mainstream media, however, are both controlled by powerful neoliberal interests who would never risk letting a * _gasp!_ * *Socialist* get elected. We're already too far fucked for the changes we need to be made through the existing system, that much is evident.

It's a fair cop. Racist socialism is just racism without economic conflict, having eliminated the unwanted elements. Socialists should be able to recognize how the dynamics of power can sell an idea to the in-group without ever addressing the methodology of the controlling groups that are selling the idea. I think the modern age can be easily seen as the engineering of groups that are obscured from public view. If people were to study the values and history of those groups who generally avoid scrutiny and discredit those who call them out, successfully, the conversation could evolve because we would have to first understand that we tend to think that if something isn't part of a popular conversation then it isn't significant. This would underscore how media and propaganda herd us collectively and individually. Studying and understanding the dynamics of marginalized populations more closely would create a conversation that directly confronted the methods and values of the engineers of socioeconomic manipulation. However, we white male leftists should not only be seeking to intersect with those populations but also with those who identify with their oppressors, the white slaver, the managerial class and their best-skilled workers because that is where the oppressor finds their greatest power base and because those people are typically also oppressed and traumatized by the same institutions, they've just learned that there are advantages for them to discard conscience and join in with the oppression. They don't really understand the cost to them and their future and they haven't adequately observed their own trauma to understand it's origins, having been agitated by the incessant internal conflict which they are brainwashed to blame on outsiders from the institutions they have been taught to defend. It's where people are their most deluded and defensive and therefore we tend to not want to do this work because it seems impossible... but it will likely keep feeding the fires of oppression until we do. We have to focus on the foundations of moral injury if we want a just society.

for real. i may not have direct relatives in the colonized periphery but i feel very invested in global black lib. "universal ghetto life. holla black you know it well"

This is so true. I immigrated to the Netherlands a while ago and there is a pervasive idea of the country being post-racial and only the US being hugely problematic. It's true that the Netherlands is the one of the best places in the world to live for anyone. But that was built using wealth that was stolen from the global south. The Dutch are still consumers under global capitalism, consuming products only made possible through the past and continued exploitation of people. When talking about politics, people are hyper fixated about politics within their own country and view foreign policy through the lens of what would be beneficial to that country, as if you can truly liberate people under these specific arbitrary borders, while ignoring everyone else.

You nailed my whole origin story . I feel seen and unoriginal at the same time lol. Liberian here whose country was ruined by America's capitalist interest . They funded a rebel leader to overthrow our communist leaning president at the time and we're still trying to recover.

@@crediblesalamander8056 so many european countries exploited us - France, netherlands, spain, portugal, england but refuse any type of accountability or even acknowledgement of these truths

@@crediblesalamander8056 and the Netherlands is racist and classist. It's not even an opinion at this point, there's enough evidence to prove that soo.

yup, if equality is the goal than reparations is a tool to get there. no matter the color, time, or place. that's the way i've always looked at it, to sort of summarize what you said.

I came here to say something similar, but you worded it a lot better. I agree that reparations seems obvious, and it is more the question of how they are paid. I'm not sure exactly how this would translate in america, but my grandmother still gets reparations from germany for the holocaust in the form of monthly payments, and i think something like this might work better than a lump sum. The stability it could provide is immeasurable. And of course it is not the only thing, I just wanted to add my 2 cents

@Maxwell Long oh yes. Its definitely due! But what is it? And I don't think its something that a white person should (ultimately) answer, to be honest.

Because by the time you exist in a world where you can give reparations without a white Jihad, you've already established a state capable of addressing the fundamental contradictions that generate poverty, so why not just answer those.

This is Marxist PoV no socialist in general.... And is problematic You don't need to replace power structure you need to dismantle them Justice is irrelevant with out equality... The idea of justice is problematic when you need to provide it... We create equality and everyone needs justice it will get it for themselves (with help for the rest of the society)

@stabilobowski It depends on what you mean by "equality." Marx, himself, spoke on this at length (as well as many other socialist thinkers). Different people are different. They have different needs, different interests, different abilities, etc. The point of restructuring society in a socialist way is so that everybody can have their individual needs met & so that they can thrive in their own particular way (this video's singer example comes to mind). That's what I'm talking about when I say justice, & it will necessarily require some type of inequality. In what way can we say the life of a reclusive artist is "equal" to the life of a world traveler or a work a day family man? These are not equal -- they're each very different, mutually exclusive lifestyles that each will appeal to different people (or even to one person at different points in their lives). Socialism WOULD inherently involve much greater economic equality than capitalism just like constitutional democracy involves much greater political equality than absolute monarchy... just look at the pay differential of Mondragon vs Walmart for instance. But the point isn't to make everyone the same, it's to enable everyone to flourish in their own unique way.

@stabilobowski Value is a squirrely thing. What do you mean by value? If we're talking about necessary labor value, different careers produce different value -- & more to the point, a person raising 5 children & attending to cancer treatment has much greater need than someone without any dependants or illnesses. This is why you get the term "from each according to their ability to each according to their need." Needs & abilities differ from person to person. I think people are especially interested in equality because we live in such monstrously unequal times. And it's true, accumulation of wealth & profit are alien to socialism... there would be no billionaires or millionaires -- such a concept wouldn't even apply. But I also think that when we simplify our worldview down to just "equality," we're setting ourselves up for failure... and we excite bad faith anti-socialists because we will have played into one of their ridiculous strawmen.

@stabilobowski Depending on which people you're talking about, I agree. We live in a white supremacist society which routinely affirms that it doesn't care about black people. If you're talking about socialists, well, there's a reason why most black liberation movements around the world have had their roots in socialism. Liberation is the business of socialists.

@stabilobowski I'm sure that there are some racist socialists, but yes, socialism as a school of thought is uncompromisingly anti-racist & anti-colonial. As is always the case though, in order to adequately represent _any_ group requires that group to also be in the driver's seat. Without black socialist leaders & popular black socialist participation, the movement will inherently be lacking because it's missing that crucial lived experience. And without socialism, black liberation movements inevitably reproduce white supremacy... "the master's tools will never dismantle the master's house," & all that. Black liberation & socialism need eachother.

The title could use some attention from Bandit Keith... IN AMERICA

lol. true. these social democrates are so silly.

Just keep doing what your doing until you're old and grey. Everyone needs a purpose.

You must not know your history very well. You see in the past when Jim Crow was in place the black community was doing much better than today. You might not understand this but once black people were told we white people and got nothing for you they did for themselves they grow their own neighborhoods they grew their own wealth. It wasn't until the Democratic Party could make use of the black community that's when the black community crumbled. And if you're socialist you don't get to complain about the white people. Because in the Socialist Utopia the minority rules and that Minority is the politician.

Someone has done his history homework. I see you, comrade.

Not all racism is born from bourgeois propaganda. A lot of interacting with other cultures/ethnicities is accepting the other. Ending systemic oppression makes all racism a matter of words and feelings, and that is the point. Social issues should begin and end as perceived dysfunction, while both parties involved in the clash of identity are housed and fed regardless of the tension between them. If we avoid corruption and deflate any rising strong man, racism will be as foreign to the common discourse as ableism is today. Again, discrimination should end in the mind of the bigot, and any insensitivity should be handled between the offender and the offended without the advantage of an oppressive government body.

Racism isn't exclusive to capitalism. Capitalism greatly benefits from racism but it's not exclusive to it. The goal is to fight against both. Against all forms of oppression. And if your organization isn't willing to say that out loud then it ain't worth it.

That Clinton quote was very confusing to me, because arguing in favor of keeping banks the way they are is essentially saying let them keep their consolidated power and discriminatory practices & make it impossible to hold them accountable when they do racist sh!t. Like, yeah let's not even try because it won't immediately end the herculean task of "ending racism".

Very based comment

I kind of think really ending racism WOULD break up the big banks, considering how the financial system has f***d over black people practically as a business plan. But the corollary is that you can't really end racism if you've left all the consequences of racial capitalism in place, and rectifying the damage in any real way would be a socialist project.

seems to me like it would do more harm. everyone may be part of the same class, but if due to race etc they have a different experience, and so to ignore that seems like it would be Really disenfranchising to anyone whos negatively affected by anything other than capitalism itself. although i do think to a limited extent its true that those things can be or are exploited to create tension in the working class, theyre still real and have to be acknowledged

Except for the fact that the question was clearly rhetorical. It wasn't intended to be answered, because it was meant to be its own answer. It might be a crap question in the realm of formal debate, but in terms of persuasive speaking, it's laser-focused on the weak points of Bernie's speeches.

That is why im puzzled about his view on capitalism . one group will be superior over another group. That is how the rich gets richer. We buying this stuff that made by his or her workers.

Bra, you saying somthing my guy.

I think the free helath care is most for white ppl. Yes it help everyone but there looking out for there own poor class. Also black women still being mistreated by hospital when comes to pain being believe in dying during birth nope we don’t trust healthcare lol an I’m nurse . Not going to lie I’m going to black female doctor cause I know they have my best interest at heart an not going to oh it’s in ur head or not give me proper test . If I had a kid I want black doctor make sure me an my baby comes out healthy

@@jborrego2406 I agree with what you are suggesting. Serious conditions and high risk health situations have notable racial bias. In contrast though, I grew up in an affluent family. You think we only use medicine for emergencies? My parents go to the Mayo clinic every year to get a full physical exam. Most of the care is preventative. Healthcare shouldn't only be about life or death. It should be about being comfortable just getting a physical. Universal healthcare is successful when the majority of citizens use those services before it's an emergency. Well before its an emergency even. I grew up comfortably going to the doctor. I'm not afraid of their services, but so many struggling Americans are because they associate it with serious conditions instead of prevention. They associate it with gaslighting your pain. Doctors you see regularly and consistently will know you better as a person. Giving Americans care is important, but we must also include community outreach to bring back the trust.

What is an example of intersectional action at a national level?

Michael Harrington? I didn’t know he was problematic 😭

@@caleb98963 means fight for all, under all members sub-classes of the working class. if you fight for a few they use them against you and infighting increases when members don't appreciate the entire diversity of the lumpenproletariat

The DSA is a bunch of mostly white rich kids who want to play at radicalism. It's bullshit.

@@caleb98963 Reparations for Black Americans.

The video you're responding to is a huge red flag that anyone that isn't a part of B1Js Wakanda takes very seriously. What are we fighting for if a racially pure society is the only outcome that centers black people enough?

@@adamconover8950 can you reiterate this in a more understandable form please?

@@jn1211 Black people's problem with Bernie according to T1J is that he doesn't specifically say "black people need" or "black people suffer from" and instead talks about the systemic issues that black people are oppressed by. This is harmful to progress because it places all progress behind qualifiers and restricts advancements that aren't specifically for black people only, meaning that instead of overhauling the entire criminal justice system we'll have to write the Black People Can't Go To Jail For *insert prior offense* to keep people like T1J from running their mouth. Additionally, I say that T1J wants a racially pure society because he's speaking in the language of black separatism, advocating for a separate state that only includes/involves black people. This is not socialism and it deprives other oppressed people (including poor whites which is why they want to keep the revolution strictly black) of the change that they are owed as well. I agree with institutional reparations and denounce any attempt at holding individuals responsible for the crimes committed in the past, but it seems like T1J is building his stance on the separatist hill where social conditions and all benefits of revolution should be isolated to and controlled by black people (which leads to private reparations and perpetuating white guilt).

What the fuck are you smoking, bro? Wanting Black people to be TREATED LIKE PEOPLE is not “a racially pure society.” In other words: stfu, udkn.

"white passing" Bruh you are white, Spaniard

Social democracies are historically much less reliant on exploitation of third world countries that neoliberal ones.

yeah, it seems like ending wealth disparity would be reparations because we would be giving rich (largely white) peoples money to poor (largely black) people, im not sure what the problem is there, im sure wed all like to see poor whites raised out of poverty alongside us and after a few generations of sustained effort at creating equality, the correlations between poverty/crime and blackness would fade and i think that would work wonders for ending racial bias, ofc youd have to stop the racist propaganda machine too, but without uberwealthy white people the media would have noone to incentivise them to demonise black populations

"Organizing for policy reforms like healthcare for all. . . if the benefits from these reforms would disproportionately raise the standards of living for POC workers and women." And therein lies the problem: that "if". You see, a whole lot of the social safety net reforms of the last 100 years have either: a) not been available to Black folk (see, e.g. the GI Bill), b) done almost as much harm as good (see, e.g., the requirement of single parent households under some forms of welfare, or the horrors of multi-story housing projects), or c) been deliberately distributed in ways to exclude Black people (white flight from diverse school districts, coupled with school funding based on land values, for example, or poorer transit routes in Black neighborhoods, or seriously different levels of enforcement for petty drug crimes). And, despite all this, any help flowing to Black people at all has formed the core of the racist dog whistle messages from the right. Such dog whistles have included things like "universal healthcare works in other countries because they're 'less culturally diverse' ", as if it's asking too much to pay taxes that will help more "diverse" groups get healthcare, and scaremongering about "welfare queens" that are somehow rampant in New York and Chicago, but have never set foot in the far-poorer regions of Appalachia. So in an ideal world, yes, there's an argument that economic reforms can be anti-racist. But they are most definitely not inherently or automatically anti-racist. That's the point so many American socialists either ignore, or simply fail to grasp.

@@Daniko2 Wait, when did I make the claim that economic reforms of any kind are inherently anti-racist? Notice in my initial comment, I listed specific organizing goals supported by socialists. Every reform you just listed were liberal reforms that were deeply opposed by socialists at the time and are still despised to this day. While ones you didn't list, like Medicare, Social Security, labor law, public jobs programs during the New Deal and World War II, none of which were perfect and each have elements worth criticizing, were universal programs that disproportionately benefited POC and were key to the mid-century rise of the black middle class. Attacking racist dogmas about welfare is an admirable goal, but that dogma is in part due to bad policy design around means-testing that limits these programs only to the poor (which due to this country's racist history is disproportionately black). At least from a political messaging and a policy perspective, universal programs like those supported by socialists today that appeal to the common interest (but still greatly benefit the lives of those at the bottom) seems to be the most productive way forward

@@CC35351 "Wait, when did I make the claim that economic reforms of any kind are inherently anti-racist? Notice in my initial comment, I listed specific organizing goals supported by socialists". Yep. Economic reforms such as "healthcare for all, homes for all, full employment. . .", which you explicitly called "inherently anti-racist". I'm not sure why you object to my using your own words, but that's the answer to your first question. As for your second comment, to an extent you make a fair point in differentiating between socialist and liberal reforms. The difference between the liberal and socialist versions of those reforms seems to be a preference universality and lack of means testing among socialists, and I do acknowledge that universal programs have a better record. However, to suggest that the reforms you mention haven't also been administered in ways that continue racially disparate practices and results would be a step too far. Unions, for example, were often not required to accept Black members, and when under the new labor laws employers were required to pay Black laborers equal pay for equal work, the response was frequently "so why hire Blacks at all then?" It took a law explicitly aimed at discrimination, not economics, to answer that question. Also, you must be aware that even today patients who are wholly reliant on Medicare for their insurance needs have far less access to needed services, and far fewer doctors who will accept them as patients. This disproportionately affects people of color. Moreover, even when economic and educational disparities are accounted for, Black patients tend to have poorer outcomes--including the fact that newborn infant and maternal survival rates for Black mothers differ based on the race of the Doctor--even among the economically comfortable. Which brings up another point. Economically comfortable Black people do exist, and in the main, they're not socialists either. A Black person who isn't over 65, has a 401k, relies on Title VII for his rights to equality in the workplace, and gets his health insurance through his employer like everyone else is still at a disadvantage in this country. She may agree that universal healthcare would be nice, and it's appalling to have homeless people in the richest country on earth. But she's not going to be overly impressed with being told that fixing these issues will somehow make her real concerns about her teenaged son's safety if pulled over by police, physicians ignoring her pain complaints, and being dismissed as nothing more than a "diversity hire" at work just go away. To assume that there aren't racial issues that are truly separate from economic ones is to ignore both how those actual programs have functioned in this country, and that there are plenty of Black people who are economically comfortable, but who most definitely see their lives constrained in ways that their white neighbors' aren't.

does not literally everyone claim to be voting "pragmatically"? T1J himself mentions this in reference to the preponderance of relying on some sense of "electability" in the 2020 Democratic primary to guide voter decisions

"Hurr durr media said it's impossible so I guess it is." Is the mindset that's fundamentally wrong and broken yet seemingly so common place in the USA. Also the idea that black people are specially gifted at analyzing policy and politics compared to other people and that we should accept "common knowledge" from the black community is silly, the failing ideas of elders should never hold down young people because they dare to dream of a better future.

Essentially, all these things are deeply connected. Climate change _is_ capitalism. Racism _is_ capitalism. This is why some of us don't like the term 'intersectionality'. It compartmentalises things and implies that they are separate problems that 'intersect' for some groups, when the truth is it's all a web of capitalism, though similar problems have existed as part of other profit-based systems that emphasised private property. I'd agree that climate change is the biggest threat however, and I don't think we have enough time to prioritise anything else at the moment.

It’s a fair counterpoint. However, if we’re going to engage with what the (possibly not generous enough) critique says about Bernie and race, we have to take it more seriously than to just come back with that. Whether or not that one line he said in front of a crowd stands up to scrutiny, there’s still a huge perception among black people that Bernie collapses their experience into that of workers and doesn’t speak enough to their concerns and struggles.

@@dingdongism That's fair, and I'm not attempting to sweep that under the rug. It just annoyed me that he has spent decades supporting the cause and attempting to illustrate that is somehow 'I have a black friend.' It also looked like he was preparing to say more when he got booed.

"This is your chance to be less cringe!" Lmffao

*anything except the military

I think T1J’s point here is that we all already have “skin in the game” because our fellow Americans are suffering - but it’s really difficult to speak out when the government will go nuclear on you for that. And that’s the part that happens less often if you’re white.

I mean I think he was being genuine. But we heard that line too many times to not roll our eyes at it

This is exactly what I was thinking. Bernie was pro-black, pro-civil rights before most of us were born, during a time when it was dangerous to be so. I never understood how anyone could look at that man's history and not see him as an ally to black people.

There are enough similarities between the two for the comparison to make total sense. Especially if you include Biden's claim of being arrested in South Africa trying to see Nelson Mandela. It's just that the "I have black friends" works for white, right-wing politics while "I marched with black icons" works for white, left wing politics. So, the two are 'not the same' only in so far as there are qualitative differences between right wing and left wing politics -- but the two are the same in so far as they are both performing a similar function for some white politicians, with variants to better suit the specific ideological wing within which they are operating.

My problem with it, is that it's as if theres nothing specific there, usually indicating a blank spot. Like, it shows somebody just hasn't thought about race because they honestly didn't have to. Are we to believe that somebody who doesn't think about race on a daily basis can really help or liberate us POC who are forced to?

oop, somebody got their white feelings hurt