Opinion To Beat White Identity Politics, End Democratic Racial Politics

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Article|Archive

Just days into his tenure as mayor of New York, Zohran Mamdani faced a backlash over social media posts that one of his housing officials made a few years ago describing homeownership as a “weapon of white supremacy” and calling for political action to “impoverish” the white middle class.

Those who have worked with the official say she has been an effective housing advocate, and her past intemperate statements may reflect a person she no longer is.

While these remarks are on the extreme end of progressive racialism, it is worth recognizing that the way Democrats invoke race in politics is making it difficult to face off with an increasingly white nationalist G.O.P.

Republican members of Congress have called for mass expulsion of Muslims. The administration has barred almost all refugees except white South Africans. The president refers to entire ethnic groups as “garbage,” and the Department of Homeland Security’s X account calls for “100 million deportations” — in a nation of about 340 million people — to end what it called our besiegement “by the third world.”

Yet in the face of such divisive white identity politics, many Democrats hang on to a racial progressivism that will prevent the party from assembling a broad enough coalition to expand on its recent electoral successes and address America’s historic and contemporary injustices.

Since whites have benefited from hundreds of years of preferential treatment, the progressive argument goes, government and institutions need to even the score a bit by infusing race into policy and political organizing.

If too few Black and Latino students are going to college, we should allow colleges and universities to give extra weight to their applications; if elite public high schools have the same issue, we should reduce or abolish testing requirements, and minority contracting requirements can steer work to contractors from underrepresented groups.

During the Covid-19 pandemic, the liberal state of Vermont prioritized vaccine eligibility for Black and other minority residents before white residents, following the lead of billionaire philanthropists like Melinda Gates who urged such a move.

The Democratic Party has made race central to its messaging and organizing for decades. When Joe Biden ran for president in 2020, he promised to nominate a Black woman to the Supreme Court; in 2024, his successor Kamala Harris assembled a policy plank aimed specifically at Black men.

The Democratic Party’s racial politics can get important results. I live not far from the world’s busiest airport; the Atlanta mayor who expanded it mandated that a hefty share of contracts during the construction went to women- and minority-owned firms. This helped the city build a powerful Black middle class from the ashes of Jim Crow.

But in the face of the G.O.P.’s white identity movement, progressive racial politics is becoming a liability.

Many white people simply do not see a place for themselves in a Democratic Party that often feels organized not for the benefit of Americans as a whole but for a coalition of identity groups instead. Polls have consistently shown that large numbers of white people even believe they are discriminated against in America.

Former Georgia State Representative LaDawn Jones, a Black liberal Democrat, noticed this problem in a 2017 blog post she wrote after reviewing the schedule for a Democratic National Committee meeting in Atlanta. She found that there were caucuses for pretty much every group except for one.

“Excuse me D.N.C., where does a middle-aged white male who lives in an urban community get a chance to discuss his concerns for the country and work on a strategy to address those issues?” she asked.

A smug liberal could laugh off her question. But if the party is intent on elevating race as a salient category, no one should be surprised that white people feel alienated from a Democratic Party that explicitly organizes around the interests of certain groups.

Research by the Yale University political scientists Joshua Kalla and Micah English has shown that framing progressive policies including increasing the minimum wage or Medicare for all around how much they benefit minorities or achieve racial justice makes it less likely that people will support those programs.

Democrats should instead think about selling candidates and policies as they would a consumer product. Would you buy something if its commercial told you how good it was for everyone except you?

Many marquee Democratic policies like raising the minimum wage, some form of guaranteed health care for all Americans, and universal child care and paid family leave are already popular with the public and would broadly benefit working and middle-class people as a whole. Emphasizing the racial angles of these policies — which percentage of which racial grouping will get what — is just asking for political division where none should exist.

Across both messaging and policy, the party must de-emphasize divisive immutable characteristics like race and emphasize inclusive identities that more Americans (including white Americans) can relate to.

History shows that when Democrats do so, they can win.

In 2017 Danica Roem became the first transgender person elected to the Virginia legislature. The centerpiece of her campaign was not her transgender identity but instead a campaign pledge to fix a local highway that everybody hated. Gender was a nonissue in the race, but by focusing on an identity that all Virginians could relate to (angry driver sitting in gridlock), she unseated a notorious bigot.

And last November, Alicia Johnson became the first Black woman elected to a statewide executive office in Georgia when she won a seat on the Public Service Commission in a landslide victory. Ms. Johnson’s campaign was simple. The ads that dotted my reliably red county (that surprisingly went blue for Ms. Johnson) read: “Electricity bill too high? Vote for change.”

Many Democrats continue to resist a colorblind approach to politics by arguing that race-conscious policies are necessary to right past wrongs. But if your political approach is so radioactive that you can’t achieve power in the first place, you can’t help anyone, let alone underprivileged minorities.

But there is a broader principle to be defended here as well. In the immediate aftermath of Jim Crow, race was a mostly accurate measure for disadvantage, especially among Black people. In today’s America, this is no longer the case.

As the Rev. Dr. William J. Barber II, a civil rights activist for whom I worked in 2024, has noted in his recent book on the topic, there are tens of millions more poor white people than Black people in the United States today, yet our national image of poverty is stubbornly focused on Black and brown people.

Moving away from race-conscious politics and developing a more holistic program that will address poverty and disadvantage from the streets of Baltimore to the mountains of Blairsville will not only help deflate the white identity movement that empowers the Stephen Millers of the world, but it will also ensure that Democrats can build a political agenda that everyone can relate to.
 
Those who have worked with the official say she has been an effective housing advocate, and her past intemperate statements may reflect a person she no longer is.
Has she said these things? No? Then fuck off. I don't care if Anonymous Sources say that Evilcorp is actually Goodcorp now. Anyone can say anything about anyone. Doesn't make it true.

Republican members of Congress have called for mass expulsion of Muslims. The administration has barred almost all refugees except white South Africans. The president refers to entire ethnic groups as “garbage,” and the Department of Homeland Security’s X account calls for “100 million deportations” — in a nation of about 340 million people — to end what it called our besiegement “by the third world.”
Yet in the face of such divisive white identity politics,
Only one of these have to do with race, and it's about rescuing a race from being genocided by a government that openly seeks its destruction. The rest are pathetically grasping at straws.

Many Democrats continue to resist a colorblind approach to politics by arguing that race-conscious policies are necessary to right past wrongs. But if your political approach is so radioactive that you can’t achieve power in the first place, you can’t help anyone, let alone underprivileged minorities.
At least the conclusion is sound. It is still - of course - not concerned with the actual problems that white people face and more concerned with using them as a resource to amass power, but going from "we want to kill you" to "I guess we need you, for now" is a pretty classic move in the villain to antihero arc. Maybe there's hope for them after all.

But probably not.
 
Moving away from race-conscious politics and developing a more holistic program that will address poverty and disadvantage from the streets of Baltimore
Then why do Democrats refuse to entertain school voucher programs?
 
They'll talk about ending racial indentity politics but then






Yeah uh huh.
Full admittance to not reading the article on my part, but the vibe I get from the headline and opening paragraph is that the author is discussing how to atomize white people rather than how to integrate American society racially.

…And, having read the article now, I was correct that what I said was the thesis.
Moving away from race-conscious politics and developing a more holistic program that will address poverty and disadvantage from the streets of Baltimore to the mountains of Blairsville will not only help deflate the white identity movement that empowers the Stephen Millers of the world
Also, the author is a notorious millennial faggot progressive from our favorite region of the world.

The shameful thing is that America had just about solved racism by the late 90s and we were on track to leave it all behind until Obama’s election made progressives think that they key to society is to racialize it again. Well, now they’ve achieved their goal and can’t complain that white identity movements have risen in response to artificially pumping up their “Person of Color” cult.
 
The author is apparently not aware that the Left is not allowed to abandon race politics.

Is this new information for anyone here? Then read on. The alternative to race politics is a focus on class. Well, we've tried that before! A class-based movement developed organically some 15 years ago. They held massive marches and demonstrations and were largely peaceful. It was called "Occupy Wallstreet"

The elites dismantled this movement. It didn't fizzle out. It certainly didn't effect any societal change. It was targeted for destruction by the elites, and eliminated.

In its place, the Left was given racial politics. The elites are clearly onboard with this substitution. All the proof you need is in this pic:

1657599463153.jpg

Race is what the Left is allowed to be upset about. They're not allowed to abandon it. Indeed, their focus on race is supported by the elites with real actual money in the hands of protestors and agitators walking the streets. If the Left suddenly stopped hating white people, that money would stop flowing.

RwrMbfKHO0Qs.jpg

1678112702045238.jpg
 
The shameful thing is that America had just about solved racism by the late 90s and we were on track to leave it all behind
I'm of a certain age where I was raised to completely ignore color/race and for a long time I did exactly that. I even voted for Obama in '08.

Sometime around 2012/13 I noticed the rugpull where the conversation changed from "color doesn't matter" to "color is the only thing that matters and white people are the root cause of all our problems" and I adjusted my politics accordingly (and forever)
 
Kek, too late. Go fuck yourselves and eat shit while you do it. You were warned. Don't call it a grave, call it the future you chose.
 
Many white people simply do not see a place for themselves in a Democratic Party that often feels organized not for the benefit of Americans as a whole but for a coalition of identity groups instead. Polls have consistently shown that large numbers of white people even believe they are discriminated against in America.
The Democratic party, who I live at the complete mercy of at the state level with no recourse (because of the sheer number of shitskins, boomer hippie faggots and Karens in this shithole), has made it crystal clear I do not have a place in their America as a White man. Of course I will support the most aggressive pro-White political party available.

Duh.

There is no going back. I will never vote for any candidate that not a right wing White man again.

This article is basically saying “Aww sheeeit, da wypipo found out dey is da only ones dat care about other races, and dey gon’ start looking out for dey selfs agin.”

Fuck yeah we are.
 
Last edited:
The author is apparently not aware that the Left is not allowed to abandon race politics.

Is this new information for anyone here? Then read on. The alternative to race politics is a focus on class. Well, we've tried that before! A class-based movement developed organically some 15 years ago. They held massive marches and demonstrations and were largely peaceful. It was called "Occupy Wallstreet"

The elites dismantled this movement. It didn't fizzle out. It certainly didn't effect any societal change. It was targeted for destruction by the elites, and eliminated.

In its place, the Left was given racial politics. The elites are clearly onboard with this substitution. All the proof you need is in this pic:

View attachment 8449479

Race is what the Left is allowed to be upset about. They're not allowed to abandon it. Indeed, their focus on race is supported by the elites with real actual money in the hands of protestors and agitators walking the streets. If the Left suddenly stopped hating white people, that money would stop flowing.

View attachment 8449484

View attachment 8449486
I love the implication that the left couldn't be fucking stupid enough to autistically hyperfixate on race by themselves. It couldn't be organic. No, it had to be the fat cats distracting us! We were almost there: a world united in its hated of wealthy people!

I know, like most of us do, that social movements are always infiltrated and coopted. And I know that happened with OWS. But you can't place in a man's heart what there's no appropriately-shaped hole for, and the left is just that retarded, I'm sorry. Progressive cryptomarxist obsession with race has been a thing since even before the 60s, and it was always going to come back.

And what were the goals of OWS, anyway? Thick-as-pig-shit, bog standard socialist hatred of the successful? Explain how that would have helped anything.

You know what I didn't see during OWS, not once? Obama and the Democrat party blamed for the laws they passed or enforced (and could have tried to change) that indemnified everyone on Wall Street for the subprime mortgage loan scandal. They can't do it at scale if it isn't legal, guys!

But no. The Democrats made sad Democrat noises decades ago about brown people not owning enough houses, and so... subprime mortgage loans. And the dumbfuck protestors blamed Wall Street itself. They would never have blamed Black Jesus and his disciples, oh lawd no.

Businesses will always be run on self interested financial behavior. But politicians do not have to peddle the influence we elected them to have. They're much worse than the hedge fund managers on Wall Street... but the left worships the state, so they can never attack it. It's always some vague "other" that's at fault.
 
I miss those days. No "identity politics" BS in everyday life. Also, "racism" had more reasonable definitions.
In some weird ways I think the “racists don’t care who you are so long as you’re racist” meme is a result of this period in time. The other major element is that anti-woke is largely a male phenomenon and we think and socialize different from women. In the past there was more female racists and imo this shaped its behavior.

Anti-woke is really a coalition against the progressive stack and its biggest opponents tend to be White men. If you’re a blue collar guy even if you’re Black or Hispanic, there’s going to be a lot of gripes because the progressive movement is inherently anti-worker, anti-blue collar, and anti-male. There’s also the individuals that are socially ostracized by progressivism with a massive axe to grind because they’re “culturally White” or “White passing.” Hence there’ll be Jews that lived in Southern California or inner cities that were bullied for being light skinned. Or the Black nerds who like nerdy things but were treated better by the nerdy Whites than their own. Or the light skinned Latinos that get screwed over by HR’s diversity stack and progressive hiring practices.

Part of its openness to marriage outside of race is due to White women being some of the largest promoters of wokeness. With it being more male driven guys are less picky about who they fuck than women are. A significant amount of anti-race mixing was pushed by White women. But now that they’re overwhelmingly progressive it’s easier for politically active men to marry Latinas or Asian women.
 
The shameful thing is that America had just about solved racism by the late 90s and we were on track to leave it all behind
Be careful with those rose-tinted glasses. Niggers were still acting like niggers. The difference between now and then was we believed the media and Hollywood when they declared a post-racial utopia was behind us.
 
if elite public high schools have the same issue, we should reduce or abolish testing requirements,
No. We should increase the quality of our early education system, across the board. There's no reason that most students shouldn't be able to pass those basic entrance exams. We just don't want to spend money on public education. And when we do, we spend it in wasteful ways.
 
Back
Top Bottom