WashPo: Warren just gave the speech that Black Lives Matter activists have been waiting for

[portlander23]

Last edited Mon Sep 28, 2015, 04:25 PM - Edit history (1)

WashPo: Elizabeth Warren just gave the speech that Black Lives Matter activists have been waiting for

In a Sunday speech on racial inequality, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) called for broad policing reform — including de-escalation training and body cameras for all police officers — and likened the current Black Lives Matter movement to the civil rights movement that won black Americans the right to vote in the 1960s.

"None of us can ignore what is happening in this country. Not when our black friends, family, neighbors literally fear dying in the streets." Warren said. "This is the reality all of us must confront, as uncomfortable and ugly as that reality may be. It comes to us to once again affirm that black lives matter, that black citizens matter, that black families matter."

"Economic justice is not — and has never been — sufficient to ensure racial justice. Owning a home won’t stop someone from burning a cross on the front lawn. Admission to a school won’t prevent a beating on the sidewalk outside," Warren declared. "The tools of oppression were woven together, and the civil rights struggle was fought against that oppression wherever it was found — against violence, against the denial of voting rights and against economic injustice."

"It is a tragedy when any American cannot trust those who have sworn to protect and serve," Warren said. "This pervasive and persistent distrust isn’t based on myths. It is grounded in the reality of unjustified violence."

"We’ve seen sickening videos of unarmed, black Americans cut down by bullets, choked to death while gasping for air — their lives ended by those who are sworn to protect them. Peaceful, unarmed protesters have been beaten. Journalists have been jailed. And, in some cities, white vigilantes with weapons freely walk the streets," Warren said. "And it’s not just about law enforcement either. Just look to the terrorism this summer at Emanuel AME Church [in Charleston, S.C.]. We must be honest: 50 years after John Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. spoke out, violence against African Americans has not disappeared."

Video:

[Schema Thing]

1. Is there legislation ready-to-go? What if Boehner pushed it through on his way out?

Giving Obama one more huge victory.


hey, I can dream.

[Warren DeMontague]

2. Liz Warren on the drug war and marijuana legalization:

http://marijuanapolitics.com/progressive-icon-elizabeth-warren-is-now-open-to-marijuana-legalization/

Think other candidates- like the ones accepting private prison lobbyist dollars- are paying attention?

[sheshe2]

36. Please do not call her Liz.

I have asked people so many times to stop it. Yet they continue. She is my Senator. Her name is Elizabeth and that is what she goes by. Calling her Liz is showing a familiarity with the person.

You show her disrespect by calling her Liz. It is demeaning unless you are a close family friend.

Call her Senator Warren or Elizabeth Warren. Do not call her LIZ!

[Warren DeMontague]

68. Has she asked people not to call her that?

People called Gerald Ford "Jerry", too. Even when he was President. Jimmy Carter's full name is James, Bill Clinton of course is short for William.

If you have a link to somewhere where she specifically has asked not to be called "Liz", I will honor her request.

Other than that, I don't see why you have the authority to speak for her, unless you ARE her.

[sheshe2]

78. The only place I have ever seen her called Liz is on DU.

In MA. She calls herself Elizabeth and so do her supporters.

I know she is just a woman, yet show her some respect.

[Warren DeMontague]

83. Like I said, if Liz Warren has specifically asked people not to call her "Liz", I wont.

I've seen her called that many places, and this is the first time I've ever heard anyone object- and something in your post tells me (i.e. "I know she's just a woman" ) you're looking for some sort of confrontation, here, that doesn't have diddly to do with Liz Warren OR the issue I posted.

Again, is it disrespectful to call Gerald "Jerry", James "Jimmy" or William "Bill"? (3 men, aren't they? I mean, last time I checked.)

Nah, not really.

Now, on the topic at hand- so, we know that Senator Warren is open to marijuana legalization, which is directly related to the drug war. Hillary Clinton, who shut down BLM protesters with "I'm going to keep talking" when they were challenging her on her private prison lobbyist money-- where does she sit on that issue?

Hmmm?

[LanternWaste]

227. I used to rationalize my pronounced lack of respect and character also.

I used to rationalize my pronounced lack of respect and character also. Back-handed compliments are just too fun to avoid though-- regardless of whether we rationalize them as something other than what they in fact, are.

[Warren DeMontague]

228. I'm so very glad you've grown out of it! Good for you!

Still gotta work on that echolalia, though, I see.

[Hiraeth]

97. omg. That is what you choose to focus on with this OP ?! Really ?!

[valerief]

109. Almost like she's trying to sway the discussion from Warren's message. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

129. yeah, sort of transparent, isn't it?

I guess I'll just wait and see if that poster ever addresses the actual point in my post.

[valerief]

108. She's my senator, too. In fact, every U.S. senator affects every American.

I happen to like the nickname Liz, and I'm guessing she could give two shits.

Nobody called Cheney Richard or Clinton William.

I voted for Liz and will do it again.

[Marr]

200. Here's an idea-- how about we speak for ourselves? /nt

[Warren DeMontague]

229. Because that might involve that poster actually having to address the point i made?

[Marr]

231. I think you're right. /nt

[totodeinhere]

222. Try Googling the term "Liz Warren." See how many hits you will get.

Plenty of people call her "Liz" and I'll bet you anything Liz doesn't care.

[billhicks76]

115. Biden An Architect Of the Drug War

Last edited Mon Sep 28, 2015, 09:08 PM - Edit history (1)

He and Clinton were surrogates for Bush Sr.

[Javaman]

123. the main reason I will never ever vote for biden is..

because he rewrote the bankruptcy law to favor corporations over people.

people keep forgetting he was the senator of Delaware. the home to all credit card corps.

[billhicks76]

186. No...Some In Our Party Are Lazy And Stupid

They didn't forget. They never paid enough attention to know to begin with. They prefer superficial fluff politics to facts and truth. Biden created mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenders and the Drug Abuse act in 1986. Like the Clintons he does Bush Sr's bidding. It's an embarrassment. All the chatter about his straight talk and no filter is just more media BS hype. Remember when they said that about McCain? Or that Bush Sr was a wimp? It's all obfuscation and misdirection.

[Warren DeMontague]

232. That and the Bankruptcy bill are my biggest problems with Biden.

I'd be even less enthused about him as a candidate in the primaries than I am about HRC.

[gwheezie]

3. I followed this speech on twitter

And reading the feedback. She makes the point blm has been trying to say. She doesn't address all the issues but this is an important speech.

[brer cat]

4. This is an important speech.

I wonder how many will be listening?

[tishaLA]

5. "Economic justice is not — and has never been — sufficient to ensure racial justice"

Oh, how I love you, Sen Warren.

[Doctor_J]

6. She's going to be on the national stage soon. Maybe Sanders will put her in the cabinet.

Then on to the white house.

[ArcticFox]

15. Sanders should put her on the ticket

[Doctor_J]

17. I don't know. Two NE liberals probably not enough balance.

But then who??

[Alittleliberal]

30. Barbara Lee would be a great choice.

[Doctor_J]

33. I like your thinking, but she'll be 70 y.o. next November

need some balance on that front too IMO. Keith Ellison?

[Chitown Kev]

63. lol, a Jewish democratic socialist and a Muslim (who happens to be Black)

therefore (so goeth the wingnuts) a Black Muslim.

lol, so many heads would explode.... I LOVES that idea...

[lonestarnot]

212. Yes she would!

[cascadiance]

87. Geography balance makes sense, but VP should be a populist liberal like he is...

Otherwise if the VP is a "compromise" candidate who's more aligned with the corporatists, even if Bernie gets elected, I think he will be as big an assassination target as we've had in a long time, since there will be a lot of money out there that will find that as a solution to get a corporatist back in charge then.

Someone like Merkley here on the west coast or another progressive in a different area might be better, but I don't think Warren would suffer that much from geographic differences.

Bernie has more of a national following than someone like O'Malley who might be better known by his direct constituents, by having been on Thom Hartmann's show for the last 8-9 years on a weekly basis. Though not everyone watches Hartmann like they might watch corporate media news, there's enough of an audience that I think it puts a nucleus of support in just about every city in the country for geographic coverage than just about anyone else besides Hillary who has already great name recognition from her time in the White House.

[tularetom]

67. She'd be wasted in that job

She has too much to offer to spend four years attending funerals in foreign countries.

The best place for her (other than the WH) is right where she's at.

[cascadiance]

89. If Bernie goes for one term, if she has designs for the presidency, it still might be her best spot.

Arguably, Bernie might be a bit old to want to serve two terms, and if he has someone like Warren as his VP, then she would be great to run in 2020 then. And being VP will help position her not only from tradition having the VP being strongly considered as the successor for a given president, but it would help her greatly gain experience on the international scene to balance out her great knowledge and experience on issues to do with the economy and regulating it. That would be a GREAT resume for her to run on in 2020.

[sheshe2]

58. She will be on the national stage endorsing Hillary.

“Economic justice is not – and has never been – sufficient to ensure racial justice. Owning a home won’t stop someone from burning a cross on the front lawn. Admission to a school won’t prevent a beating on the sidewalk outside. But when Dr. King led hundreds of thousands of people to march on Washington, he talked about an end to violence, access to voting AND economic opportunity. As Dr. King once wrote, ‘the inseparable twin of racial injustice was economic injustice.'”

Her statement is the direct opposite of what BS is saying.

As Dr. King once wrote, ‘the inseparable twin of racial injustice was economic injustice.

Kick and rec for Elizabeth Warren. My Senator.

[rhett o rick]

116. Of course she will, she is a good Democrat. But why didn't H. Clinton give this speech?

Your post is confusing. It appears that you are attributing the same quote to both Sen Warren and Sen Sanders.

Give a quote from Sen Sanders that is "the direct opposite" of what Sen Warren said.

[jfern]

131. Really, the opposite?

Here a Bernie supporter was told he was whitesplaining and acting like the right-wing when he quoted that.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/09/28/1425461/-Thank-You-Senator-Elizabeth-Warren#c16

I guess no matter what Bernie and his supporter say, they'll be attacked.

[Cali_Democrat]

107. You're putting the cart before the horse

You have to win the White House before you can form a cabinet.

[rhett o rick]

117. The Populist Movement is going to sweep the Corporatist Democrats out of the Party leadership.

We must take control of our government back from corporations like Goldman-Sachs.

[darkangel218]

127. I so hope that will be the case.

I love her

[loyalsister]

192. She's on the national stage now

The entire country pays attention to her when she speaks. Which is why we need her in the senate.

[jfern]

194. Hopefully as Senate Majority Leader then

[loyalsister]

208. I think she's stronger where she is

The fewer people she has to answer to, the better. The majority leader has to suffer fools in their caucus without calling them or their values out.

[jfern]

209. Well, we really need someone better than Chuck Schumer as Senate leader

[loyalsister]

210. I agree

But, the majority leader still has to be a compromiser. I would hate to see Elizabeth Warren be in a position where she would have to temper her independence.

[Omaha Steve]

7. K&R!

[tomm2thumbs]

8. Wow, those are some powerful words and truths

Need to be said and re-said throughout this campaign and into the future

Until changes are made!!

[stevenleser]

9. Some here will promptly throw her under the bus for saying so. Nt

[PragmaticLiberal]

21. No. they won't. And that's because Senator Warren said it.

Now if I said that.....

[stevenleser]

22. Yep, particularly if you or I said that in certain conversations...

We would probably get a hidden post.

[PragmaticLiberal]

26. Exactly

[artislife]

84. ...

[Bugenhagen]

187. But you wouldn't say it

You'd say something snarky and awful, our else brag about being on the TV. At least that's all I've ever seen from you.

[stevenleser]

188. Lol, you need to read the two sentences you posted and think

About the irony of them, because you just made yourself look like a fool.

[stevenleser]

189. And here is something else you did to out yourself

I always wonder why prior DU tombstoned zombies post posts expressing some kind of historical knowledge of DUers when they have less than 200 posts to their name.

Don't you know his outs you as a previously banned user?

[cyberswede]

204. (That poster has been here for over 8 years)

[stevenleser]

214. Not really.

I have about the same amount of comments on DKos the last 11 years. It would not be accurate to say I have "Been on DKos for 11 years".

[cyberswede]

219. They may read more than they post.

My first seven years on DU, I racked up just over 1200 posts, but I read here every day during that time.

Are they a retread? Maybe. But you can't really know based only on their number of posts. Regardless, don't let them get your goat.

[stevenleser]

220. They don't seem the shy kind.

Definitely a retread.

[cyberswede]

224. A retread who signed up 8 years ago? Doubtful.

Perhaps they're a person of few words...who really speaks candidly when they finally post.

Or maybe they're a sleeper sock.

I have no idea. And neither do you.

[haikugal]

29. Why would you say something nasty like that Steve?

[Scootaloo]

82. Does he ever say anything else?

[stevenleser]

106. You mean besides evidence, history and experience? Besides those things why would I say that?

Ask any member of the African American group here why we would think that someone who says what Warren just said would get her thrown under the bus.

[jfern]

203. ""We have to address both" - Bernie Sanders

https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/3ens3j/bernie_sanders_racism_economic_inequality_are/

So when did the Bernie supporters throw Bernie under the bus?

[riversedge]

103. Warren is saying that an emphasis is economic justice is not sufficient-it will not trickle down

to ensure economic justice. Yes, I have said this before and will continue to say it.

[jfern]

133. Nope

And if Warren had run for President, Sanders would have promptly endorsed her.

[stevenleser]

135. Then folks are hypocrites. Because folks here who defended BLM said the same thing and were

roundly criticized by Sanders supporters for saying it.

So either those same folks should hammer Senator Warren or apologize to African American DUers because they are hypocrites.

[jfern]

137. Where were they criticized?

[stevenleser]

139. You're kidding me right? You are telling me you missed that whole thing that happened over 4-6 weeks

here?

[randys1]

142. It never happened!

[stevenleser]

143. I can't take it here sometimes...

[jfern]

147. It must be tough being asked for evidence for your claims

[stevenleser]

161. LOL, everyone reading this knows exactly what I am talking about, including you.

Almost a nice try.

[rbrnmw]

182. This is exactly what happened to Bravenak and a few others

[stevenleser]

183. Yep. I got tired of that poster playing games with this issue and put them on ignore.

Folks now want to rewrite history and pretend the kinds of things that were said were not said.

It's gas-lighting on a large scale. The problem for those folks is this is the internet, and there are links.

[rbrnmw]

185. Of course it is

Links are your friend.

[jfern]

144. What? A bunch of people who all agree that black lives matter

but arguing about whether Sanders should have had 2 of his speeches shut down?

[stevenleser]

163. Just as I thought. You knew exactly what we were talking about.

I have no idea why you thought being passive-aggressive was a good debate tactic.

[jfern]

166. So you agree that everyone agreed that black lives matter?

Then we can quit arguing about this.

[stevenleser]

167. Nope. They most certainly did not. They thought BLM was a scam, a Hillary ploy. nt

[jfern]

169. I bet they still though black lives matter

They were just upset that some people who had a scheduled meeting with Sanders decided to protest him instead.

[stevenleser]

172. Nope. Here are some links for you

Casting doubt on the BLM movement with the implied accusation that they aren't pressuring President Obama enough --> http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251469547

Saying BLM is a Soros plant organization to help Hillary --> http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251458059

Multiple comments that BLM is a trick including one accusing them of using "Dirty-tricks right out of the Lee Atwater playbook --> http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251456266

An OP by Scarletwoman making the exact point I am making--> http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251459998

All of the back and forth between Bravenak and Sanders supporters--> http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251464949

OP by Bravenak--> http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251467790

[jfern]

175. Besides the conspiracy theories, that's basically just a question about tacticts

The thing is those BLM protests were the first thing many people ever heard about Sanders, that he supposedly had a race problem. But he has reached out to members of the black lives movement, and come up with a good racial justice platform. Meanwhile Hillary talked down to BLM and told them to shut up when she was protested, and has no racial justice platform on her site. It's time for people to move on, and stop using BLM as tool to attack Sanders with.

[Shankapotomus]

198. Well Steve

Considering those BLM members crashed a Sanders event and practically sabotaged it, those DU members can be forgiven for having such suspicions. I also noticed they didn't use the same tactics when they confronted Hillary. This is not a suggestion that BLM was concocted by the Clinton caimpaign. But if their tactics were so justifiable and correct when used to confront Sanders, why did they not repeat them when confronting Clinton? We were told that was the only way it would be effective.

Got anything else?

[jfern]

199. Secret Service doesn't let you shove aside the person they are protecting

But yes, there did seem to be quite a double standard how no one cared when she told BLM to shut up.

[stevenleser]

202. Shorter version: You guys are caught in hypocrisy. Full stop. Nt

[Chitown Kev]

148. Lawd!

[jfern]

157. Where were people saying black lives didn't matter?

[stevenleser]

162. Several of the hosts of the AA forum are just downthread. You could ask them.

If you have the courage.

[jfern]

164. You made the claim, no need to have people ask someone else for evidence

[stevenleser]

165. LMAO. OK, so you are afraid of directly asking the folks who this impacts the most.

And playing games with an issue that literally kills African Americans.

Great job.

[jfern]

168. I'm not playing games, I've always thought that black lives matter

And there were major protests here last year. I went to see what was going on, and had to climb a fence to get away from the police. I certainly didn't need Sanders to have 2 of his speeches shut down to hear about it.

[stevenleser]

173. See my #172 and yes you are playing games with advocacy for the lives of black people. nt

[jfern]

176. You are the one playing the games

By trying to use it to attack Sanders and his supporters. Shame on you. Sanders has addressed BLM, and yet you continue to attack. Why hasn't your canddate properly addressed it?

[stevenleser]

177. Nope, and see my #172. The posts are there

This is my last post to you. Anyone who plays games where the lives of a minority hang in the balance deserves a place on my ignore list.

[jfern]

178. Your comments are very divisive

It's time for people like you to stop trying to divide the community, so that people can heal and not have this division hurting the Democratic party and the black lives movement. People need to move on from whatever flame wars a couple of months ago that are only going to bite the party in the ass in the general election.

[nashville_brook]

197. +100000 -- this nonsense is beyond done

they'll continue to try and make a tempest in a teapot, but if we ignore them they'll move on...to the next divisive topic.

[Shankapotomus]

205. But it wasn't the goals or message of BLM

that prompted the objections. It was the method and target. I was one of those objectors. You're not telling the whole story.

First, in targeting Sanders, it made it seem that it might have a Clinton connection, which is an honest mistake - something I personally didn't buy into one way or the other - but not indicative of any racial motivations at all.

And second, since no one was contesting the goals and message of BLM beyond those who might have made the honest mistake of thinking it might be a fabricated ploy of the Clinton campaign, your accusation of hypocrites is wrong.

I, personally, never had an issue with the message and goals of BLM and I don't have an issue with what Warren is saying now.

You consistently make these kinds of misreading errors and put words in people's mouths. Consistently. I've watched you and other regulars here do this time and time again with almost a willing denial of the true reality behind what people were actually saying.

As a result, I do not trust you as a democrat.

[aikoaiko]

234. BLM was criticized for tactics and the message it sent about Bernie.

[Shankapotomus]

195. Total misrepresentation of your fellow Democrats

The objections to BLM were never about its goals but the methods of a few of its members (amateur progressives still wet behind their ears) and their decision to target a democrat - with a 50 year record of fighting for civil rights - during an election campaign where losing will surely not advance law enforcement reform.

You and the DU members who relentlessly target and try to spin a negative narrative about other democrat, liberal and progressive members of this board and the democrat community at large do nothing but spread divisiveness and hate and weaken our party.

I don't know what it is with democrats such as yourself but you seem to have a mental block that says that vicious and direct accusations of racism, tone-deafness, homophobia or misogyny against your fellow democrats is a-okay. It's not.

I am convinced the ranks of democrats would be better off without self-appointed gate keepers such as yourself who engage in a relentless crusade specifically against other democrats, liberals and progressives who have their words twisted under your, frankly, bizarre interpretations. And I don't want to single out you. It's many regulars here too.

If your loyalty is to 3-4 pet causes and not democrats per se, I get that. But maybe if your tolerance and alliance to other democrats is conditional to them sharing your precise view on those causes, less you condemn them as racists or homophobes, perhaps you shouldn't be on a political forum called DEMOCRATIC Underground. Perhaps forums more specific to your favorite causes would work better for you and other DUers who share such a passion for those causes that they feel the need to explain to other democrats why they are such dispicable human beings.

This is a discussion board, not a report card.

[stevenleser]

215. Nope, it's not. And you can see multiple hosts from the AA group below who agree with me.

We all remember what was posted.

Attempting to gaslight us won't work.

[Shankapotomus]

221. Now I know you're wrong

There is no way in hell I would ever gaslight anyone. That is a completely reckless interpretation and this is exactly what I'm talking about:

Jumping to conclusions based on just a little information and creating this negative narrative/profile around it about democrats you've never even met. A professional psychologist wouldn't and couldn't confidently level accusations of gas-lighting based on what occurs here, let alone you. And you do it constantly and with less evidence and training.

"psy•chol•o•gize (saɪˈkɒl əˌdʒaɪz)

v.i. -gized, -giz•ing.
to make psychological investigations or speculations, esp. those that are naive or uninformed."

[stevenleser]

223. Nope, it's clear you are wrong. You know better about a minority issue than the minority in question

clear sign you need to rethink your position.

[Shankapotomus]

225. This is not a minority issue

This is a psychologizing issue falsely promoted as a minority issue. This concerns the fundamental behavior that underlines basic interaction between human beings. You could be using psychologizing on anyone, including other minorities who disagree with you. Anyone can do it:

Me: "The BLM activists were wrong to disrupt a speech about Social Security so important to the disabled community."

You: "I disagree with you."

Me: "This is a disability issue. You know better about a disability issue than the disabled people in question. A clear sign you need to rethink your position. You're a hypocrite and need to apologize to the disabled community. Otherwise, you're gas lighting disabled people."

[jfern]

201. You mean like what happened to the person who said this?

But what King saw in 1968 — and what we all should recognize today — is that it is necessary to try to address the rampant economic inequality while also taking on the issue of societal racism. We must simultaneously address the structural and institutional racism which exists in this country, while at the same time we vigorously attack the grotesque level of income and wealth inequality which is making the very rich much richer while everyone else – especially those in our minority communities – are becoming poorer.

Well, some people have thrown Bernie Sanders under the bus.

[retrowire]

10. Sanders + Warren 2016 nuff said n/t

[darkangel218]

128. Hopefully so!!

What a great team they would make!

[leftofcool]

153. No thanks.

[ozone_man]

191. What's not to like?

Seems like a dream ticket to me.

[awoke_in_2003]

11. K&R. nt

[NorthCarolina]

12. This on the heels of her appearance on The Late Show...I have

NO DOUBT in my mind which candidate for President she will endorse in this election cycle. One of the candidates is in complete sync with her rhetoric, whereas backing the other would prove quite hypocritical.

[George II]

27. The one that she stopped just short of endorsing:

Elizabeth Warren Hopes Hillary Clinton Makes 2016 Run But Declines to Endorse Her

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/04/elizabeth-warren-hopes-hillary-clinton-makes-2016-run-but-declines-to-endorse-her/

[sheshe2]

79. Kick kick kick~

[artislife]

86. But declines to endorse her....nt

[zappaman]

13. "Economic justice is not — and has never been — sufficient to ensure racial justice."

I hope our candidates are paying attention.

[greatauntoftriplets]

24. Exactly what's been said in the AfAm group here since the year dot.

Nice vindication.

[sheshe2]

61. Kick kick kick~

My Senator. I am so proud!

[sheshe2]

60. I am!

[druidity33]

95. and yet

in the same speech she says,

"As Dr. King once wrote, ‘the inseparable twin of racial injustice was economic injustice.'"

I think that most people understand that economic justice will not entirely bring about racial justice... but it sure will help. And in that initial quote, the critical word is "sufficient".

[leftofcool]

96. Sorry buddy, they are not the same. Ask Chris Rock

[randys1]

145. Or the guy the cops tackled inn NYC

[druidity33]

190. who said they were the same? Not me...

One helps lead to the other. Are you saying you don't want economic parity? Legislatively, i think it would be real hard to abolish racism (that's internal and emotional)... but economic inequality we could work on. Why is it difficult to understand that? I'm not trying to say working on one would fix the other... but NEITHER WAS BERNIE, despite what HRC supporters here would have everyone believe. And we're all commenting on a speech here where Elizabeth Warren specifically leaves that open by using that MLK quote. She's not disavowing that, she's helping to affirm that economic parity is NECESSARY. It amazes me that people (HRC supporters) have made such a huge deal over this issue when BS himself is willing to adjust his stance and really listen to the voices of BLM. I don't see Hillary working on ANY of these issues to the extent that Bernie would.

[jfern]

193. And Bernie has a strong racial justice section platform on his website

Hillary doesn't have anything comparable

https://berniesanders.com/issues/racial-justice/

[TM99]

102. Please don't separate them yet again

because Warren has not.

"The tools of oppression were woven together, and the civil rights struggle was fought against that oppression wherever it was found — against violence, against the denial of voting rights and against economic injustice."

The only people on DU who have ever separated the two are those that benefit from that separation politically speaking.

We need BOTH!

[Paka]

132. +1

[rhett o rick]

118. No one is making that claim. Economic justice will not ensure racial justice but

economic justice is necessary for democracy and that is necessary for racial justice. They go hand in hand.

[zappaman]

120. Yes, Rick.

I can read what the Senator said.
Nice of you to fix what she said though.
I'm sure she could use you to help her with her words next time.

[d_legendary1]

155. Absolutely correct!

During the good times nobody gave a damn about undocumented workers other than the racists. Now when jobs are scarce immigration becomes a hot button issue due to the misconception that "they're taking our jobs".

If we had economic justice we would be able to talk about paths to citizenship instead of building walls and deportations.

[lumberjack_jeff]

206. If Ahmed Muhammed has taught us anything, it should be this.

But I would argue the opposite even more forcefully.

i.e. He was treated badly because he's a muslim. You know about it because his family has resources.

[cindyperry2010]

14. she is just

amazing a powerful force to be reckoned with

[Number23]

16. DAYUUMM!!!

"Economic justice is not — and has never been — sufficient to ensure racial justice. Owning a home won’t stop someone from burning a cross on the front lawn. Admission to a school won’t prevent a beating on the sidewalk outside," Warren declared. "The tools of oppression were woven together, and the civil rights struggle was fought against that oppression wherever it was found — against violence, against the denial of voting rights and against economic injustice."

Holy Hannah!!!

Maybe now that somebody not black has finally said this clearly and LOUDLY, it will now resonate with people who have steadfastly denied this simple truth out of ignorance, bigotry, stupidity or other reasons.

We must be honest: 50 years after John Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. spoke out, violence against African Americans has not disappeared."

Tell it, Elizabeth. Wonder how this will go down??

[tishaLA]

19. "Maybe now that somebody not black has finally said this clearly and LOUDLY"

Yeah, I more or less said this in a thread in the AA group. It vindicates precisely the kinds of things people like 1SBM have been saying for....how long now?

[Number23]

20. Four hours into this thread, almost half the respondents in it are regulars in the AA forum

This is why we know what's up and who has our back. And why we've always known.

1SBM was just one of many who tried to say what Warren has just said to people here. And he was shouted down and accused of only caring about "rich" black people and not being "representative" of the black community as so many of us have been even though our positions are WELL within the "mainstream" of black thought.

But then again, this is a place where the only "popular" black people are the ones that only say what white people want to hear and need to so desperately believe, no matter how divorced from mainstream black thought, reality or basic common sense they may be. So, there's always that.

[stevenleser]

23. Bernie supporters here owe the AA group and members an apology

And yes, Sanders supporters as a whole. Because not nearly enough stood up for AA members of DU when many were criticized for saying exactly what Sen Warren said except they said it months ago.

[greatauntoftriplets]

25. Amen.

[JI7]

38. yup, and i also give credit to blm and related activists for Warren's Words

she gets credit for listening. but it's the exact thing many black and other minorities have been saying and just got attacked for it.

[Number23]

39. Not all of them, steve. We have a sizeable number of Bernie supporters in AA

and they have been every bit as disgusted and angry with the attacks on BLM, black academics, journalists, pundits and just regular black folks as everyone else.

[pnwmom]

43. Bravenak was one of the Bernie supporters. And she was shot down by other Bernie people

for trying to tell Bernie how to strengthen his candidacy among African Americans.

[Number23]

46. Bravenak will tell you, we actually got into it a bit. Not regarding her support for Sanders

I have always understood why people would support him, but because of her high fiving and giggling with folks here that were Sanders supporters that could not have made it more obvious that they were hostile to black people. I said something to her about her "new friends" and we actually didn't talk for a few months. It was upsetting to me because I have always adored her but I couldn't understand what was happening.

She was genuine in her support for Sanders. But it was only when the attacks against #BLM began that she realized that what I was saying to her was true. That was when she made it her mission to try to explain how, as a black woman, when these guys accused black posters of "playing the race card" for daring to question Sanders and attacked #BLM it was INCREDIBLY upsetting to her. And well, we all saw how well that worked out for her.

She'll tell you. For a few months we were not friends at all. So it makes all of the "I never bought her schtick" from people here that did their hardest to minimize her when she was doing nothing but posting in good faith and having the unmitigated nerve to explain how the attacks on BLM looked to black Sanders supporters all the more disgusting. I think she still supports Sanders on a fundamental level but I don't think she will ever return to DU.

[pnwmom]

51. The greatest weakness

of the Bernie supporters, I think, is that so many of them can't seem to tolerate any thought that there could be anything about him that is less than perfect. So they couldn't listen to Bravenak when she tried to explain how he could improve his approach to African Americans.

I think most of the supporters of the other candidates are much more willing to acknowledge that their candidate has flaws -- they just prefer their candidate, or think that person has a better chance in the general.

But the people who need to think Bernie is perfect will be the first to feel betrayed when he turns out to be a human being, just like everyone else.

[Number23]

55. Absolutely. And the branding of the AA forum as "pro Hillary" when it is nothing of the sort

ties in with what you're saying. Some people seem to desperately need to believe that everyone that doesn't support him or even if they support him but dare to question him are either evil or corrupt. It's what's lead to AA posters here being accused of conducting "jihads" and "Lee Atwater attacks" against him -- the kind of language you'd never guess would be used by "progressives" on a "Democratic" site. But it is.

I think, is that so many of them can't seem to tolerate any thought that there could be anything about him that is less than perfect.

I see it all the time. The idea that Sanders is "perfect on every issue" so anything that's discussed about him that says otherwise -- no matter how crucial to the very existence of large swaths of Americans -- is "manufactured." It's astonishing.

Hopefully Warren's comments today as well as the interaction he's had with #BLM will lead to even more progress on this issue. Like I said, I'm curious how all of this will be received.

[pnwmom]

56. And

they often refuse to believe that anyone is on the fence, or neutral, or uncommitted, or has questions or doubts. If you're not feeling the bern, then you're an enemy.

That explains a lot of their reaction to people in the AA forum, I think.

[Art_from_Ark]

70. Gee, would you listen to someone

who bragged about torching people's stuff in the LA Riots and advocated violence as a means of achieving a goal?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026578403#post27

As John Lennon sang so many years ago

"But when you talk about destruction
Don't you know that you can count me OUT"

[tishaLA]

92. African American thinkers from Malcolm X to Ta-Nehisi Coates have argued the case for violence

so I'm not sure what the issue is.

Now, the reason why I say that <"The Case for Reparations"> was incomplete was because there is a methodology, a tool that has been used to make sure that black people are available for plunder. And a major tool in making that process happen has been the criminal justice system. It’s very, very important to understand. I read the governor in the New York Times today and he was saying in the paper that—you know, because it’s going to be a big day tomorrow—he was saying “violence will not be tolerated.” And I thought about that as a young man who’s from West Baltimore and grew up in West Baltimore and I thought about how violence was tolerated for all of my life here in West Baltimore.

When I was going to school, I thought about every little article that I wore when I walked out the house. I thought about who I was walking with. I thought about how many of them there were. I thought about what neighborhoods they were from. I thought about which route I was going to take to school. Once I got to school I thought about what I was going to do during the lunch hour—was I actually going to have lunch or was I going to go sit in the library. When school was dismissed I thought about what time I was going to leave school. I thought about whether I should stay after-school for class. I thought about whether I should take the bus up to my grandmother’s house. I thought about which way I should go home if I was going to go home. Every one of those choices was about the avoidance of violence, about the protection of my body. And so I don’t want to come off as if I’m sympathizing or saying that it is necessarily okay, to inflict violence just out of anger, no matter how legitimate that anger is.

But I have a problem when you begin the clock with the violence on Tuesday. Because the fact of the matter is that the lives of black people in this city, the lives of black people in this country have been violent for a long time. Violence is how enslavement actually happened. People will think of enslavement as like a summer camp, where you just have to work, where you just go and someone gives you food and lodging, but enslavement is violence, it is torture. Torture is how it was made possible. You can’t imagine enslavement without stripping away people’s kids and putting them up for sale. And the way you did that was, you threatened people with violence. Jim Crow was enforced through violence. That was the way things that got done. You didn’t politely ask somebody not to show up and vote. You stood in front of voting booths with guns, that’s what you did. And the state backed this; it was state-backed violence.[/div[link:http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/ta-nehisi-coates-johns-hopkins-baltimore/391904/|]The Atlantic]

I'm sure some might quibble with the idea, as Mr Coates argues on Twitter, that violence has been an effective tool for African Americans to respond to institutionalized racist violence against them in the United States from Nat Turner to the LA uprisings to Ferguson to Baltimore. But it is nonetheless a serious idea with a serious history. And it is a history, Mr Coates will remind you, with proven positive results.

[Art_from_Ark]

93. You don't think that bragging about torching someone else's property is not an issue???

Seriously?
That is arson. Arson is a felony.
If I ran this site, I certainly would not want posters encouraging other posters to commit felonies.

[jfern]

138. Of course Sanders isn't perfect

The question is whether people are merely pointing out that he's not perfect, or are trying to take him down because he's the first liberal with a chance in decades.

[Bonobo]

52. She ain't no damned Hillary supporter either, I can tell you. nt

[pnwmom]

57. Right, she isn't. But some Bernie supporters have claimed she is

just because she wanted him to make some changes to connect better with the AA community.

[Bonobo]

64. Not me. And one point I'd like to make that I know some of you already understand...

But I want to reiterate.

The most vocal and obnoxious people stand out the most and it is not easy to notice those that don't (in fact, they cannot be noticed by definition).

Secondly, if you can TRY to understand the emotions of the people at the time, I will try to say something in defense of them.

Bernie's campaign, a major long shot to begin with, was in an even more young and precarious stage than it is now. From the POV of his supporters, not only were they looking at something that they felt was injurious to it (right or wrong, they felt that way), but they also felt that it was not deserved. I'm sure that's not that hard to understand.

Those feelings only got worse when it was perceived that Hillary supporters were making hay at Bernie's expense. That they were enjoying a difficult moment. Remember, I am describing emotions, so rationality doesn't enter into it.

So, if at the worst, you can say that Sanders supporters were overly defensive of their long shot candidate, even at the expense of not listening to the few black opinions that were on their side, I hope that you can try to understand that emotionally and not use it, as some do, as a yardstick by which to measure their racism.

I hope that came off well. I am feeling fence mending impulses today (or this morning anyway).

[pnwmom]

66. That all seems like a reasonable possibility.

Hopefully it is true. If his candidacy continues to strengthen, and you are right, then they should get less defensive (and offensive) over time.

But Bernie isn't Superman. If he's elected, and has to make the inevitable compromises with the other side, I hope they don't respond by trashing him. We won't accomplish anything unless we're unified.

[Bonobo]

72. Agreed and thank you for your response, sincerely. nt

[tishaLA]

71. I appreciate your post. Sincerely.

And I understand what you're talking about. But, while it has been difficult for Sen. Sanders' supporters for the reasons you describe, it has been at least as bad for those of us who have been trying to address issues important to the African American community, often to the point of their voices being silenced.

I hope Sen Warren's speech can offer a step in a more productive direction--one filled with dialogue and empathy on both sides.

[Bonobo]

73. I understand entirely. Big ugly emotions come out and empathy flies out the window.

As you said, let's hope this strengthens empathy all around.

Thanks for your most kind reply.

[The Polack MSgt]

113. Sad to hear she's left for good

Bravenak and 1SBM were 2 of the frequent posters that lead me to join DU. I wanted to chime in and join the discussion they lead.
I'm such an old man that I didn't know how this site worked and it took much too long to realize that the things I read on main page were just the tip of the iceberg of all that they wrote.
Then I joined started reading the other forums and all hell breaks loose.
I'm not a member of the AA here in DU, BTW, I'm just not comfortable self declaring "Ally" status. But I am glad that the forum isn't locked so that I may throw in my 2 cents now and again.

[Number23]

150. We'd love to have you in the AA forum, ThePolack.

Please feel free to pop in anytime. And stay awhile.

[onpatrol98]

125. that's heartbreaking, number 23

I had no idea you and bravenak went through that.

[Number23]

151. We are cool as hell again though so it all worked out.

She's alot wiser after having gone through this whole experience though. And by "wiser" I mean cynical as all hell. I think this experience really opened her eyes to alot of stuff and helped her see things alot more clearly. So she's been hurt but sometimes you learn more from experiences that hurt you than from anything else.

Did you see downthread where I high fived an absolutely magnificent post of yours in defense of Black Lives Matter from a few months ago?? I know your efforts were in vain (as so many are around here) but I saw what you wrote. It was powerful and it was true. And if people choose not to listen then that is their stupidity and loss and theirs alone.

[JI7]

207. i remember that time

not the part about the falling out with you and bravenak . but i know the time you are referring to with those new "friends". and i feel like the one(s) who send her the letter was among these "friends".

[stevenleser]

216. I agree, but far too few. If 85% of the site supports Sanders as polls here keep indicating...

... there should have been a mountain of people of conscience beating back what was said.

A huge amount of Sanders supporters were silent or participating in the ugliness.

[shenmue]

80. Yep

[leftofcool]

99. Yes, yes. yes!

[lunamagica]

122. + a million

[sheshe2]

34. Holy shit 23!

I have been waiting for the Senator that I helped elect to stand up! YES! Finally. Thank you Elizabeth.

Thank you.

Excellent 23. I think she just found her voice!!!!

Maybe now that somebody not black has finally said this clearly and LOUDLY, it will now resonate with people who have steadfastly denied this simple truth out of ignorance, bigotry, stupidity or other reasons.

You rock Elizabeth.

Holy shit 23....she is now under the bus!

Sorry to tell you this....yet some don't like ya much here. I know, you never had a clue. Some just didn't like you here, you are uppity You need to know your place.

Boom! I am so loving this!

[Number23]

41. I couldn't care less about nameless fools disliking me nor the attempts to pretend that a certain

candidate never made "economics will trump all" their rallying cry and/or mantra or that black people who dare to discuss this are conducting a "jihad" against Bernie Sanders.

If a candidate had never made this message a staple of their campaign, there wouldn't be endless analyses and comments from black people, economists and now apparently Elizabeth Warren saying how clueless and historically ignorant that stance actually is.

To Black Lives Matter activists and sympathizers, who've spent the last year or more calling attention to the deaths of young black men and women (many at the hands of police), Sanders's attitude toward race was all too familiar: Generations of white progressives have kept economic issues at the center of progressivism and issues that affect mostly nonwhites at the margins. They've challenged Sanders to make racism and mass incarceration as important to his campaign as Social Security. http://www.vox.com/2015/8/11/9127653/bernie-sanders-black-lives-matter

The horizontal organization of Black Lives Matter ensures a diversity of perspectives among participants and even branches. Nevertheless, the now-commonplace claim at the heart of the recent Black Lives Matter protests against Sanders is that white liberals have long reduced racism to class inequality in order to deflect attention from racial disparities. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/08/bernie-sanders-black-lives-matter-civil-rights-movement/

"We have a fundamental disagreement with Bernie Sanders that racism is somehow an offshoot from economic exploitation when the reality is that race and class in America are inextricably linked to the rise of capitalism in this country," activist Kimberly Ellis told Weigel. http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/09/14/why-bernie-sanders-problems-with-black-voters-go-much-deeper-than-him-just-blaming-the-media/

And that was just with a 12 second search. I'd be here all day if I posted even 1/4 of the stories discussing this, making the "Bernie never said that the focus on economics was most important" denial even more blatant and flat out dumb as well as dishonest.

[RichVRichV]

75. Why would she be thrown under the bus?

I'd say most everyone at this site agrees with what she just said.

[sheshe2]

77. K

You may want to read here a bit more.

I suggest the AA Group.

[RichVRichV]

91. I have been here for a while now.

Maybe it's you who needs to pay better attention.

Go actually watch a Bernie rally for once. He's been talking about injustice by police for a while now. Condemnation of police brutality usually draws the loudest cheers from his "overly white" crowds. He also talks about how the war on drugs predominately harms blacks.

Sander supporters do agree with what Warren has been saying whether you choose to see it or not. As do Hillary supporters and O'Malley supporters. So as I stated the majority of this site is in agreement with her. No buses are needed.

[jfern]

141. Exactly, Warren and Sanders are saying pretty much the same thing

The main difference is that Sanders is taking a lot of attacks for daring to run against Hillary.

[leftofcool]

154. No, the have NOT said the same thing

Try getting out of the bernie forum once in a while and read back about 3 months in the AA forum. You won't though because you would rather believe that bernie is perfect than thousands of AA people who know better.

[jfern]

156. As I was saying, Bernie has been attacked a lot because he's been

running against Hillary. Warren hasn't. But they've been talking about the same things. Just the day before the first BLM protest, Sanders said "I Want an America Where Young Blacks are Not Harassed, Shot & Killed by Police".

Since the protests, Sanders has spoken far more about it, and now has a strong racial justice platform on his website.

https://berniesanders.com/issues/racial-justice/

From his website:

But what King saw in 1968 — and what we all should recognize today — is that it is necessary to try to address the rampant economic inequality while also taking on the issue of societal racism. We must simultaneously address the structural and institutional racism which exists in this country, while at the same time we vigorously attack the grotesque level of income and wealth inequality which is making the very rich much richer while everyone else – especially those in our minority communities – are becoming poorer.

From Warren's speech:

Economic justice is not - and has never been - sufficient to ensure racial justice. Owning a home won't stop someone from burning a cross on the front lawn. Admission to a school won't prevent a beating on the sidewalk outside. But when Dr. King led hundreds of thousands of people to march on Washington, he talked about an end to violence, access to voting AND economic opportunity. As Dr. King once wrote, "the inseparable twin of racial injustice was economic injustice."

Sounds pretty similar to me.

[artislife]

90. Exactly

I would be hard pressed to find a Sanders supporter who doesn't like Warren a lot. I read the H supporters and they seem to like her in the senate doing good work.

Actually, she may be the one person, 90% at the minimum, this board really likes.

If she had run, this site might be have been filled with daisies and sunshine.

[Baitball Blogger]

65. Maybe I'm reading her statements differently.

This is a powerful statement: "Economic justice is not — and has never been — sufficient to ensure racial justice."

I don't think this contradicts those of us who said that we need to work on both racial and economic justice. The way that I read it, she's just saying that economic justice (as a one strategy approach) is not sufficient to ensure racial justice. The operative word being "sufficient." That means, a broad approach needs to be applied.

It's explained in the next sentence: She points out that the Civil Rights movement fought against the tools of oppression wherever they found it. And one of those tools was, wait for it, economic injustice.

So, isn't she saying, then, that in order to ensure racial justice, we must also tackle the problems with economic injustice since they are all tools of oppression?

[Number23]

69. I think she's pretty clear in her statement.

And I have no idea how you could interpret her comment that way unless you are suggesting that anyone has ever stated that economic injustice is not a part of racism?

She is saying what black people have been saying for decades. That economic injustice is merely one component of racism and that fixing economic injustice will not fix racism or racial injustice.

[Baitball Blogger]

111. I get the feeling that we have been agreeing with each other all along.

One of those cases when you look back and can't remember what the fight was all about.

We're all on the same page now. That's the important thing.

[Number23]

152. I don't know if we're on the same page or not. I have seen the old "rising tide lifts all boats"

argument lauded here left and right. That argument is the complete ANTITHESIS of what black activists, Warren, and economists with a strong grasp of American history have been saying for decades.

Those boats didn't all get there at the same time or by the same route. That "rising tide" that many Sanders supporters love to say will fix all ills is focused entirely on economics and the idea of that if we fix economic injustice that everything else will fix itself.

That is the complete OPPOSITE of what Warren and others have been saying. Economic justice is not and HAS NEVER BEEN the cure for racial injustice.

[Baitball Blogger]

159. What she said was, that it wasn't "sufficient."

So, in other words, the neo-Liberal economic plans of the past fell short of changing the social factors that were causing racial injustice. And I think we all know why. Building schools and improving infra-structure in impoverished communities did not change racist attitudes in the white flight zones.

The reason why systemic racism is prevalent is because our policies and the attitudes of the agencies in this country, (like the people working in our criminal justice departments) reflect the desire of the status quo. The status quo in this country is primarily composed of white individuals. This is to say, that our system is replete with prejudice against minorities. I think we can all agree up to this point. But from here on is where we may have difficulty agreeing on the big picture.

As I see it, when people talk about racial justice, I assume they mean passing massive civil rights laws that can go beyond the reach of previous laws; as well as taking on the criminal justice system directly. Specifically, changes in the attitudes and policies in the police force are immediately needed. That is a great objective for the BLM movement because they have everyone's support and I think it is achievable.

However, how do you counter the negative effects that we encounter in daily life that come from private citizens and businesses? That's going to be more difficult. There is a whole set of racist affronts that involve Civil Torts. In other words, no government agency will come to our rescue. We are on our own and the only option is through the courts. In order to exercise our rights, we need money for good lawyers, because there aren't very many high principled lawyers willing to work pro bono these day. Thus, economic equality opens that door for us.

But, probably the biggest advantages that economic equality will offer is provide an opportunity to change the demographics of the status quo. We need to raise the income and education for minorities and hope for the best that the initial wave of individuals who make it into the circles of power aren't going to get seduced and absorbed by the system. I realize that there are difficulties here, since altruism isn't a big seller these days.

But, expecting racial justice to be its own self-propelling vehicle of change, I just don't see it. Mainly because there is no incentive for white America to change without pressure from outside and from within.

[Number23]

160. It's not sufficient because it doesn't address the issue, its causes or its effects. That's why it's

not sufficient! This is not hard.

You cannot "raise the income and education for minorities" if they are crowded into crumbling neighborhoods with horrible schools and no opportunities due to racism. And racism will cause even the brightest and most educated minorities to still encounter issues that the most uneducated white person will never have to endure. Racism will cause even the WEALTHIEST minorities to still endure things that even poor whites won't.

I'm not sure why there are so many attempts to parse what Warren is saying or pretend that it's the same thing as what Bernie's been saying. Well actually I do know. I think her comments speak for themselves but if you disagree, then okay.

[Baitball Blogger]

171. This doesn't address the point I made in my last statement:

"But, expecting racial justice to be its own self-propelling vehicle of change, I just don't see it. Mainly because there is no incentive for white America to change without pressure from outside and from within"

Racial justice may address minority issues more directly, and it may also be able to make direct changes to anything that falls under the "public" jurisdiction, like police departments. But it will not change racist attitudes. Especially not in the private sector.

That's why we need a broad approach. Warren mentioned the tools of oppression that the Civil Rights movement fought against and economic inequality was one of them. I find it difficult to believe that the one issue that she champions is something that she is willing to sweep off the table in this fight for equality.

[Number23]

174. No one is talking about jurisdiction or policy. We are talking about the efforts of far too many

in the white liberal left to pretend that class issues are the last hurdle to climb and that once economic issues are addressed, everything else, including racism will fall away.

Racist attitudes and practices will endure as they always have. But the best way to change these racist behaviors and attitudes is to make the behavior illegal (practices) and call them out (attitude). To inform the people who hold these views that they are not "sufficient" to address the dagger that's been lodged in this country's back for 400 years.

You keep mentioning the CRM and its economic approach. I have never denied that economics is ONE aspect of this so I'm not sure why you keep beating that drum. When my grandparents were out marching for their rights, the right to have a job where they wanted was one of them. But so was also the right to educate their children where they wanted as well as live where they wanted. For the last time, the economics was ONE and only ONE component of their overall fight.

[jfern]

180. I think everyone thinks that racism is an issue, it's just how much

Obviously some people need to see this video about how a black male, a white male, and a white female are treated when they are stealing a bike to realize how much race and gender affect how people are perceived.

[rhett o rick]

121. Exactly. But there are those that want to build a strawman to fight. And while Sen Sanders is for

racial justice as well as economic justice, they want him to be their strawman. His main opponent may support racial justice but she in no way whatsoever supports economic justice.

What is being overlooked by many is that the most important issue facing us is regaining our democracy. Without democracy we will get zero justice. While some are distracted by some minor social justice advancements, they don't realize that that can all disappear if we totally lose our democracy. Allowing big corporations to literally buy candidates is destroying our democracy.

We need both social justice and economic justice. Don't let the Oligarchy drive a wedge between them.

[Hiraeth]

98. Yes, that is my take on that sentence as well. The operative word being: INJUSTICE.

The words: SOCIAL and ECONOMIC are the qualifying words that describe INJUSTICE. They are adjectives used to describe the noun.

English 101

[gollygee]

170. ROFL

Well she moved up my list. I have been concerned about her ability to have been a Republican during the Reagan years.

[NCTraveler]

28. Love this.

She put some truths out there.

[Bonobo]

31. Reminder: Sanders never said economic justice alone

Would solve racial injustice.

Sorry to shit on the parade here.

[Hydra]

37. Convenient ignore of that as usual

Team Hillary tried to strip the economic justice out of it so that it became a completely unactionable issue and one their candidate could simply talk on not have to promise anything.

I've been talking about police brutality and unequal application of laws for years- I'm glad there's finally some public support to put a stop to it.

[pnwmom]

44. At the Netroots meeting all he could talk about, when confronted by the BLM,

was economic justice.

[Bonobo]

47. That's not the same thing.

The other day I was talking about a ham sandwich. It doesn't mean I don't like BLTs.

[pnwmom]

49. When someone begs you for a BLT and your only response is to talk about your ham sandwich,

the logical conclusion is that all you have to offer is your ham sandwich.

[Bonobo]

50. I like your counterargument!

I don't agree, but I think it was a clever counter.

[pnwmom]

53. Thanks, Bonobo.

[Warren DeMontague]

136. Fair enough, it is a good argument. So how about this-

What if you want to talk about a BLT and the person doesnt talk about it or the ham sandwich, but instead dismissively shuts you down and just tells you "Im going to keep talking?"

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/29/1416502/-Hillary-to-BlackLivesMatter-protestors-I-m-going-to-keep-talking

What if you want to talk about BLTs and the person is taking lobbyist money from the folks whose profit margin and business model depends on the incarceration of millions of non-violent BLT eaters?

What if most reasonable people agree that the war on BLTs is a failure, yet instead of calling it as such, a candidate is determined to rebrand it and throw 10 billion more dollars at "the BLT problem"?

[Ed Suspicious]

126. It was a good one.

[bobbobbins01]

146. No one at Netroots was begging to hear his social justice platform.

It was just a clusterfuck of confusion there. If you can fault Bernie for anything that day, it was his inability to decipher the needs 100 different people yelling 100 different things. And he promptly released his platform a few weeks later, so good on him. Bernie and Elizabeth are both speaking the same message. Some people just want the economic justice side to be downplayed for pretty obvious reasons.

[Snap the Turtle]

158. And I'd vote for that ham sandwich..

[Warren DeMontague]

74. Hillary Clinton to Black Lives Matter: "I'm going to keep talking"

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/29/1416502/-Hillary-to-BlackLivesMatter-protestors-I-m-going-to-keep-talking

[NuclearDem]

32. "Economic justice is not — and has never been — sufficient to ensure racial justice"

ABOUT DAMN TIME

[ismnotwasm]

35. Righteous!

A enthusiastic K&R

[Starry Messenger]

40. k&r

Maybe DU can retire toxic phrases like "race card," "identity politics," and the like now.

I look forward to Senator Warren being in the Clinton cabinet. She'd be a great Labor Sec.

[tishaLA]

48. when DU began disparaging "identity politics"

I thought I'd gone through the looking glass. Seriously. The modern Democratic Party has always championed (or at least paid lip service to) "identity politics," whether that meant progressive policies for women, or LGBT people, or African Americans, or Latinos.

That said, I have less excitement about a Clinton presidency/cabinet than you do.

[Starry Messenger]

62. I wish I had more excitement over the election itself.

Frankly, I'm mostly stressed out over the effects of a possible RW win and just wish this was all over. It would be nice to be guaranteed some continuity of the last 8 years, and I only have my fantasy football cabinet to tide me over. If it goes badly, my union will be history, since the RW Supreme Court that might ensue with a Republican victory will no doubt carry on a very anti-labor agenda.

[Tarheel_Dem]

85. I doubt it, they got the phrase "identity politics" from Dear Leader. They think it's catchy, I....

think it's dismissive.

[Starry Messenger]

100. I hate that phrase so much.

Nothing like having your core life experiences dismissed with an airy hand wave.

[JEB]

42. Excellent speech.

Hoping we can make real progress to reform policing in this country.

[pnwmom]

45. President Obama is the living embodiment of that. Economic justice doesn't automatically

bring racial justice.

The racists hate him as much as they would any black person. Maybe more.

[Comrade Grumpy]

54. Good for Warren, but don't all the Democratic candidates say something similar?

[Matariki]

59. Yeah. What she said.

[herding cats]

76. She gets it.

Thank you Senator Warren.

[sheshe2]

81. "Economic justice is not and has never been sufficient to ensure racial justice."

[Tarheel_Dem]

88. Finally. n/t

[Number23]

94. Yep. Amazing how WHAT is being said around here is not nearly as important as WHO is saying it??

Months of attacks on BLM including threads like this http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027060303 (notice the rec count, and please note this post from onpatrol where she tried -- in vain, of course -- to get people to see how stuff like this may look to people of color http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027060303#post252) that ignored this central, simple point that Warren is making. A point that black people have been making for decades.

Now that Warren is saying it, it's "oh yes, of course" and the hideousness of the sentiment behind that linked thread and the rabid attacks on BLM where they were called "thugs" and "subhuman" were just people feeling "enthusiastic" for their candidate and is in no way indicative of anything else and certainly not racism. It is surreal. Nothing short of surreal.

[TM99]

104. So not agreeing with only one, yes, ONE

BLM activist is your proof that Sanders and his supporters have not said from the beginning that economic justice and social justice must be worked on together?

Y'all are loving quoting the first part of Warren's statement but conveniently leaving out the second where she ties them together.

This speech is excellent, and it mirrors quite well what both O'Malley and Sanders have been saying. Clinton, I am still waiting for a clear and unequivocal statement from, that in order to deal with institutionalized racism there must be both social and economic justice for PoC.

[Tarheel_Dem]

114. They only need us to show up and vote. That seems to be the extent of their "concern".

Having been black all my life, I know that issues that affect us adversely, don't get real attention until it reaches into white America. I'm glad Warren spoke up, but she didn't invent the wheel. This is a conversation that's been happening long before BLM got into the mix, but things finally came to a head, and we began to see who our true "allies" are.

[Number23]

149. EXACTLY.

This is a conversation that's been happening long before BLM got into the mix, but things finally came to a head, and we began to see who our true "allies" are.

Absolutely right. This conversation has been going on for decades. None of this is new or news.

I don't know what's funnier. The lack of attacks on Warren for saying the same thing that black folks have been trying to say here for months and were run away for or the laughable attempts to rewrite history. Bernie never put economics first. His supporters on DU only attacked ONE BLM activist ( ) My bookmarks are full to overflowing with the number of times those people were called the most vile, disgusting, RACIST names. But it is so very, very interesting the people who never saw that. Any of that. Even though it went on for months.

Like I said upthread and like you said -- we know who our friends and allies are. We have always known. And if Liz Warren keeps up this kind of bold fearlessness on issues that affect ALL of us, I will be happy to add her to that list.

[riversedge]

101. Warren is saying that even if economic justice is achieved, it will not trickle down to

ensure racial justice.


...."Economic justice is not — and has never been — sufficient to ensure racial justice. Owning a home won’t stop someone from burning a cross on the front lawn. Admission to a school won’t prevent a beating on the sidewalk outside," Warren declared. "The tools of oppression were woven together, and the civil rights struggle was fought against that oppression wherever it was found — against violence, against the denial of voting rights and against economic injustice."

"It is a tragedy when any American cannot trust those who have sworn to protect and serve," Warren said. "This pervasive and persistent distrust isn’t based on myths. It is grounded in the reality of unjustified violence."

[wordpix]

105. I'm on Cape Cod off-season & just saw a young black F driver pulled over by police

OK, maybe she did something wrong but I thought, driving while black? I almost pulled over to assist the driver.

[valerief]

110. That was a great speech, but the truly brave pol will be the one who explains WHO

benefits from this systemic racism and WHY.

[AOR]

119. Yes... but who benefits...

would include talking about capitalist social relations, private ownership of the means of production, and the capitalist ruling class in which not a modern politician exists (including the black capitalist political class) willing to go there in any major way. Symbolism, tokenism, and feel good speeches of "hope and change for all" will rule the day. Who benefits can then be safely glossed over in slogans of the divine right of individualism and "liberty and freedom for all." For the vast majority of the population...the "freedom and liberty" for workers of all races and creeds to work for the owners or starve under capitalist social relations. As an acquaintance once put it -- One is also free to stick their head up their ass providing they break their spine first.

You can't make the cut ? Well...economic justice is not really the problem. We're working on "social justice issues" and "opportunity and ladders into the middle class for all." "Capitalism is human nature and the end of history" and "Socialism has been tried and doesn't work" so that's about the best we can do for the foreseeable future.


Fred Hampton had it right despite the protestations of the purveyors of "Social Justice" without regards to class analysis, economic justice, and capitalism. His words ring loud and clear in contrast to the bourgeois bullshit, lip-service solutions,and platitudes of capitalist politicians and their loyal acolytes.


"It was one class - the oppressed, and that other class - the oppressor. And it's got to be a universal fact. Those that don't admit to that are those that don't want to get involved in a revolution, because they know as long as they're dealing with a race thing, they'll never be involved in a revolution."

"We never negated the fact that there was racism in America, but we said that the by-product, what comes off of capitalism, that happens to be racism. That capitalism comes first and next is racism. That when they brought slaves over here, it was to make money. So first the idea came that we want to make money, then the slaves came in order to make that money. That means, through historical fact, that racism had to come from capitalism. It had to be capitalism first and racism was a byproduct of that."

"We have to understand very clearly that there's a man in our community called a capitalist. Sometimes he's black and sometimes he's white. But that man has to be driven out of our community, because anybody who comes into the community to make profit off the people by exploiting them can be defined as a capitalist."

"We got to face some facts. That the masses are poor, that the masses belong to what you call the lower class, and when I talk about the masses, I'm talking about the white masses, I'm talking about the black masses, and the brown masses, and the yellow masses, too. We've got to face the fact that some people say you fight fire best with fire, but we say you put fire out best with water. We say you don't fight racism with racism. We're gonna fight racism with solidarity. We say you don't fight capitalism with no black capitalism; you fight capitalism with socialism."

--Fred Hampton excerpts from-- Power Anywhere Where There's People

[jalan48]

112. If only she were the woman running for President...............

[LostOne4Ever]

124. Awesome! WTG Senator Warren!!!! (nt)

[NonMetro]

130. Body Cameras For Police Officers Is No Way To Build Trust

Between the police and the people. Besides, who wants to do a job with their supervisor, and everybody else, watching what you do every minute of the day? It's a good job elimination plan, I guess!

[tishaLA]

134. Agreed. It would be tragic if police

Were subjected to the same nearly omnipresent surveillance as black folks. Now THAT is an elimination plan.

[stevenleser]

140. Reality is, there are so many cameras around they need to behave as if they are being watched anyway

There is no getting around it.

[NonMetro]

179. You're Right.

I'm sure George Orwell would be turning over in his grave. Poor George! He thought the commies would bring in the surveillance society!

[stage left]

184. My only concern would be

Policemen turning them off. At the last job I had there was a camera on me all the time. I was a cashier. It's not a problem if you're not doing anything wrong.

Oh, and good for you, Elizabeth Warren.

[NonMetro]

217. Right. You Were Under Suspicion At All Times.

[stage left]

226. Yes, cashiers have been known

to dip into the till. Customers have been known to get in the till, too. And shoplift. I would think all places of business have cameras scanning the aisles. I would feel differently about it if the government installed cameras in my house. Obviously. Police with dash cams have been known to take the people they've stopped out of range of those cameras. That's what the officer did with Sandra Bland. If people distrust them, they've earned the distrust. The decent officers will do as they've always done, whether or not they're being watched.

[NonMetro]

230. For Over 200 Years, Business Operated Just Fine Without Cameras, or...

Surveillance of any kind. No scanners at the doors, no cameras over cash registers, no urine tests for employees, no lie detector tests. None of that stuff - and none would be needed now, either. Other than installing the infrastructure of a police state, the only thing all this surveillance has done is to increase the mistrust people have of each other.

[gollygee]

213. There is no trust

and there is no trust for a reason. We can't build trust unless we see they're trustworthy. The cameras could show us that they're trustworthy.

Every McDonald's employee who works with a cash register, in fact every person who works with a cash register, is on camera at all times they work.

[NonMetro]

218. How Do You Think We Ended Up With 2 Million People In Jail?

In order to fill the prisons, the police, the courts, and the legislatures had to run "stings", engage in illegal surveillance, and even suspend things like the Miranda ruling. The mistrust was built by our police, courts, and lawmakers - and even, as you've pointed out, even our employers who don't trust anyone who works for them. When they are watching you every minute of the day, they're putting everyone under suspicion every minute of the day, and building mistrust every minute of the day. So now, nobody trusts anyone else - the perfect precondition for the perfect police state!

Having more cameras to keep us safe s like saying we need more guns to keep us safe.

[JDPriestly]

181. K&R.

[Ken Burch]

196. Good speech. One quibble, though...

...nobody has eve SAID that economic justice was sufficient to create racial justice.

All that has been said is that you can't really end racism without economic justice...or the other way around.

Both are needed to get either.

[cheapdate]

211. Never heard her acknowledge her white privilege.