Poll: Are there any white democrats that intentionally want to hurt minority groups?

[Shankapotomus]

Because, when you come right down to it, that is the accusation being constantly made by many democrats for whom minority group issues occupy the largest percentage of their energy and activism. That to disagree for too long on a point or strategy involving a struggling minority group is an intentional attempt to oppress that group. The final take away from all this back and forth bickering and leveling of accusations being, some white democrats want to see minorities hurt.
That some white and/or male and/or straight democrats are intentionally "gas lighting" other democrats.

So I thought I'd create a poll to find out what's going on.

I'm not a star member anymore (and so can't post a poll) so I will just provide the choices below in a numbered list. Just put your selection in the subject line of your reply. Thank you.

Poll One:

1. No, I do not want to intentionally hurt minorities and their causes. And, as a democrat/progressive/liberal I'm offended, insulted and sick off the accusations.

2. No. I disagree with some of the methods and conclusions used and drawn by minority activists but I am not trying to intentionally oppress them.

3. Yes. I have strong issues issues/disagreements with minority activists and supporters and feel their progress needs to be openly thwarted and stifled.

4. I am a minority activist and don't think white and/or male and/or straight democrats want to intentionally hurt minorities or minority causes.

5. I am a minority activist and unapologetically claim some white and/or male and/or straight democrats are intentionally trying to hurt and stifle minority progress.

Poll Two (for minority activists):

6. I am a minority activist and think white and/or male and/or straight democrats want to intentionally hurt minorities or minority causes out of pure bigotry and conscious discrimination.

7. I am a minority activist and think white and/or male and/or straight democrats want to intentionally hurt minorities or minority causes out of ignorance.

For Other:

8. I don't like polls.

9. I've always thought you were strange. Not to be mean but could you please stay out of my threads. OkayThanksBye!

[leftofcool]

1. So this is "your" take away?

I'm not even going to bother.

[sibelian]

4. You never do...

...

[gollygee]

2. Racism doesn't require intention

In fact, it's often invisible to white people. We often don't even see it happening, because it's usually built into structures and institutions rather than simply being the act of someone mean, and because it doesn't happen to us.

[Shankapotomus]

3. I don't doubt that

However, this thread concerns those instances where democrats are specifically accused of intentional, conscious bigotry, discrimination, racism, gas lighting, etc, as a motive..

[sibelian]

5. I think that's a very good point.

But I DO think there is a necessity to distinguish between "conscious" and "unconscious" racism if we're going to continue to use the term "racism" to address both institutional bias and actual consciously held bigotry.

[sibelian]

6. I would say option 2, for me.

... Although my position as "minority activist" depends on who is describing me.

It seems that I am part of an oppressed demographic through being gay and an oppressor demographic through being white.

This being the case, I prefer to assess the capacity for prejudice according to what is done rather than what people are.

[Shankapotomus]

7. Someone such as yourself, sibelian,

is precisely why I resist this kind of demonizing of fellow democrats. A lot of democrats are suffering and thought they would find a refuge in the strength of other liberals only find they are considered oppressors.

[sibelian]

9. Yes, it's become completely impossible to discuss prejudice in terms of it's actual meaning

(sorry to take so long to get back to you)

The cartoonish boxing in of individuals into oppressor and oppressed classes serves only to obscure the real mechanisms of prejudice. Bigotry is a behaviour, a character trait, not a state of being.

"A lot of democrats are suffering and thought they would find a refuge in the strength of other liberals only find they are considered oppressors."

Yes! There is an unstated and unanalysed hierarchy of victimhood. It drives me absolutely bananas!!!

[Prism]

8. The question is whether or not you're obstructing the group

It's one thing to disagree with a point of tactics. But if you find yourself angrier at the minority group for their tactics than the system they are attempting to overcome, I would venture that priorities have been misplaced somewhere in the process.

For example, on DU, many people got really angry at LGBTers for criticizing President Obama and spent more time haranguing the community than speaking out at against the inequality that drove us to act.

Likewise, a lot of people got really, really pissed at BLM for their tactics and spent more time arguing about that than discussing the institutionalized systems and racism that brought them to organize in the first place.

When it comes to Power vs the Oppressed, if you spend more time complaining about what the Oppressed is up to, you've misprioritized and are probably not being incredibly helpful.

[Glassunion]

10. So if your not a minority you have 3 options. If you are a minority you have 2 identical options in

Last edited Fri Oct 2, 2015, 05:57 PM - Edit history (1)

the second poll.

[bettyellen]

13. Amazing, huh? Wondering if THAT was out of ignorance or intentional?

[Glassunion]

17. I'm probably on the poster's ignore list. The "minority" poll still only has one option...

You can't want to intentionally hurt someone out of ignorance. If you want to intentionally do something, you're not ignorant of your actions.

I should try that...

To finally put this ever so divisive issue to rest...

Poll for DU:

Who was the sexiest actor to play Batman?

1. Michael Keaton
2. Michael John Douglas

[Dont call me Shirley]

11. I believe there are a few white democrats who would intentionally hurt minority groups. Proof..

Kim Davis, as a Democrat, intentionally tried to harm the LGBTQ community by denying them their legal right to marry.

[AgingAmerican]

15. She makes Zell Miller

Look like a 'long haired' hippy

[dembotoz]

12. we always pride ourselves in having a big tent...the tent from time to time has racists.

as our party leadership has dragged us toward the center some of this is unavoidable.
and prior to lbj jim crow was pretty much a southern dem thing. that lovely county clerk is an example of one who should have
been a goper for years but somehow remained on paper dem.

I also know some quite lefty folks who are quite racist...i mean really racist.
It was either harry reasoner or howard k smith who used to do promos from his newscast on how folks were not generally purely left or right but an odd assortment of some of this and some of that. I do think that over time the gop has done a fairly good job of more consistency within its membership but i do not really see that as a good thing

[Shankapotomus]

14. I guess I have to admit

some "dems" are discriminatory. I wanted to draw a better conclusion. I thought people are democrats and liberals because they get race, they get misogyny, they get homophobia. But sadly, that's not the case and some do need to be reminded to be more sensitive and aware of others.

But I don't think someone like Bernie Sanders needs to reminded. That, I thought, crossed a line. But I don't want to start that argument again.

[Glassunion]

16. Post 10 aside... Since I refuse to take a poll where there is not an option that reflects my views..

I would lean towards option 5, however I lean not towards intent, but more of an apathy of just a flat out obtuse attitude. If someone is standing on my foot, and I ask them to stop, and they ignore me. I will tell them to stop. If I am still not heard, I will yell. Yet, here is what happens. Someone stands on our foot, we ask, we are ignored, then we tell, then we are questioned as to our motives and who is really pulling the strings. Then we yell, we act out, well because damn it, it hurts. But then we are questioned as if we are plants sent to disrupt, or further questioned as to the end game of our demands, and instead offered what someone else thinks that we need, instead of just getting off our damn foot.

Are we questioning that you are intentionally trying to hurt minorities, or are we telling you that your actions may inadvertently hurt minority groups? Disagreeing on a point or strategy is just that, however when you disagree, put your foot down and walk away, there is no discussion and you have failed to listen.

The take away should be to look inward, take a moment and listen and ask could my actions hurt the minority? But when your mind is made up, and that's all there is to it, minorities will be hurt regardless of your intent.

An example of Democrats hurting minorities. Hair braiding is part of our culture. Like it or not, it is. One thing it is not is cosmetology, as cosmetology involves far more than braiding hair. It involves treatments (chemicals) for the hair, nails, and skin. A hair braider is not qualified to be a cosmetologist. Problem is that some licensed cosmetologists complained because they see the hair braiders as unwelcome competition. Now what demographic group do you think that the vast majority of hair braiders falls into? If you guessed West African immigrants you would be correct. So, a pair of Democrats without doing their homework, decided to co-sponsor a bill requiring the occupation of braiding hair (no chemicals) now requires a license. To make it easy, for the hair braiders, the licensing board offered the tests in English only, and you are not allowed a translator or someone else to help you take the required tests if you are illiterate (West Africa is not known for its high literacy rates).

So there you have it... Democrats had a good idea, a good plan, because in the end they were just protecting the customers (based on the "what if" complaints from cosmetologists), but they did so by putting a group that is by and far a minority in a tough spot where they could possibly have to shut down their businesses.

[olddots]

18. as M.Mouse once said

I can only squeak for myself .

dopey question ....dopey answer or ar least a dopey answer .