Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is good to see that Sanders is speaking out about this . He must realize it's a losing strategy.
He totally slammed Hillary too. I know he probably felt like he sold part of his soul to endorse her.
Sanders speaking a lot of truth here but it seems many in his party likely won't listen
____
Bernie Sanders said Monday that the path to success for Democrats has to be through more than just identity politics, adding that it’s simply not enough for the party to base its appeals on diversity.
“It’s not good enough for someone to say, ‘I’m a woman! Vote for me!’” No, that’s not good enough. What we need is a woman who has the guts to stand up to Wall Street, to the insurance companies, to the drug companies, to the fossil fuel industry,” the Vermont independent senator and former Democratic presidential candidate said in a not-so-subtle rebuke to Hillary Clinton.
"“We need candidates — black, white and Latino and gay and male, we need all of that. But we need all of those candidates and officials to have the guts to stand up to the oligarchy. That is the fight of today.”"
This is good to see that Sanders is speaking out about this . He must realize it's a losing strategy.
He totally slammed Hillary too. I know he probably felt like he sold part of his soul to endorse her.
Sanders speaking a lot of truth here but it seems many in his party likely won't listen
____
Bernie Sanders said Monday that the path to success for Democrats has to be through more than just identity politics, adding that it’s simply not enough for the party to base its appeals on diversity.
“It’s not good enough for someone to say, ‘I’m a woman! Vote for me!’” No, that’s not good enough. What we need is a woman who has the guts to stand up to Wall Street, to the insurance companies, to the drug companies, to the fossil fuel industry,” the Vermont independent senator and former Democratic presidential candidate said in a not-so-subtle rebuke to Hillary Clinton.
"“We need candidates — black, white and Latino and gay and male, we need all of that. But we need all of those candidates and officials to have the guts to stand up to the oligarchy. That is the fight of today.”"
The Dems pulled a number on Bernie and ousted him in the dirtiest manner. They halted all the class politics and switched to identity politics because they knew Clinton was all about globalization, corporate interests, Wall St, and pro-establishment.
This is a bunch of baloney on his part, don't believe it. I saw him in an interview last week and he was playing identity politics like an expert. He, as much as the Clintons, deserves to be forgotten.
Well at first he was riding the populist wave but then after Hillary got the nod he switched his tune too. I wonder who got to him. He didn't really champion identity politics a whole lot. He still subscribes to it but it was always secondary.
This is interesting this book came out 10 years ago , so true.
The Trouble With Diversity: How We Learned to Love Identity and Ignore Inequality, which makes the unpopular argument that liberalism's single-minded obsession with diversity is a tool used by elites to distract from the greater evils of worker exploitation and economic inequality. Michaels argues that social justice is perceived as served if the top classes at Ivy League colleges contain a percentage of women, black people, and Latinos proportionate to the population—ignoring the lack of opportunity for those who don't go to college. Likewise, it's considered a victory if minorities or women become executives at Fortune 500 companies, whether or not workers at those companies are paid a living wage. In other words, liberals are OK with inequality so long as it's diverse inequality.
This is a bunch of baloney on his part, don't believe it. I saw him in an interview last week and he was playing identity politics like an expert. He, as much as the Clintons, deserves to be forgotten.
Thats not true at all. He talks about it here as well. 30 years ago.
This is interesting this book came out 10 years ago , so true.
The Trouble With Diversity: How We Learned to Love Identity and Ignore Inequality, which makes the unpopular argument that liberalism's single-minded obsession with diversity is a tool used by elites to distract from the greater evils of worker exploitation and economic inequality. Michaels argues that social justice is perceived as served if the top classes at Ivy League colleges contain a percentage of women, black people, and Latinos proportionate to the population—ignoring the lack of opportunity for those who don't go to college. Likewise, it's considered a victory if minorities or women become executives at Fortune 500 companies, whether or not workers at those companies are paid a living wage. In other words, liberals are OK with inequality so long as it's diverse inequality.
WOW I buy it. I mean whenever I bring this up to my liberal friends they're like a deer in headlights. All they seem to care about is ending what they think is a white supremacist patriarchy. They only care about social issues and identity politics.
With Bernie many got on board with class but as soon as he was booted out Hillary took over and it was all about identity again. I honestly think younger liberals don't know or don't care about the economy. Whenever I bring up how much of a corporate shill Hillary is they just don't care. She was MORE pro-corporate than Trump.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.