White women tend not to be mass shooters, for instance

Truly, they’re interchangeable depending kn the circumstances.

+1…Their cousins are “busy” in the red run oblasts, eh.

I had a Latino buddy that was in it only for the machismo because libs were gay and no way a black woman. He really didn’t have any hardline conservative views except for “don’t stray from the herd”

I did not know that, but it sounds about right lmao. Lil Marco the narco

Don’t get me wrong, he did plenty of divisive things. Pioneering the idea that the president can just call in a drone strike without the approval of Congress if he can get a quick kill in, for example.

But that’s just an ‘improvement’ on the same shit that every US Prez has done since the Gulf of Tonkin. Literally every single one has authorized the use of extrajudicial authority to silence their critics or exercised military clout without approval. The War Powers Act of 1973 functionally gave away the most important power the representatives had. They’ve just invented a casus belli and gone to town, every god damn time.

Obama wasn’t divisive, not by comparison. He was an improvement. At the very least he acted like there was some kind of civilized intent behind the enormous war machine he was driving. Recently, we just haven’t had the luxury of a President that is polite enough to let us ignore how brutal this hellhole really is.

I have a good relationship with my family, but they are still miserable and draining to be around.

Why would you tolerate this?

I am from Boston, northeast has always been super racist and still is.

We just hide our racism by using different words, like ‘those people’. Go to any town/city meeting and you will see 50% of the people going up to talk about their ‘concerns’ using phrases like that. It’s all very veiled and vague, for sure, but it’s incredibly obvious what they mean. Being racist here is 100% cool as long as you are not doing it directly.

And hell, most of my white progressive anti-racists friends, are very very uncomfortable around non-white people. I had the ‘privileged’ of growing up a lower-income mixed race community, but most of my peers have zero experience with non-white people.

I think it’s more that a lot of racists hid it rather than openly reveling in it like they do now.

I mean, exhibit A, Obama won election and re-election.

You somehow failed to understand their comment. They very clearly write that they thought it wasn’t this bad until Obama became president and they (the person you replied to) learned just how bad it actually is. And a lot of countries are way less racist than the US. They aren’t saying there is no racism where they live, which again is weird how you don’t seem to understand.

So both things you said are fully because you failed to read something that shouldn’t be possible to misunderstand because of how clearly they are written.

Racism is just tribalism evolved.

And what country are you from where racism is not an issue?

No really, where, because a non-racist place to live sounds fantastic, especially nowadays.

What? Republicans trash the economy then leave the next Democrat to fix it.

But because the changes in policy take time to affect the economy, it looks like the democrat caused it.

But every time, the Democrats end with an improving economy and the Republicans end with a declining economy.

Most people are racist. Some of the biggest racists I ever knew were Asian and Hispanic.

It’s just white racism is considered wrong and bad, and the other kind of racisms are not, because the white media industry is obsessed with self-flagellating itself over white on black racism as begin the only legitimate racism.

There is also a massive issue with asian on black, and black on asian, racism. But White people don’t know about it or talk about it, because white people are mostly obsessed with racism in terms of their own guilt, rather than understanding how it operates systematically across various groups. A lot of Trumps minority supports were for him because he’s racist and they agree with him.

The Catholic Church is openly opposed to this administration so a vote for Trump was a vote against the pope so nice try but no

Many Latinos are super religious.

Reason enough to close the Southern border.

This is a nonsensical argument the republicans literally always add trillions to the debt, funnel all the government money to their criminal friends and cause a recession. Fiscal responsibility isn’t a conservative value they’re just brainwashed. ALSO and more importantly you were not able to comprehend what I was saying at all. We have a good portion of the United states brainwashed by billionaire owned propaganda and voting to shoot themselves in the foot. My point wasn’t that Latinos are dumb and that was pretty obvious it was that we have a serious propaganda issue

Malcolm X had thoughts on this, but I would probably be auto banned if I shared the title of his speech.

There has to be at least one person in history who was aroused by the idea of their partner (consensually and temporarily) taking their voting rights away

you mean that?

a lot of black people are homophobic, sexist, and conservative. and racist.

both things can be true.

this idea that black people are all progressive liberals is just a projection from white progressive liberals complete lack of interaction with people outside their little enclaves. they aren’t.

black voters are largely democratic, yes, but they are typically not progressives on social issues.

What everyone forgot, esp on the Dem/liberal side, is you win by buying a coalition of voters around various issues on which they can find some mutual ground. Which is exactly what Trump did in '16 and '20 and the Democrats did with Obama in '08 and '12.

Trump focused on the border, economy, and other rhetoric around which a lot of people found common interest. And racism was one of those interests. Many Hispanic voters also wanted the border closed. My Asian friends parents were Trump supporters, because they were anti-immigration. They were first gen immigrant and they hate new Asian immigrants coming here.

Ahh, screw news media, we only have exit polls to go on, sadly those are percentages.

There were less black and white democrats and more black and white republicans voting in 2024 compared to 2020.

You can read that a lot of ways. One side will say it’s democrats defecting, one side will say it’s just them not voting while the other side was making maximum effort.

There is, however, a growing call, especially in the black communities, to stop supporting the DNC because they’re leaning so hard toward the white patriarchy (e.g.). Texas) that they’d suffer another 4 years of facism then hand off the reights to yet another half baked white guy in place of a black woman with decades of experience. The call is they know how to survive while oppressed, let the DNC figure it out or rot on the vine trying. And there were in fact comparatively half the black voters in 2024 than in 2020. where the white-only drop was 3-5%.

This is in no way meant to criticise their decisions. I worry that it’s the wrong way to go, but hell, they might be right. I just really wish my kids and their kids didn’t have to pay for all this to make it happen.

Where the person thinks they started from nothing no matter how elevated their position was.

In America, this is the internalized narrative that everyone has, it’s our national mythology.

I’ll do you one better. I am a working-class born American, who went to Harvard and became part of the upper-middle class. Many people I meet in my adult life, tell me I should have never been born because my parents were unable to provide me with college/grad school education out of their own money. They actively hate and resent the idea of people working their way up in life because it makes them feel bad about themselves. Sometimes I get told that my lack of wealth, makes me MORE privileged than them. Literally last month I was out with someone whose parents had PhDs, who started lecturing me no how ‘oppressed’ they were by having such successful parents, and my uneducated rural upbringing was ‘more privileged’ than theirs because ‘your starting point was so much lower and therefore it was easier for you to achieve things’. It was wild. But I encounter such attitudes very frequently. It’s basically the sentiment that affirmative action is cheating and allowing ‘unworthy’ minorities to attend schools and ‘displacing’ more deserving wealthier white/asian students.

The upper classes do not want anyone to achieve what they have, they want to horde it for themselves. In their own minds, they are the victims of an evil and undeserving working-class who wants to steal from them.

I used to. When I was a kid in school, I figured it was a holdover from “the racist times” back in the 1960s.

Then I saw how people treated Obama. Real eye opener.

Things seemed to be getting better in the 90s. It wasn’t solved, but it was on course to be getting better. And then 9/11 happened and all of a sudden, it was ok to be prejudice against brown people and it didn’t take long for that to snowball. Seeing that felt like everyone around me was replaced with pod people.

Do you think that scene from Blues Brothers would be included if it was made today or would the executives play it safe and veto it?

The Supreme Court literally ruled that racism was over when they overturned the voting rights act.

Person above you apparently lol

I think Adam Smith would have a lot to say about this. Specifically, he would probably point out that the slave states really had an awfully small economy compared to the free states, and that most of the wealth generation which occurred in the US occurred due to productivity gains driven by technological innovations which were most aggressively exploited in the north. In the long run, few people could claim to have really benefitted noticeably from american slavery - it was just a shitty thing to do for no reason.

Some historians appear to agree with additional support. During the 18th century, the slave economy was significant in the expansion of industry & commerce, but its value declined & was no longer needed by the 19th century. Slave-intensive sugar production that dominated the 18th century became less important in the 19th century as shipment of cotton products to international markets grew in significance. Unlike sugar, cotton had less need for slaves, and early cotton growers used slaves primarily because they were already slave-owners.

Insurgent scholars known as New Historians of Capitalism argue that slavery, specifically slave-grown cotton, was critical for the rise of the U.S. economy in the 19th century. In contrast, I argued that although industrial capitalism needed cheap cotton, cheap cotton did not need slavery. Unlike sugar, cotton required no large investments of fixed capital and could be cultivated efficiently at any scale, in locations that would have been settled by free farmers in the absence of slavery. Early mainland cotton growers deployed slave labour not because of its productivity or aptness for the new crop, but because they were already slave owners, searching for profitable alternatives to tobacco, indigo, and other declining crops. Slavery was, in effect, a ‘pre-existing condition’ for the 19th-century American South.

Slavery restrained economic development of the south, causing it to underperform economically: while it unevenly concentrated the lesser wealth produced there, the lesser wealth produced there benefitted the rest of the economy less than it could have. Free states didn’t benefit from the less wealth concentrated elsewhere.

To be sure, U.S. cotton did indeed rise ‘on the backs of slaves’, and no cliometric counterfactual can gainsay this brute fact of history. But it is doubtful that this brutal system served the long-run interests of textile producers in Lancashire and New England, as many of them recognized at the time. As argued here, the slave South underperformed as a world cotton supplier, for three distinct though related reasons: in 1807 the region closed the African slave trade, yet failed to recruit free migrants, making labour supply inelastic; slave owners neglected transportation infrastructure, leaving large sections of potential cotton land on the margins of commercial agriculture; and because of the fixed-cost character of slavery, even large plantations aimed at self-sufficiency in foodstuffs, limiting the region’s overall degree of market specialization. The best evidence that slavery was not essential for cotton supply is demonstrated by what happened when slavery ended. After war and emancipation, merchants and railroads flooded into the southeast, enticing previously isolated farm areas into the cotton economy. Production in plantation areas gradually recovered, but the biggest source of new cotton came from white farmers in the Piedmont. When the dust settled in the 1880s, India, Egypt, and slave-using Brazil had retreated from world markets, and the price of cotton in Liverpool returned to its antebellum level. See Figure 2.

Specifically, he would probably point out that the slave states really had an awfully small economy compared to the free states,

Both things can be true though. The money from black slaves flowed into the pockets of white slaveowners AND it was economically a very dumb move.

If I steal a thousand bucks, and lose nine hundred and fifty while running away, I haven’t benefited much, but that doesn’t change the damage inflicted.

Your comment completely completely proves what white feminism is , that’s the lack of accountability and no consideration of rights of minority

Even United Nations acknowledge the need to move beyond white feminism :-

https://www.unwomen.org/en/articles/explainer/intersectional-feminism-what-it-means-and-why-it-matters-right-now

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_feminism

Adam smith point of view won’t work here cause black people even after abolishment of slavery were not allowed to participate in economy in efficient way . Productivity of economy benefited only white people for wealth generation … In case black people if became successful,they were torn downed to the ground Best example would be what happened to black wall street and how it got destroyed during Tulsa massacre

it’s a convoluted rant blaming white women for trumps win, or something. because if only they were the right kind of feminist they’d have seen the light! or something

I particularly enjoyed the random injection of NA land issues, as if that’s somehow the fault of white middle-class feminism?

Wild stuff. But your typical leftist lemmy rant that is completely out of touch and incoherent and blames other people for being ignorant fools for not being their particular flavor of leftism. Because if only everyone believed what they did, we’d live in a socialist utopia where injustice would not exist and butterflies would fly out of everyone’s assholes when they farted.

1)“Literally the only feminism I’ve heard about for the past 10 years is intersectional feminism.”

Actions speaks more than words , Unlike Scandinavian countries where feminists became so inclusive that they heavily prioritised welfare and empowerment of minority women belonging to Sami tribe community Whereas in United States , everything is just in words not in action. Also the percentage of white women voting for trump increased in United States shows what is the state of intersectionality in United States compared to Nordic countries,

2)“Very much a just-so story. Imo, a far more reasonable interpretation breaks voting patterns along tribal identity, while most women voting care about more things than the very amorphous “collective welfare of all women”. Interesting to note that 38% of latina voters voted for Trump, a statistic strangely absent from your argument”

Exactly—voting is shaped by identity. That’s the point. The large gap between white and Black women voters shows that “women” are not a unified political group, and race often outweighs gender solidarity in practice. Bringing up Latina voters actually strengthens the argument—different groups of women have different lived realities and priorities. So main stream white feminists avoided problems of minorities despite making claims of suport for intersectionality

3)“I have never met a single self-identifying feminist who would not agree with this to some extent.”

Acknowledging history isn’t the same as centering it. The critique is that these histories are often treated as background context rather than shaping current feminist priorities and policy focus.

4)“I think Adam Smith would have a lot to say about this. Specifically, he would probably point out that the slave states really had an awfully small economy compared to the free states, and that most of the wealth generation which occurred in the US occurred due to productivity gains driven by technological innovations which were most aggressively exploited in the north. In the long run, few people could claim to have really benefitted noticeably from american slavery - it was just a shitty thing to do for no reason.”

That’s a very selective reading. slavery was deeply integrated into early American capitalism—financing, banking, and global trade . The effects didn’t just disappear; they shaped wealth distribution and institutions long-term. Jim crows laws also disadvantaged black people in economic wealth creation , most of the black workers during this period didn’t had an opportunity to generate assets unlike white people. productivity gains driven by technological innovations mostly benefitted white people because of restrictions for participation of black people in the economy

5)“I mean, from the pro-DEI arguments I keep hearing on lemmy, DEI seems to mostly involve removing names from resumes before they are rejected by AI or something. But I wouldn’t be surprised if this critique had merit - most people who benefit from adding footholds inside the system are people who know how to work the system.”

Yes—and that’s precisely the critique. When structural inequalities aren’t addressed, benefits often flow to those already closer to power like white women rather than the most marginalized groups.

6)“I really don’t have anything to say to this, because it feels like you kind of just shut down in the middle of a rant. Are you okay? Did you have a stroke?”

Dismissing the point doesn’t address it. There’s research showing that diversity initiatives and educational access programs often disproportionately benefit white women compared to more marginalized groups. That’s a structural outcome worth examining, not ignoring.

I’m thinking many people who voted for Trump did not love everything about him, such as the racism, but settled for him for other varied reasons.

Latina people are white , Colombia is the best example , were most of the Latina people like to identify as white over mestizo or black identity.

Most of the Latina people identify more as white than black or mestizo