I think it’s funny how in the article, Warren’s tweet is first and she has the earlier timestamp, but in your post, you put Bernie first. I mean, you’re not wrong to do it that way, but it is interesting…
I’ve been arguing with libertarians (and especially anarcho-capitalists) since the mid-90s and I’ve embraced the statist label and worked towards developing a political philosophy that justifies big government. I may have a tendency to go overboard, but I’m not going to be happy with any candidate who I think is enabling libertarian talking points. I consider the libertarian wing of the Republican Party to be much more corrosive to our society than the religious conservative wing.
I’ve also suggested that you are a troll. You’re either an actually honest mainstream Dem or trying to rub mainstream Dem’s noses in the implications of their policies.
I’m not sure how mainstream I am, but I definitely approach politics differently than most people. I am definitely not a consequentialist, so I accept that my preferences can have outcomes that are undesirable. I am a lot more process-oriented and I want to back a presidential candidate who I think understands the big-picture, theoretical ideas of politics.
lol DNC. I wonder if they’ll move it, or try to force negotiations.
So different question for you folks. Do you consider having a special reference code on a donation link to be “bundling”? Pete’s “Investor’s circle” that Warren has been talking about going after includes a lot of people who are just normal grassroots supporters who signed up at the start to have their own referral code, so when they post the link to donate to Pete on twitter, etc, a note goes on the donation that their link was used.
So my friend who is an engineer at GA, and my other friend who is a fellow poker dealer, their names are going to be listed on this bundler list. I would be lying if I said I wasn’t just a tiny bit afraid for them for the unnecessary scrutiny they might receive for doing something completely innocent. I highly doubt when they signed up for this in April that they even thought they would be considered bundlers, and thus evil and corrupt by fellow dems. Nuance is not exactly the strong suit of the people screaming about this, and I’m not sure they care that these folks have “bundled” a bunch of $3 and $10 donations through ActBlue.
OK so this redefining white privilege as class privilege is like, peak white privilege.
What you think of as white privilege is an aspect of it. But what you don’t experience is the effects of the constant policing of your identity. Freedom from that is what white privilege is.
Anecdote - - a family member moved back to Socal after a few years in Portland. Her ancestry is southern European and she looks vaguely Mediterranean and has been mistaken for black, for Jewish, Iranian, Greek by people of those ethnicities. Anyway, at the doctor’s, physical therapist, notary public even, her ethnicity or race was always questioned. She would check the “white” box on medical forms and get second guessed on it every time. Worst thing she could say is ‘Spanish’ (you know, from Spain) because then they think that means Mexican.
Having strangers constantly assuming it is their place to tell you who you are and where you should be is a humiliaring hassle.
She said she missed not having to constantly explain herself and assert her right to be in a space and right to be taken seriously. I said what she missed was being white.
Moving back to a more diverse part of the country, she feels more at home and nobody thinks twice about who she is or where she should be. That freedom is the privilege of whiteness.