Why is racism so normalized on social media in 2025?

[Mnementh]

sundin13 said:

Mnementh said:

Maybe. But going into details you will find examples that point in many different directions. Because real politics is messy and there are many different people with many different backgrounds, that are affected in different ways by policies.

What the Gini-index demonstrates is, that neither democrats nor republicans are willing to do substantial changes, only superficial ones. That is since Reagan/Bush, because they clearly enabled policies that redistributed wealth towards the rich and increased inequalities. What we can see, that Clinton accepted that change and the democrats after as well. Only superficial changes were enacted. If something would've cut deeper, that would've impacted the Gini-index. Nothing did.

That is because the democrats are also a neoliberal party that is afraid to anger big corporations. Rolling back the changes Reagan did would anger some companies, because what the Gini-index expresses, that wealth floats towards big global corporations (and the people owning them). The democrats will not piss off Google.

To bring it back to racism: minorities are often on the lower side  of the wealth inequality. Sure there are rich non-white people, but the distribution is that the curve for non-whites will trend more towards the lower wealth than for whites. So reforms that fix general inequality expressed by the Gini-index would proportionally help more people in minority population, but not exclusively. So: affordable health care for everyone, proper workers rights for everyone, better free public education, free or affordable and good public transport - all that would help the working class and minorities. But as the Gini-index showed it didn't happen. Even under democrats.

Affordable health care: Dem policy

Expanded worker rights/union rights: Dem policy

Better public education: Dem policy

Expanded public transit: Dem policy

But they didn't realize any of it. All I see is superficial not effective. That's why it has no effect on the Gini-index.

And we can say the republicans do the same. Affordable health care. A lot of orders on education, which effect we still have to see. Public transport.

But to what effect really? How much of it is show, how much reshuffling of funds, how much supporting helpers of the party? And that goes for democrats too. As the Gini-index shows nothing they did had a real effect on wealth distribution. But meaningful effective policies in these four areas (and more) would lead to an effect. Which means none of it ever was meaningful or effective.

To be clear: the democrats surely produce a lot of paper which can people like you convince that they are doing something. But if over decades the effect is negligable the people that should be the ones feeling these policies, they start to ask questions.

Last edited by Mnementh - on 22 June 2025