shavenferret said:
Now, we have the option of protesting and voicing ourselves over media. Books, YT, scholarship, people making talking points over various forms of discrimination,etc. This sounds kind of like what SvennoJ was saying, but for perhaps different reasons. You seem to want a slower paced solution by this live and let live approach. He would sympathize but disliked coming down on certain groups (like american blacks) if they've been discriminated against in the past. Liberalism turns into something that can forgive various groups of their wrongdoings. |
I assume 'He' refers to me in your last paragraph, so let me clear some things up a bit :)
I do no sympathize letting the market solve systemic discrimination, in the best case scenario that would only lead to segregation, not integration and mutual respect / equality. Plus those marginalized do not have the means to start a business. Plus the idea that the majority will agree is not how progress works, that's how preservation of the group and perpetuation of ostracism works. Even if the majority agrees, it's still those in power economically that set the course.
I'm not talking about forgiving various groups of their wrongdoings. I gave explanations of why this happens (human nature, tribalism, survival of the fittest when oppressed) and how to solve it (real equality including social economic status and address systemic racism) It's not forgiveness, it's understanding that pointing fingers and ostracism of various groups only furthers the problems you want changed. Change requires both a bottom up and top down approach.
Take for example Iran where there is a big 'underground' of more liberal values. Those are the seeds for change. The government was slowly changing to get more tolerant, revoking the most restricting laws or at least not acting on them. Eventually this leads to policy changes as the government wants votes from minority groups as well, or simply stay in power without worrying about revolts. Then top down changes make sure the majority follows.
Of course Trump/Netty stoking up the protests early this year, turning them violent hoping to instigate a revolt only has the opposite effect. The worry about a revolt induces changes, an actual revolt ends in a bloodbath and people digging their heels in. Then of course bombing Iran set all progress back (likely by design, the west doesn't want a progressive Iran, they want a bogeyman) and the grassroots organization for change are hit hardest in the outcome while more radical hardliners take over to preserve the sovereignty of the country. In times of hardship, marginalized groups suffer the most.
Look at the USA, the worry about people rising up keeps Trump from nuking Iran and putting boots on the ground. While an actual storming of congress / the White house will end in civil war and chaos where marginalized groups better move out of the way...
I don't know what liberals are saying, but understanding is not the same as forgiving. It's to find the best way to induce change rather than making it 'their' identity. To induce the same path of change as happened in the West where the grip of religion lost power over people because they were no longer living meal to meal and now had time and means to stand up for those ostracized to keep the group tightly controlled. Poverty leads to / reinforces discrimination. MAGA's / the elite's strategy is to destroy the middle class to better / more easily control the group again with divide and rule. Pointing fingers at outliers / putting the blame for your hardships on outliers is the core strategy. That has to change.
