What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The States: Maybe A National Divorce Is A Good Idea After All

Status
Not open for further replies.
Three things ring true to me:

1. As the labor movement initially grew in power, they actively tried to exclude minorities. Such were the times.

2. It took government intervention to put and end to that discrimination in the 1940s through 60s.

3. Once poor whites realized that unions were helping, and likely *disproportionally* helping minorities, they walked away from unions despite strong unions being in their own best self interest. Racism runs deeper than we ever want to admit, no matter how many times we see phenomena like this occur.

#1 and #2 show up in this article, #3 is a bit of speculation on my part:

https://amsterdamnews.com/news/2022/09/08/black-workers-history-and-building-union-membership/
 
LynahFan said:
Three things ring true to me:

1. As the labor movement initially grew in power, they actively tried to exclude minorities. Such were the times.[/url]
Click to expand...

I think it is fair to point out that the initial labor movement from the 1880s through the 1920s, which proceeded hand in hand with European socialism, was aggressively color-blind and ethnicity-blind. This is one of the reasons it failed to take hold in America: our whites were just too f-cking racist to make common cause with non-white workers.

This was not exclusive to the South, either. Northern white workers were every bit as racist -- possibly even moreso, because Southern whites had worked alongside blacks in agriculture while Northern whites were unfamiliar with and scared of blacks.

I'm thinking primarily here of the Rust belt and the Northeastern cities. I have no idea whether blacks were welcomed by, say, the Minnesota Farmer–Labor Party. I don't really understand prairie populism -- it seems like it had elements of socialism crossed with religious fervor. You guys know way more about it than I.

The rich were able to break the back of Debsian socialism by splitting workers along racial lines. But that was the great moment of truth for the white working class in the US and they ate the sidewalk. They fell right into the trap of Southern Democratic and Northern Republican politicians, both of which were allied with big business to destroy labor. The tame labor movement that came out of that conflict in the 1930s and 1940s and eventually triumphed, and that never challenged the hegemony of the wealthy in the US the way they tried to in England, France, and elsewhere, did employ racist strategies, because it had become divorced from and was actively hostile to socialism.
 
Poor people hardly vote compared to the rest of us anyways. The ultimate problem is the rich and powerful who successfully dismantle government when in power to enrich themselves, while simultaneously feeding propaganda about government helping only poor people, minorities, thus impeding white people trying to achieve the American Dream. I’d say white people of all incomes, but especially ones like Drew, who are educated enough, wealthy enough, with enough time on his hands to know better than to ever vote for the current iteration of the Republican Party, are way more of a problem than poor white people.
 
psych said:
Poor people hardly vote compared to the rest of us anyways. The ultimate problem is the rich and powerful who successfully dismantle government when in power to enrich themselves, while simultaneously feeding propaganda about government helping only poor people, minorities, thus impeding white people trying to achieve the American Dream. I’d say white people of all incomes, but especially ones like Drew, who are educated enough, wealthy enough, with enough time on his hands to know better than to ever vote for the current iteration of the Republican Party, are way more of a problem than poor white people.
Click to expand...

This is why the race against time American society (and probably human society) is in has all the appearances of turning out poorly for those of us who identify as human. By all logic the current iteration of the republican party should have disappeared quicker than the Whigs folded up their tent. But between the people who circumstances prevent from knowing or doing better and others (like a few who post on this board or did before they folded up their own tents and moved on to the next life) who clearly should know better and have the time to understand why, the rest of us are going to be as phucked as they are.
 
They also passed a repeal of a zombie law that made it illegal for unmarried men and women to cohabitate. Total votes between the senate and house were 111-35. I’ll leave you to guess which party all the No votes came from.
 
MissThundercat said:
Red states are pushing back against age limits for marriage.
Click to expand...

Groomers gonna groom.

wbimDA4.png
 
Deutsche Gopher Fan said:
NY appeals court rules the congressional maps must be redrawn.

if it holds, will shift up to 6 seats from red to blue
Click to expand...

If I have this right:

NY Legislature draws maps heavily favoring Dems
NY Supreme Court says to redraw
NY Legislature does nothing
NY Supreme Court draws their own, favors more Rs than before
NYC Court of Appeals says to redraw, but make them bluer?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top