Do you know any poor white people?

[KingSweden]

I challenge anyone to drive through Eastern Washington or Northern Idaho and claim that the people there enjoy any kind of "white privilege." The intersectional-heavy rhetoric you see from the campus left and Salon-esque sources these days are dangerous not because they prevent downscale whites in the South from voting Democrat - that ship sailed decades ago - but because they color the policy prescriptions offered by progressive politicians who, outside of (to his credit) Bernie Sanders seem desperate to be never seen helping rural voters (middle-class, urban liberal whites have all kinds of policy demands Democrats are quick to cave to including but not limited to higher minimum wage, rent control, mass transit, social policies, etc. All of which I am supportive of, but still).

It should also be pointed out that there are plenty of poor or downscale whites who don't live in Appalachia but in cities and suburbs who are not culturally "poor white" as many modern progressives think of it, and these men and women certainly don't suffer from any privilege themselves.

[KingSweden]

I challenge anyone to drive through Eastern Washington or Northern Idaho and claim that the people there enjoy any kind of "white privilege." The intersectional-heavy rhetoric you see from the campus left and Salon-esque sources these days are dangerous not because they prevent downscale whites in the South from voting Democrat - that ship sailed decades ago - but because they color the policy prescriptions offered by progressive politicians who, outside of (to his credit) Bernie Sanders seem desperate to be never seen helping rural voters (middle-class, urban liberal whites have all kinds of policy demands Democrats are quick to cave to including but not limited to higher minimum wage, rent control, mass transit, social policies, etc. All of which I am supportive of, but still).

It should also be pointed out that there are plenty of poor or downscale whites who don't live in Appalachia but in cities and suburbs who are not culturally "poor white" as many modern progressives think of it, and these men and women certainly don't suffer from any privilege themselves.

I've literally lived in poor, rural, 99% white areas all my life so I think I'm entitled to my opinion. You, however, apparently drove through Idaho once and now you think you're the God appointed defender of working class whites, which I guess says everything anyone needs to know about this forum.

And when NY said that attitude was much more condescending then anything he said he was telling the truth.

I live a few miles from the Idaho border and have spent considerable time there, nor am I "defending" poor whites. I'm not attacking them, either, nor did I at any point attack your opinion. Jeez.

[KingSweden]

I challenge anyone to drive through Eastern Washington or Northern Idaho and claim that the people there enjoy any kind of "white privilege." The intersectional-heavy rhetoric you see from the campus left and Salon-esque sources these days are dangerous not because they prevent downscale whites in the South from voting Democrat - that ship sailed decades ago - but because they color the policy prescriptions offered by progressive politicians who, outside of (to his credit) Bernie Sanders seem desperate to be never seen helping rural voters (middle-class, urban liberal whites have all kinds of policy demands Democrats are quick to cave to including but not limited to higher minimum wage, rent control, mass transit, social policies, etc. All of which I am supportive of, but still).

It should also be pointed out that there are plenty of poor or downscale whites who don't live in Appalachia but in cities and suburbs who are not culturally "poor white" as many modern progressives think of it, and these men and women certainly don't suffer from any privilege themselves.

I've literally lived in poor, rural, 99% white areas all my life so I think I'm entitled to my opinion. You, however, apparently drove through Idaho once and now you think you're the God appointed defender of working class whites, which I guess says everything anyone needs to know about this forum.

And when NY said that attitude was much more condescending then anything he said he was telling the truth.

I live a few miles from the Idaho border and have spent considerable time there, nor am I "defending" poor whites. I'm not attacking them, either, nor did I at any point attack your opinion. Jeez.

Yeah, yeah you are. Let's be clear about this. When you blame "intersectional-heavy rhetoric you see from the campus left and Salon-esque sources" for "[coloring] the policy prescriptions offered by progressive politicians" you're both being incredible condescending towards and defending poor, rural whites at the same time.

You're being condescending because you're saying that maybe if we use slightly different words to couch our policies there will be some great proverbial come-to-Jesus moment where rural voters will start voting in progressive politicians, like people in Appalachia, or the south, or Idaho, or wherever are all just that ing stupid and don't have informed, deeply & sincerely held conservative beliefs about what's right for America.

These people are conservatives. If you put a white, male left-wing farmer on TV and have him couch everything in conservative buzz words it won't change anything. As long as he holds the same sets of policy positions as other Democrats, he'll still lose. You, and other people in this thread, have no idea how ing condescending it sounds to act like poor, rural whites are not just as informed and educated in voting in the politicians they vote in as you lot in the suburbs. They are.

You're defending them, because by blaming "intersectional-heavy rhetoric you see from the campus left and Salon-esque sources" for "[coloring] the policy prescriptions offered by progressive politicians" you're letting them off the hook for the things they say, do, and support. If they vote in racist, vile politicians like Donald Trump, or God knows how many other example, they have no responsibility. It's all the fault of the "campus left" (you know, the Democratic base) and their "intersectional-heavy rhetoric" for alienating them, for not sucking up to them hard enough, or it's societies fault, or whatever. Of course, no one has to pander to the nasty "campus left" to get them not to vote in vile people...

It might sound crazy to hear this from a Democrat, but I do believe in a degree of self responsibility. I do understand how hard it is growing up in rural areas, in trailer parks, and I hope to God the Democratic party represents the interests of poor, rural whites, even if they don't vote for us (and they never will.) HOWEVER, I do not believe in always letting people off the hook for their actions. These poor, rural whites are ideological conservatives, they're educated, they know what they're doing, and a lot of them are great people. I've known racists who were great husbands, brought their wives flowers every weekend, great fathers, volunteered, ect.

Again though, a lot of them are racists. A lot of them are sexists. And they are ideological conservatives. And in those respects, they're vile. It's not the Democratic party's fault, or anyone else's responsibility when they vote in racist, sexist, conservative politicians. The voters who elect these politicians are responsible for them. And they have to be called out, they have to be criticized. And I'm sick to ing death of seeing Democrats, in the Democratic ing party, which is supposed to stand up against racism constantly bending over backwards to make excuses for these people. Just, please, stop.

Rant over.

I don't disagree with the thrust of what you wrote, so I probably didn't write my initial comment clearly enough.

Like train wrote up above, we need to be the bigger people. The rural voters you describe are 100% conservatives and thinking that "buzzwords" will change anything will not work. Agreed. However, like you said, we need to be the party that represents all people, whether they vote for us or not. Politicians are (and have to be) responsive first to their base, but this only encourages the unfortunate tribalism we see in American politics today.

I don't think anyone is "dumb" for who they vote for, and I have a much better sense for why many rural whites are Republicans now than I did just a few years ago. It is certainly not because they are stupid or Uninformed, and that reflects my broader critique of the modern Democratic Party - we do ourselves no favor by pretending this.

We also don't do ourselves any favors by ignoring abject poverty, meth addiction, high school dropout rates that are through the roof in these areas. The Republicans certainly aren't doing much to combat these problems and even if we don't earn the votes of a demographic leery of cosmopolitanism and liberal values, opiate addiction and this kind of mass unemployment should be an outrage.

I don't doubt that the reason this is largely forgotten is that the Democratic leadership is fundamentally urban and so is more familiar/comfortable with urban problems, many of which are acute. Police violence, failing schools, the need for mass transit, NIMBY-run housing policies - these need to be solved and deserve the attention they get (or finally getting). But for us to be the morally superior party we cannot ignore millions of fellow Americans who are suffering in rural communities. I do not doubt that many Democrats, including President Obama, would like to do more to help them.

My critique is that dismissing their plight under he guise of "white privilege" hurts progressivism as much as it hurts the rural poor. It is morally unacceptable to rationalize that it is okay to help one marginalized group but dismiss another because they have "white privilege" or are "racist." I do not think that was your point, at least I did not interpret it as such, but that's the vibe I got from some other posters.

[KingSweden]

I challenge anyone to drive through Eastern Washington or Northern Idaho and claim that the people there enjoy any kind of "white privilege."

Their are plenty of poor white people in western Washington, too. The Pacific coast has been pretty devastated economically (minus the really tourist-y parts), and having grown up in rural-ish Snohomish County, I can say there are a lot of poor white places with heavy drug problems there, too (Granite Falls, Arlington, Camano Island, most anywhere in the foothills/mountains of Snoho, Skagit, and Whatcom).

Granted, crossing from Spokane County into Kootenai County is quite the experience. Oh boy.

Yeah, the poorest communities in Washington are 1. rez towns 2. Hispanic towns in Central WA and 3. the poor white towns along the Pacific coast. 

Camano Island is dear to my heart, but yeah away from the beaches that whole area is not doing well economically. nothing like Aberdeen, though...

[KingSweden]

[snip]

My critique is that dismissing their plight under he guise of "white privilege" hurts progressivism as much as it hurts the rural poor. It is morally unacceptable to rationalize that it is okay to help one marginalized group but dismiss another because they have "white privilege" or are "racist." I do not think that was your point, at least I did not interpret it as such, but that's the vibe I got from some other posters.

I understand what you're saying then, and I think it's fair. I think that looking at the typical poor, white, racist rural voter it's fair to say that they've been exploited in a lot of ways in their life, and that's terrible, but that doesn't mean white privilege doesn't also exist and that they haven't benefited from it some ways while still remaining a member of a poor and marginalized group. I hope that's not me dismissing their plight.

And, like I said, from the bottom of my heart I hope the Democratic addresses those issues and represents poor, rural whites even if they don't vote for us.

However, what you're saying is not the vibe I got from some other posters and that's why I reacted so strongly. The vibe I was getting was that because rural, poor whites are exploited in some ways that absolves them of responsibility for their actions, whether that's what they say, what they do, or who they vote for. Some people in this thread, to me, seem perfectly happy to bend over backwards to make excuses for blatant racism on that basis. I want the Democratic party to try to do right by poor, rural whites but I also want it to be unafraid to call out racism and sexism, not shuffle their feet and make excuses.

I don't think you're being dismissive at all.

[KingSweden]

I challenge anyone to drive through Eastern Washington or Northern Idaho and claim that the people there enjoy any kind of "white privilege."

Their are plenty of poor white people in western Washington, too. The Pacific coast has been pretty devastated economically (minus the really tourist-y parts), and having grown up in rural-ish Snohomish County, I can say there are a lot of poor white places with heavy drug problems there, too (Granite Falls, Arlington, Camano Island, most anywhere in the foothills/mountains of Snoho, Skagit, and Whatcom).


Granted, crossing from Spokane County into Kootenai County is quite the experience. Oh boy.

Do people actually think that Coeur d' Alene or north Idaho in general is some sort of poverty pocket? It's a reasonably affluent community by the standards of Idaho. North Idaho has also never struck me as being particularly poor either.

Spokane, on the other hand, strikes me as a community where there are many poor white people.

Coeur d'Alene has some pockets of poverty, though it's pretty nice overall. It's once you get outside of the city proper that it gets more depressed.

Spokane is... Well, it's Spokane. A few years ago Northeast Spokane was one of the poorest ZIP codes in the state.

[KingSweden]

Spokane has plenty of poor white people. Logan neighborhood downtown in one of those "don't walk at night" neighborhoods (though Spokane has quite nice parts, too). But as you head from Spokane eastward, it gets more and more redneck-y. Liberty Lake is a step down, and then you hit State Line and its nothing but Cabella's and trailer parks until you get to Coeur d'Alene itself, which is an all right town.

Liberty Lake is actually pretty nice, I think you're thinking of Otis Orchards and Newman Lake, which are north of I-90