General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: A shout out to "social issues" [View all]BainsBane
(53,137 posts)I don't hide behind poverty. I have plenty of personal experience with the subject to know what I'm talking about.
You are the one who has said that poverty is "social issues." It's pretty clear to most of us economic issues are limited to your own class interests and not the economic survival of the rest of us, and not the lives of the poor.
The OP is about the issues that matter between the GOP and the Democratic Party. It has nothing to do with your tired obsession with the DLC or your idiotic political labels. You don't know the first thing about what you're talking about.
You call yourself a liberal. Fine. I accept that. That leaves you on the center-right of the global political spectrum, and to the right of me. I recall when you invaded a thread of mine on Marxism to insist it was all some cryptic message to get Clinton elected. Your political consciousness is so incredibly narrow, so hopelessly provincial, you can't even see what is under discussion.
You aren't even aware that there is a world outside your sad little obsession with DLC vs. what, I don't know. The OP mentions the field of Democratic candidates. That is four so far, not one. It talks about the GOP vs. the Democratic Party. It doesn't say support this or that candidate. I don't give a shit who you vote for. I haven't even decided who I'm going to caucus for.
I didn't say poverty can't be "fixed." That isn't what the OP is about. My last post talked about how income inequality isn't recent but rather endemic to the nation--a nation born out of inequality, whose conception of liberty for some depended on the enslavement and subjugation of others. I could engage in a discussion about what I think is involved in ameliorating or actually ending poverty that but it is obviously pointless. Marx is a DLC plot anyway, as far as you're concerned. I'm bored with your sad little bourgeois obsessions. .