White privilege. Democrats are split.

He was accused of inserting "white manself."   A group on the progressive left delegitimizes a white candidate.  

  

I observed an example of group unity and race-based disapproval.  It had an interesting twist.  It wasn't southern whites with racial disapproval of a black.  It was white people in the progressive left objecting to a white candidate.

People on Facebook reacted to the announcement that a young man, Spenser Raymond, filed as a candidate for a Portland City Council position.  A firestorm of protest erupted, with every Facebook comment criticizing him for exercising a haughty form of white supremacy, as indicated by his filing for the office.  There are three other candidates in the race, all black women.

How dare he?  The presumption!  

There was no mention of his politics or any other issue beyond his status as a young white male.  Their argument was that he was illegitimate per se, wrong for the job and undoubtably motivated by privilege and racism.  The fact that he was a reporter for a public radio station gave him no liberal credibility.  Indeed, the opposite.  Within this group, public radio was a corporate sellout.   

Examples of the comments:

". . . for those who think it's just white hoods or torches or extremists, THIS is exactly what White Supremacy looks like."

And, "Spencer, or perhaps maybe you do understand how white dominance works, and that's why you're running.  You don't want to dismantle white dominance--you want to double down on it?"

And, "Nah bro.  Stop with your blind privilege."

And, "Bow out, put your resources and privilege behind the three women of color running."

And, "Inserting ones white manself into this very exciting race is so tone deaf it speaks for itself."

And, "The future of Portland isn't another white guy.  Step down away from this campaign."

And, "Do you really want to deal with me at City Council?  Because buddy, we will be relentless.  You career as an anybody will be toast.  In fact, you are hemorrhaging your reputation now.. Your White Privilege is not welcomed here."

There were some twenty more posts like this one.   What is going on?  

Some of this is left identity politics, a position that this blog describes as counter-productive.  In identity politics as practiced here, status (race, gender, religion, etc.) are central, not incidental. 

Some of this is the power of organization and leadership.  Gregory McKelvey, a political activist leading he anti-Trump protests in Portland has led this protest against the City Council candidate.  Leadership matters.  This was a united effort, piling on, accusing the candidate of bad motives and illegitimacy.  

There is not a big cohort that feels this way, but it is an activist cohort and important in Democratic politics.  A Democratic candidate disagrees with this group at his or her peril.  This group is alert for heresy, or what one person accused this blog of being, "very pro-establish-muddy-progressive noise", i.e. not doctrinaire.  The net result is that the wider political audience of white working class people hears this talk, notices that it is not contradicted, and gets the impression that it represents general Democratic thinking.  (Maybe it is general Democratic thinking.  Certainly a great many on the left hope so.)  

Not surprisingly, white people don't like hearing that.  They understand that they are being accused of enjoying white privilege.  Many of them may be, but the 2016 election suggests that many of them in the struggling working and middle class don't believe it.

Click here

This blog wrote about race two days ago:  "Backlash."  The burden of the post was that many on the progressive left had adopted the policy of racial grievance and victory through conflict rather than the policy of racial equality and harmony.  (Malcolm X vs. Martin Luther King.)  The blog said this was a mistake, because it causes backlash of the majority, and it wins states for George Wallace in 1968 and 1972, and for Trump in 2016.

That blog post elicited comments, and they document the persistence of that deep split within the left, one that may not be bridgeable by any candidate.  Some people, white self-identified Bernie Sanders supporters, are deeply dug into their positions, utterly dismissive of white working class grievance or the potential of white political backlash:

"Ridiculous!  Poor spoiled white people, unwilling and unable to see the sharing, at last, of the privilege we enjoy."

And, "I have NO sympathy with whites who think they are discriminated against.  Sorry!"

And, "Oh. . . . poor, poor white people.  They have so much trouble in the world.  How sad they are picked on, beat up and disrespected."

And, "Sometimes you gotta fight. . . .I'm on board with Malcolm X--not giving an inch. . . . If so-called progressives can't handle it, tough."

Donald Trump deals with bad political news by returning to his bedrock fortress: the culture war and racial politics.  He picks a fight with a black athlete or a black woman or he condemns a brown criminal.  It works for him to change the subject to one he thinks he wins.  Many white people will grimace at his tactics but they come away knowing something important: that Trump is on their side in the war of racial resentments.   

America has a long, long history of those resentments.  Some members of the activist left think they have a winning issue in pointing to racial grievance.  After all, the evidence is so clear that prejudice persists, and people of color are the victims.  It is only fair and just to condemn whites for their deplorable attitudes, right?.  They want a fight on this issue.

So does Trump.  He is sure he has the winning hand.