disenfranchisement

Tears from Heaven 😪

So saddened, disheartened and disgusted with the state of the world today. So much tragedy, loss, evil and hatred infiltrating to the very core….seeping into our very existence. I’m really finding it hard to understand how we as human beings can have such a blatant disregard for another human life. How…WHY…are we doing this to one another?! My soul is tired and my heart bleeds. For all the weary, the hurt, the broken, the disenfranchised. I am praying for healing, praying for change but most of all, praying for love. Because it’s evident that that is what is missing the most from this world….💔🙏🏻

#PleaseLoveOneAnother

#PrayingForTheWorld

I find it horrid that we (POCs) are devalued in this country to the point even our food in this country is seen as suppose to be cheap. The fact our cuisine and something like Tacos are so delicate, are full of flavor, time consuming in prep of the pieces that they should not be devalued. The fact food created by indigenous/immigrant and other disenfranchised groups are targeted with having cheap food when the value of these dishes should be the same of any five star restaurant. Even in my household we hold a saying of certain dishes being “Poor People’s food” when dishes of that title could rival any other. When dishes like a steak and potato with some mixed vegetables are what we can accept for a higher price when something like Mole which is from more if not as much care and prep. is what we accept to be cheaper than the steak. I know this perspective is rarely spoken on but it is important that a gourmet restaurant of these disenfranchised groups that is actually owned by them should be payed a right price for the food that is from a line of history and made with care and love from our ancestor’s efforts.

a lot of talk about violence is premised on the belief that we have a natural, inherent ability to recognise certain actions and events as violent (and thus, morally wrong) – and to some extent, this is true; but our understanding of violence is always socially constructed in part

to be specific, our understanding of violence, particularly in the West, is one heavily informed by capitalism and the ‘moral’ tenets that underpin capitalism (namely humanism and individualism, stemming from the Enlightenment tradition)

additionally, violence isn’t a single, all-encompassing concept – a concept of violence is dependent on concepts of what is considered harmful, who is considered a person, who is considered deserving or undeserving of violence, whose violence is considered justifiable or unjustifiable, and more (and, in the West, all of these concepts derive in part from the same philosophies I listed)

capitalism and hegemony are dependent on us conceiving of certain actions, events, and people as violent, and certain other actions, events, and people as not – in the former category goes nearly anything and anyone that threatens or hinders them, and in the latter category goes anything and anyone that allows them to persist – and then, making us believe that these associations are objectively true, natural, and inevitable, such that we won’t question their origins or ends

so, when U say things like “violence is not the answer!” and “we should never resort to violence”, note that not only your concept of violence but what U recognise as violence has been constructed in terms of capitalist and hegemonic ends – and this is how we arrive at “punching Nazis is morally wrong because violence is wrong!”, but being unable to recognise the extermination, disenfranchisement, persecution, theft, imprisonment, exploitation, and coercion that make yr life as a capitalist and hegemonic subject possible as violence – because these violations are made invisible, because U believe these violations are justifiable, because U believe that the people who are the subject of these violations are deserving of violence, and/or because U believe the people who are subject to these violations aren’t people at all

(in fact, in these same ways, capitalism and hegemony make it impossible to recognise the violence the state regularly inflicts on U as violence)

your beliefs and moral attitudes do not exist in isolation – they should all be subject to scrutiny, especially when they lead U to sympathise with Nazis

independent.co.uk
Man appointed by Trump to investigate voter fraud has been sued four times for voter suppression
The Vice Chair of Donald Trump’s new “election integrity” commission has been successfully sued four times for voter suppression, according to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Kris Kobach led restrictive voting initiatives that targeted minorities and perpetuated voter suppression, the not-for-profit legal advocacy group said.

Disenfranchise minorities as collateral damage to you wanting to combat the fact that you lost the general election.

APUSH The Musical Part One: songs from musical theater that explain concepts from apush chapters 2-26 of american pagent 

8tracks / playmoss / youtube 

1. Molasses to Rum from 1776: explains the triangle trade as well as the hypocrisy of the revolutionary era on the topic of slavery 

2. Sit Down John from 1776: the apprehension of moderates to declare independence during the continental congress

3. But Mr. Adams from 1776: the declaration of independence (this is partly on here bc it’s about jefferson wanting to bust his nut) 

4. Non-Stop from Hamilton: the formation of the federal government, the constitutional convention, and the federalist papers

5. Cabinet Battle #1 from Hamilton: arguments between federalists and democratic republicans over assumption, excise taxes on whiskey, and slavery 

6. The Room Where It Happens from Hamilton: the dinner that jefferson hosted which decided assumption as well as where the capital would be located 

7. The Election of 1800 from Hamilton: the election of 1800 would lead to the creation of political parties 

8. Alll American Prophet from Book of Mormon: the formation of mormonism and its westward expansion 

9. Rock Star from Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson: the anti-elitist sentiments that would lead to an increase in populism as well as how jackson’s anti-elitist populism contradicted with his own superiority complex 

10. Corrupt Bargain from Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson: the bargain which got JQA elected during the tie breaker for the election of 1824

11. Populism Yea Yea from Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson: the rise of populism and jacksonian democracy 

12. Ten Little Indians from Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson: the awful awful treatment of native americans (especially during jackson’s administration) 

13. Someone In a Tree from Pacific Overtures: the treaty of kanagawa and the “opening” of japan 

14. The Wild Wild West from Harvey Girls: westward expansion and the wild west

15. Paint Your Wagon from Paint Your Wagon: the california gold rush and westward expansion 

16. A Peculiar Institution from Civil War: the awful awful treatment of slaves 

17. The Glory from Civil War: the civil war in general 

18. The Ballad Of Booth from Assassins: john wilkes booth’s assassination of abraham lincoln 

19. The Ballad of Guiteau from Assassins: charles guiteau’s assassination of president garfield because he wanted to place chester a arthur in power so his faction would reap benefits of patronage 

20. The Bottom Line from Newsies: business owner’s cost cutting methods which often disenfranchised the workers 

21. The World Will Know from Newsies: the organization of labor unions against big business during the gilded age 

22. The Ballad of Czolgosz from Assassins: leon czolgosz’s assassination of president william mckinley because he felt the working class was oppressed

I woke up [the day after the presidential election] with a very pronounced case of moral clarity. In addition to the disappointment, it was like, oh, this does not change the things that I believe in. The things that I believe in that this candidate doesn’t means we’re going to have to fight for them. You don’t want to go backwards when it comes to our LGBT brothers and sisters; you don’t want to go backwards when it comes to the disenfranchisement of voters of color. We have to keep fighting for the things we believe in, and it just made that very clear: I know who I am, and I know what I’m going to fight for in the years to come.
—  Lin-Manuel Miranda
2

On today’s episode of: Jeff Sessions wants to bring back Jim Crow.

Click the source link for the rest of the article, but as you can see Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III is wasting no time to roll back civil rights protections and make sure discriminatory policies are etched in stone.

Which is exactly wtf everyone - including Coretta Scott King - warned us he would do considering his history of doing JUST THAT - using his political power for racist ends.

Another reason to be worried, these voter ID laws are used to not only disenfranchise poor voters and minorities, but these populations have been specifically targeted since Obama’s win in an effort to regain republican control over districts around the country.
The specter of male privilege has long since been a way to deny trans women’s womanhood and basic humanity. Invoking male privilege is often meant to imply that trans women don’t know what it is like to live as “real” women — that we have not suffered the way other women have suffered, that we have not been disenfranchised by patriarchy because of our genders, and that our early experiences allow us access to forms of social power which influence how we move through the world even after we transition. This argument, beyond hinging all of womanhood on a relatively singular experience of suffering, has often been used to flatten the vast array of different life experiences among trans women and other transfeminine-spectrum people. At worst, it contributes to a culture of violence, harassment, exclusion, and erasure that presents a real threat to the lives and physical safety of the most marginalized among us.

Bernie Sanders just said, “Some people think that the people who voted for Trump are racists and sexists and homophobes and deplorable folks. I don’t agree, because I’ve been there.”

Oh, I don’t doubt he’s “been there,” and as a straight white male, I can think of no better person to decide what constitutes racism, sexism, or homophobia.

He went onto attack Hilary Clinton for using the word “deplorable” to describe a portion of Trump’s constituency that she believed would always support him because, above all else, those people followed him for his bigotry.

I’m so fucking tired of this old sack of shit and I need people to catch up on seeing him for what he is - a populist who really only caters to the needs of disenfranchised white voters and only cares or talks about issues effecting minorities insofar as (1) they assuage the white guilt of his followers and (2) allow him to maintain the appearance of being a caring progressive.

Fuck. This. Guy.

With the posts going around reminding people how crucial the 2018 midterm elections will be, this is your reminder that there are going to be a small handful of elections in the US this year. There will be gubernatorial elections and state legislature elections in New Jersey and Virginia, as well as a few special Congressional races elsewhere.

If you live somewhere where there’s an election this year, it’s REALLY crucial for you to show up. Weird off-year elections aren’t an accident, it’s a deliberate attempt at disenfranchisement because the powers that be figured (correctly) that people wouldn’t even think to show up to the polls when there’s not a major election. Don’t fall into that trap. NJ and VA are both going to be electing new governors as neither incumbent will run again, and the state governorships and legislatures being run by republicans are part of the reason why the country has been gerrymandered to shit.

Know your elections, know your candidates, figure out if you have to go to the polls this November. Volunteer. Organize. Vote. It starts now, this year, and this fight will be a lot longer if you’re not vigilant and active.

why don’t people understand that minority =/= oppressed

blondes are a minority. blondes are not oppressed

vegans are a minority. vegans are not oppressed

bald people are a minority. bald people are not oppressed

just because you are a minority of something doesn’t mean you’re oppressed. oppression requires systemic and institutional movements meant to disenfranchise and disadvantage groups of people.

You don’t even need to be a minority to be oppressed. The majority of South Africans are black but they are still subject to racism. White people make up less than 10% of the population of South Africa, but white people are not oppressed in South Africa on the basis of being a “racial minority” there

Please dear god educate yourself on oppression dynamics before speaking up like you’re an authority on it

6

How fashion icon Nick Wooster is using his robust closet to give back to LGTBQ youth

  • Most people putting half their closet up for sale may not expect huge returns. Then again, Nick Wooster isn’t just anybody — and neither is his closet.
  • In fact, half of his closet is enough to fill-out the pop-up shop he created — with the support of the Hetrick-Martin Institute — in an effort to raise funds for disenfranchised LGBTQ youth. Read more. (3/31/17, 12:01 PM)

There’s this notion that I keep seeing that privileged people benefit from oppression of another class, and it’s an idea I never saw when I first started learning sociological theory.

Back in like 2012, tumblr was all about including men in feminism and talking about how feminism would benefit everybody because it would do away with homophobia/homoantagonism and toxic masculinity, etc.

Like… to say that privileged groups (if not individuals) actively benefit from oppression is to erase the performative aspect of privilege; entry to privilege is determined by the privileged (see: Straight determines Straight) and if you deviate Too Much from their expectations, they revoke your right to reap the benefits of membership.

For example, despite all the campaigns about how Real Men Cry or whatever, the prevailing cognitive understanding that society holds is that crying is not masculine, and men who cry are shameful. This is sets a very hard limit on the emotions that a man is capable of showing, which is absolutely a kind of marginalization (but not inherently oppression).

To put it another way, if a cis man wears a dress, would he not face tangible violence from society at large regardless of what he claims his gender is? Is it the same as systemic legal disenfranchisement? Of course not. But a cis man in a dress has less social power than a cis man following social norms. And that power difference is rooted in transphobia/transantagonism. Whether or not it necessarily is the same experience is debatable, but transphobia/transantagonism is inexorably linked to rigid gender roles and toxic masculinity and homophobia/misogyny and other systems that actively hurt both oppressed and privileged classes.

Orientation-wise, people have discussed how coercive heterocentricism can negatively impact people who have never thought about their own orientations before, regardless of if they would turn out straight in the end anyway.

Even aside from gender and orientation, does anyone really benefit from ableism? A student experiencing one-off anxiety will likely not receive any more accommodation than somebody with an anxiety disorder with no legal documentation of it. How often do able-bodied people feel awkward about using the elevator? And how many often do disabled folks feel similarly awkward about how soon it’ll be before somebody makes them justify their right to use accessibility features? Again, abled people are not systemically disenfranchised and stigmatized, but both classes would benefit from a world where nobody gatekeeps disability or bats an eye at accommodations.

The problem with the Us vs Them model of privilege and oppression is that it seeks to create new power structures alongside the existing ones, instead of dismantling the entire notion of power itself. If you let people do what they need to do (whether it’s using the elevator or wearing a dress) without trying to retroactively judge the validity of their experiences, then everybody gets an equal playing field to be themselves freely and openly. After all, the number of elevators (ie resources) that exist in a space should be determined by usage statistics, and not by some statistic of how many disabled people there are present.

Exclusive labels will always leave out a grey population or fringe groups of marginalization.  Everybody oppresses each other and that’s a fact of life and intersectionality. What needs to happen is an abolishment of the systems that keep everyone down; true revolution means aligning not through labels but through ideologies. Even Marx said that when the time comes to overthrow capitalism, some bourgeoisie will align themselves with the revolution. Disability and gender are social constructs that exist because people in power say they do, but those people in power would benefit more in the end from saying they don’t.

I hate the missapropriation of the concept of trolling.

Trolling: An American saying “the Beatles? I don’t know her” then watching as everyone who loves the Beatles gets mad. And its funny because: why are they mad that someone they don’t know doesn’t know the Beatles???And also it’s nearly impossible that you’re an American who has never even tangentially been exposed to them, so it’s easy to see it’s a joke because it’s–culturally–wild hyperbolic.

Not Trolling: “I’m going to directly antagonize a socioeconomically marginalized group! ” for the pure entertainment of seeing someone try to defend their own humanity and beg you to stop turning ‘hurting them’ into entertainment. Because you think other people’s trauma is amusing and you equate personal emotional disconnect directly to intellect/power/prestige as if such a thing is causation rather than correlation. Which ultimately creates a scenario in which the “troll” trolls for the objective purpose of fueling their own personal self worth with the ultimate goal of gaining ideological support from peers. (Aka: look how sad that person is, I am not sad, which makes me smart. If enough people see me being smart, that makes me cool. I like how being cool feels so I don’t care about what I sacrifice to achieve that)

Not the communal appreciation for comedic hyperbole of the Beatles joke.

Like.

One is a fun social joke that requires group participation. In which an aspect of the joke is that it probably takes someone a second look to see that you’re kidding. But even if it takes someone longer and they get really mad, when it’s revealed you knew who the Beatles were all along and you were just pretending to be obtuse in a hyperbolic way, they too can laugh at the joke.

The other is as close as you can get to group sociopathy. And also is less fun in general. And a bit sad for the person who receives their emotional support at the cost of demeaning others. But also it’s incredible damaging, as it normalizes negative sentiment towards whatever group is being attacked/disenfranchised/ belittled/hypersinplified/disregarded. And worse, most of these interactions (that older stronger people can brush off) can often be seen by children who have no defenses against certain concepts which is sad, and incredibly reckless.

5

”We will shelter freaks and outcasts - those who have no hope. We will get past the lies. We will hunt monsters. And when we are at a loss amidst the hypocrisy and casual violence of certain individuals and institutions, we will, as per Chief Jim Hopper, punch some people in the face when they seek to destroy the meek and the disenfranchised and the marginalized.”

Me: We need to not disenfranchise those people new to active political engagement and be understanding about having misguided positions on things, because almost every single radical was a Liberal at one point. We are the ones who can start the thought process rolling


Also Me: 

The clock has been turned back on racial progress in America, though scarcely anyone seems to notice. All eyes are fixed on people like Barack Obama and Oprah Winfrey, who have defied the odds and risen to power, fame, and fortune. For those left behind, especially those within prison walls, the celebration of racial triumph in America must seem a tad premature. More black men are imprisoned today than at any other moment in our nation’s history. More are disenfranchised today than in 1870, the year the Fifteenth Amendment was ratified prohibiting laws that explicitly deny the right to vote on the basis of race. Young black men today may be just as likely to suffer discrimination in employment, housing, public benefits, and jury service as a black man in the Jim Crow era–discrimination that is perfectly legal, because it is based on one’s criminal record.
—  Michelle Alexander, The New Jim Crow

John Boyega did not “slam” Samuel L. Jackson first of all. But if he’s not going to contribute to the discourse of African-Americans being systematically disenfranchised from their own opportunities, even by other black people in the world, he can kindly shut up. We don’t have time for, “Let’s just get along,” cop out when we’re talking about African-Americans being denied telling their own stories.