You don't change hearts, Hillary? WTF?

[Bonobo]

I thought you evolved on gay marriage? You used to be against it in favor of the "sanctity " of marriage between a man and woman?

What happened? Didn't your heart change?

Or maybe it was just that someone packaged the message and put it in a shelf or whatever weird capitalistic, business bullshit you mentioned after that. Was that it? It was just sold to you in a better form?

[mmonk]

1. ?

[monmouth4]

2. "You change the laws." That was the rest of her sentence...n/t

[JackInGreen]

3. Pretty sure it's a reference

To hillary meeting with #blm and saying something to the effect of "you can't change hearts, only laws" and indicating they needed more cohesion so she could sell their message.

[mmonk]

4. OK. Got it.

[ieoeja]

37. It was Hillary explaining to BLM that they were doing it wrong.

It was not, however, "whitesplaining". It was Hillary having a discussion with BLM. This is different from what Bernie supporters did because {insert rationale here}.

[arcane1]

51. I wish I could see that rationale. I've mostly seen silence on this.

Something about not letting white people tell black people what's best for them or what protest tactics they should use

[PoliticAverse]

5. Changing hearts is how many laws get changed. n/t

[4139]

6. How fast did hearts change on the Confederate flag?

PS: She did not have a change of heart on gay marriage, the trianglulation just changed

[Adrahil]

11. No politician changed hearts on that flag.

It was a reaction to a horrible event.

Likewise, the change in public opinion on gay marriage did not occur becuase some politician made it happen.

[Adrahil]

7. I agree with her....

Policies which rely on changing hearts are naive. You MIGHT change hearts, but the point of policy is to act anyway. You'll change hearts along the way, but the point is address injustices now.

That was the whole point of the voting rights act, integration, etc. it was to enact change legally.... Not to convince Southern Whites to change their minds.

Im nit interested in changing the heart of some bigotted county clerk in Kentucky in order for people to exercise their right to get married. Fuck that. If hearts change, great, but the point is to act as soon as you can.

HRC is making a pont here.... Political leaders can indeed make great and inspirational speeches. But their might weapon is policy.

[Bonobo]

8. "I don't believe you change hearts".

That was what she said.

Anything else is your spin of what she said.

[Adrahil]

10. Let's look at the whole quote, since we are talking about spin

Instead of the cherry picked bit that fits your narrative:

"Look I don’t believe you change hearts. I believe you change laws, you change allocation of resources, you change the way systems operate. You’re not going to change every heart. You’re not. But at the end of the day, we could do a whole lot to change some hearts and change some systems and create more opportunities for people who deserve to have them, to live up to their own God-given potential, to live safely without fear of violence in their own communities, to have a decent school, to have a decent house, to have a decent future. So we can do it one of many ways. You can keep the movement going, which you have started, and through it you may actually change some hearts. But if that’s all that happens, we’ll be back here in 10 years having the same conversation. We will not have all of the changes that you deserve to see happen in your lifetime because of your willingness to get out there and talk about this."

Her comment was about what you do. She believes in enacting policy.

[Bonobo]

12. She could have said: "It's wonderful to change hearts but at the same time" or any number of things.

But she revealed herself as having a definite lack of heart to me. If you do not believe you change hearts, it can only be because you are missing something.

A good example of a similar phenomena is that people that don't trust others are USUALLY not trustworthy people. The reason that happens is because people assume others are like themselves and tend to extrapolate based on how they are,

This was a revealing moment -and what it revealed was not pretty.

[azmom]

29. The immigration movement's gain was due

To pulling of the heart strings by putting the Dreamers up front. They were portrayed as innocent victims that were brought to the U.S. by their parents with no fault of their own.

It changed hearts.

[Adrahil]

48. She could have, and that would have been more diplomatic....

... but she is right.

She's a politician, and she is thinking in terms of political action. Changing hearts is best left to artists, writers, musicians, etc. Politicians enact policy.

I don't think a single person here thinks we should rely on changing arts to reverse the trend in income inequality.

I don't think a single person here thinks we should have waited for hearts to change to guarantee marriage equality.

I don't think a single person here thinks we should depend on changing hearts to defend a woman's right to choose.

Politicians enact policy. That's what they do. That's how they effect change.

Also, given your previous positions, I suspect a bit on confirmation bias in your analysis of what this "reveals."

[Laser102]

14. Thank you for clarifying. I was a bit confused.

I agree with her.

[Fred Sanders]

21. The whole quote? context? No, we must not do that...ruins the whole morning outrage full meal deal!

That the OP comes with free vomit sauce emojis's is appropriate.

[demwing]

55. Your warm, reasonable ways have convinced me to vote for Hillary!

[Fred Sanders]

57. An infant on a toilet picture....how appropriate as a visual aid to your comment!

[demwing]

60. You inspire, what can I say? / nt

[azmom]

30. Is this the part where BLM told her

If you don't tell us what to do, we won't tell you what to do?

[starroute]

34. I think a lot of the problems lie in the words "you" and "we"

Last edited Thu Aug 20, 2015, 02:03 PM - Edit history (2)

The confusion starts when she says, "I don't believe you change hearts," because it isn't clear who the "you" is that she's speaking about. Is it the BLM protesters? Or is she talking about herself and other politicians?

But then she goes on to say, "you change laws, you change allocation of resources, you change the way systems operate" -- and she's clearly referring to people in the government, because those are things only government can do. And that's the point at which she transitions to "we" and goes into stump speech mode.

So she's established that politicians aren't in the business of changing people's hearts, but then she pivots back to "you" -- with the implication that the BLM protesters shouldn't be focusing on that either. And that's where it gets dismissive and paternalistic.

"You can keep the movement going ... and through it you may actually change some hearts. But if that's all that happens... we will not have all of the changes that you deserve to see happen in your lifetime because of your willingness to get out there and talk about this."

So what I take her as saying here is that ordinary people can't bring about meaningful changes. Neither can passionately-felt social movements. Only the government can do that by doing the sorts of things government does -- housing, schools, police, incentives to business. And the only role for a movement like BLM is to "get out there and talk about this" in a way that shows them as deserving of governmental help.

Even aside from the questions this raises about the relationship between political power and movements for change, it completely overlooks the moral dimension. BLM isn't attempting to "change hearts" -- which is a simplistic and sentimental reduction of what they're doing. They're out to make it morally unacceptable to be part of a system that privileges part of its population while treating another part as irrelevant, disposable, and subject to exploitation. They want to make it so people can't live with themselves until they do the right things.

And that obliviousness to morality is where Hillary comes across as tone-deaf.

[Bonobo]

42. An excellent and thorough analysis. I tip my hat to you. nt

[azmom]

50. Sounds vaguely familiar.

"Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act," Clinton said. "It took a president to get it done."

[starroute]

63. The Civil Rights Act birthed Nixon's Southern Strategy and put us where we are now

That's what happens when you impose policies without bringing the people along with you.

I'm not saying it shouldn't have been done, but legislation is a clumsy tool that often has unintended side effects.

For Clinton to suggest that it took a corrupt old boor like LBJ to "realize" Martin Luther King's dream also seems off-key. But it goes along with her whole "I want to be your champion" approach. She seems to believe that government can look out for people better than they can look out for themselves, and that is intensely disempowering.

[Adrahil]

52. All that is fine, but.....

Making the systemic problems of racism in our country is an admirable goal, but that is nit what politicians DO. Politicians enact policy. That is the role they play in this process.

They can be inspirational, but their primary role is in policy. Artists, musicians, writers, religious leaders, etc, are in a better position to attack it form a conscience point of view.

[Fred Sanders]

59. The fetus loving crowd and the GOP do not try to win over hearts, they impose policies. So should progressives.

That was the message....if folks can not fathom that I can not help much more.

It is an excellent argument, no?

[sufrommich]

9. Explain how the Federal government changes hearts.

[Bonobo]

13. Take a look at some presidential speeches over the years and then come back to me and tell me

that the POTUS can't change hearts.

I don't buy it for a minute.

Changing hearts is EXACTLY what leaders do.

We are not hiring a bean counter to punch numbers into a machine. The role of POTUS carries enormous symbolic weight and believe it or not, many people DO look up to the president as a leader to inspire.

But if you disagree, maybe Hillary IS a good choice for you.

[sufrommich]

16. Except they were specifically talking about concrete action

they want. I think it's hilarious that you think they were there to ask Hillary to help them change the hearts and minds of white racists.Why don't you go on over to their Facebook page and give them some paternalistic advice?

[Bonobo]

17. It was Hillary that gave her paternalistic advice. Here. No bolds, no edits. Read it yourself.

The very definition of paternalistic advice.

"That’s what I’m trying to put together in a way that I can explain and I can sell it. Because in politics, if you can’t explain it and you can’t sell it, it stays on its shelf. And this is now a time—a moment in time, just like the Civil Rights Movement or the women’s movement or the gay rights movement or a lot of other movements reached a point in time—the people behind that consciousness raising and advocacy, they had a plan ready to go. So that when you turn to, you know, the women’s movement—we want to pass this and we want to pass that and we want to do this—problems are not taken care of, we know that.

Obviously, I know more about the Civil Rights Movement in the old days, because I had a lot of involvement in working with people. So they had a plan—this piece of legislation, this court case we’re going to make, et cetera, et cetera. Same with the gay rights movement. You know, we’re sick of homophobia. We’re sick of being discriminated against. We want marriage equality. We’re starting in the states, and we’re going to keep going until we get it at the highest court in the land.

So all I’m saying is, your analysis is totally fair. It’s historically fair. It’s psychologically fair. It’s economically fair. But you’re going to have to come together as a movement and say, “Here’s what we want done about it.” Because you can get lip service from as many white people as you can pack into Yankee Stadium and a million more like it, who are going to say, “Oh, we get it. We get it. We’re going to be nicer.”"

[sufrommich]

18. There's nothing paternalistic in that quote. You,on the other

hand,have decided that BLM needs to be angry about Hillary not working on changing the hearts of racists as opposed to real,concrete things that the Federal government can do. Like I said,you should totally go tell BLM what they need to be pissed about,they're getting it all wrong!

[Bonobo]

20. "But you’re going to have to come together as a movement and say, “Here’s what we want done about it

Yup, not paternalistic at all. Telling them how they should protest. LOL.

Whatever.

[whathehell]

27. Most people won't engage in ONE way conversations (also known as 'lectures')

and in that case they will offer advice. Someone with Hillary's experience

is obviously going to do that, whether that's deemed "paternalistic" or not.

Expecting anything else is extremely unrealistic.

P.S. She's not telling them "how to protest", she's telling them they need MORE than protests,

they need concrete plans, and she's right.

[TexasBushwhacker]

47. Exactly

It's not enough for BLM to say "we want the killing to stop". We get that and I think that most white people agree. Somehow, law enforcement seems to have gone back decades, when police brutality was common place. And POC were victims more often then too. But with the 24/7 news cycle we have now, with body cameras and cell phone footage EVERYONE hears about EVERY case and they hear about it right away.

So what I get from her is that she's telling them to focus on something concrete. For example:

Pass a law that ALL law enforcement officers wear body cameras and that the footage is stored by an unrelated 3rd party.

Police departments may not investigate themselves in cases of excessive force.

Demilitarize police departments. If they have all that gear, they'll want to use it.

I'm sure that people in the BLM movement have more concrete ideas about laws that should be written, current laws that should be enforced differently and programs that could be implemented to improve their communities. Focus on those things. Concrete goals for real changes that can have measurable outcomes. They have everyone's attention. Now that they have it, they need to be specific about the changes they want.

[whathehell]

61. Yes, it's good to hear from others who get it.

and I agree with every one of your proposals.

There must be body cams and the footage must be stored where it can't be tampered with.

Police departments must have civilian review boards -- I don't know how that's been avoided for so long.

Thanks for weighing in.

[A Simple Game]

23. It's hard to change the majority of hearts. Some that are fence sitters can be

changed easily but there are some that will never change, the majority are probably somewhere in between.

But the only way you can change laws is to change the hearts of enough lawmakers to have a majority willing to change the laws.

It really is not something that is easily answered in just a short paragraph. I don't disagree with Hillary but it is not as simple as she states and she probably does realize that.

[Betty Karlson]

15. Well maybe it was just her campaign advice that changed, not her heart, when she changed her views

on same-sex marriage?

[azmom]

31. Makes one wonder. She is very calculating.

[Betty Karlson]

46. She came out against TPP when New Zealand had given it a snowball's chance in hell.

Very calculating: coming out against it when it was indefinitely stalled anyway.

[Fred Sanders]

19. Misquote. Out of context. Horrible speculation and conclusion. Juvenile logic. The vomit emoticon does not help!

Total nonsense, right up there with all the other Clinton nonsense that passes for an "opinion"...low bar for logic at DU lately....I guess you pass!

Who needs the propaganda and distortions of the right when there is so much propaganda and distortion from the left?

This OP is so bad....that is all I have to say.

Good day, though you started out on a rough note. I hope it gets better.

[Cryptoad]

22. another Rioght wing hack job!

[Doctor_J]

24. imagine if Sanders had said such a thing. The cries of

"He just doesn't connect with black people" would be deafening. The deck is stacked. Our president's already been chosen for us. So discouraging.

[whathehell]

28. +1000 n/t

[hootinholler]

35. He didn't say such a thing

And we still heard those cries, are still hearing those cries, and something about black twitter, which I didn't realize that twitter was segregated.

[ieoeja]

38. There is a ton of whitesplaining going on upthread and all over DU right now.

And not one of those who attacked Bernie and his supporters have weighed in. Not a single fucking one!

Proof positive all those complaints were complete and utter horseshit.

[sibelian]

41. Well, of course they were.

There isn't a single authentic word leaving their keyboard.

[arcane1]

54. Hell, mere DUers were attacked for coming even close to saying anything like that n/t

[phleshdef]

25. I'm not voting for her, but in this case, I get what she meant.

There are a lot of internally ugly people out there who will never cease to be internally ugly. The most effective way to deal with them is to pass laws that keeps their ugliness in check, such as laws that hold law enforcement to more accountability and demilitarizes local police departments.

[Jester Messiah]

26. She doesn't change hearts, she just changes position.

She reminds me of Bohemian Rhapsody.

♫ Any way the wind blows... ♫

[azmom]

32. [phone]

[WillyT]

33. + 1,000,000,000 What You Said !!!

[moobu2]

36. She was saying you can not force people to change their

deeply held feelings.

[olddots]

39. Hillary wears her phycological problems on her sleeve

I feel her backers have the same baggage .As a Bernie voter I share his baggage which is what this whole election process comes down to .

Is being stern a good trait for a Democratic presidential candidate ?

[dsc]

40. Since you mentioned marriage equality

if we in NC waited for hearts to change, instead of the law which is what changed, we still wouldn't have it. Nor would those in a rather wide swath of the country.

[Bonobo]

43. It' funny how wrong you actually are.

http://www.scpr.org/programs/take-two/2014/12/29/40802/to-win-over-people-on-same-sex-marriage-lgbt-canva/

[dsc]

44. actually that study has been totally and completly and utterly debunked.

yes, some people have evolved over time and that has helped us win marriage equality at the federal level. but there is no doubt in my mind that a majority of people in every southern state except maybe VA and FL do not favor it. I actually can't access the link at work due to the fact it mentions lgbt (no really that is why I can't it is blocked) so I am presuming for its title that it is about that debunked study.

[dsc]

49. You know I was going to give you the benefit of the doubt about not knowing what

happened with this study but then I was able to open your link at home and found this, right at the top.

Update May 28, 2015: "Science" has officially retracted this study, with editor-in-chief Marcia McNutt noting that co-author Michael LaCour does not agree with the retraction. In correspondence with LaCour's attorney, the magazine says the funding and sponsorship for the surveys were falsified.

It is damn hard to imagine a more dishonest post.

[Bonobo]

65. I had heard a great NPR report about what I think

Was the study I linked to. What I wanted to do was find the great podcast that actually had the people that went door to door talking about howvtheyvwere able to change the minds of the CA residents who had previously voted against Prop 8.

If I hav somehow given a wrong link that has nothing to do with what I meant to refer to, I apologize. I looked in haste for what I wanted to find and didn't confirm first if it was in fact the same thing.

As a father of an LGBT, I assure you I am sincere.

[dsc]

66. No it is about that

but the whole thing was debunked. The data was made up. It said that in the very first paragraph. People who actually paid attention to this issue knew that it was debunked. I knew before reading your link what it was and that it had been debunked. Apparently you still haven't even read your own link. All the while telling me how wrong I was, the irony is rich.

[Bonobo]

67. I see you are completely right. It was debunked.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/05/20/408299979/an-author-of-paper-about-changing-minds-on-gay-marriage-seeks-retraction

I apologize for not following up and realizing this was a debunked NPR claim.

It was such a positive thing that I believed it like many others and had not heard it was debunked nor did I read my own link (since I had heard the NPR study and believed it true).

I only linked to show what I had thought to be true and yes, I did not read it. My apologies.

[Zorra]

45. Supporting LGBT became politically expedient for her. nt

[ecstatic]

53. You change laws first. Hearts can come around in due time (or never).

I don't care what someone THINKS about me, but I do expect fair treatment under the law.

[Motown_Johnny]

56. But then she said "that is how you change hearts"

about 30 seconds later.

She just can't give a straight answer on anything. Not even a softball question like that.

[Comrade Grumpy]

58. I can't fault her for this. Politicians change policies.

[emulatorloo]

62. Willful Misrepresentation

Fairly transparent too.

[WillyT]

64. K & R !!!