MAGA called out: Your condition only changes when you realize it’s class warfare and not the isms.

A smart caller’s point is that MAGA’s condition will change only when they realize it’s class warfare and not their obsession with racism, other isms, and smoke and mirrors.

MAGA called out. It’s class warfare.

Watch Politics Done Right T.V. here.

Podcasts (Video — Audio)

---

Summary

The caller argues that racism functions as a smokescreen that keeps working‑class MAGA supporters from recognizing their real struggle — an economic system rigged to favor the wealthy. By reframing the debate as class warfare, she urges listeners to ignore culture‑war distractions and unite across racial lines to challenge corporate power and oligarchic politics.

• Elites deliberately constructed race to divide poor whites and Black people who share the same economic hardships.
• Martin Luther King, Jr. and other civil rights leaders were targeted because they linked racial justice to class struggle.
• Today’s “flood the zone” media strategy overwhelms citizens with cultural outrage to hide policy decisions that hurt workers.
• True solidarity requires judging politicians by material commitments—living wages, union rights, and wealth taxes—not party labels or racial dog whistles.
• When the multiracial working class identifies the billionaire donor class as the real foe, the path to economic democracy becomes clear.

In short, the segment spotlights a core progressive insight: liberation demands multiracial class solidarity that confronts corporate greed, dismantles systemic racism, and builds an economy that serves the many rather than the privileged few.

---

Premium Content (Complimentary)

The on‑air exchange began as so many do in today’s polarized media ecosystem: a self‑identified MAGA supporter phoned in who regularly blamed his economic frustrations on “racial preferences,” and inferred that Black Americans somehow stood between his family and prosperity. Moments later, another listener—calm, prepared, and historically literate—dissected the first caller’s narrative with surgical precision. She argued that elites have long weaponized race, gender, and other “isms” to fracture the very coalition that could challenge concentrated wealth. Her contention echoed a through‑line in U.S. history: when working people recognize their real fight against class exploitation, the edifice of manufactured prejudice begins to crumble.

Historians routinely trace that divide‑and‑conquer strategy to the late‑seventeenth‑century Chesapeake colonies. After Bacon’s Rebellion united Black enslaved laborers and poor white indentured servants, plantation owners codified racial slavery. They granted marginal privileges to whites — a deliberate maneuver to keep laborers from seeing their shared economic interest in solidarity. The construct of “race,” in short, was engineered to blunt class consciousness.

A century and a half later, Martin Luther King, Jr. reached the identical conclusion. In the months before his murder, King launched the Poor People’s Campaign, insisting that the next phase of the freedom struggle must uproot poverty for people of every color. “Poor people of all colors and backgrounds” would march on Washington to demand a fair share of the national abundance, King declared, because economic justice “always has been” the unfinished business of American democracy. He understood that the same plutocrats who financed Jim Crow also busted unions, depressed wages, and hoarded the gains of dizzying post‑war productivity.

The economics of our moment confirm the caller’s analysis. The Economic Policy Institute finds that since 1979, the wages of the top 1 percent have exploded by 182 percent, while the bottom 90 percent saw growth of just 44 percent. By 2023, the richest captured 12.4 percent of all wages, nearly double their share in the late Carter era. The Guardian’s labor reporting shows that workers’ share of national income has fallen to 55.8 percent, even as CEO compensation soars. A politics that obsesses over immigrant scapegoats or “woke” curricula, then, conveniently masks the upward siphoning of wealth that both MAGA voters and Black communities experience.

Polling underscores how confusion benefits plutocracy. The Georgetown Institute’s March 2024 Battleground Civility Poll recorded that large majorities in both parties believe the opposite camp threatens democracy. Yet, almost no respondents pointed to corporate domination or runaway inequality as the culprit. Such misplaced anxiety testifies to a right‑wing media machine that “floods the zone” with cultural panic. Jon Stewart recently lampooned this tactic on The Daily Show, mapping how each outrage cycle distracts from the one policy story—a tax loophole expansion, redistributing wealth upward.

The progressive caller, therefore, did more than rebut a racist trope; she illuminated a path to liberation. First, she insisted on naming class warfare publicly. Wall Street already wages that war through anti‑union campaigns, privatization schemes, and austerity budgets; acknowledging the conflict allows everyday Americans to fight back rather than punch sideways. Second, she urged listeners to cultivate media literacy—identifying the lone headline among “eleven pieces of trash” that merits real attention, and noticing the fifteen stories buried to keep citizens ignorant. That means tracking wage‑theft prosecutions, monopoly‑busting lawsuits, and pending legislation to expand the Child Tax Credit, even while culture‑war theatrics dominate cable news chyrons.

Her intervention also carried electoral implications. When voters understand that billionaires fund voter suppression laws, deregulation, and union‑busting alike, they can scrutinize candidates less for party label than for material commitments: a $17 hourly federal minimum wage, sectoral bargaining rights, Medicare for All, and a wealth tax indexed to the obscene pandemic windfalls of tech and private equity titans. Research from EPI confirms that policy choices—not immutable market forces—produced today’s wage stagnation. Those choices can be reversed if a multiracial working‑class bloc flexes its latent majority power.

Critics may argue that racism and misogyny operate independently of class, and indeed, the lived experience of hate cannot be reduced to spreadsheets. Yet the economic through‑line remains undeniable: whether a factory worker is Black in Birmingham or white in rural Ohio, corporate offshoring, union decertification, and regressive taxation empty the same wallets. The ruling minority thus relies on symbolic hierarchy to preserve material hierarchy. By exposing that ruse, the caller joined a radical tradition from the Populists of the 1890s to the 1968 Memphis sanitation strikers, who marched under the banner “I Am A Man” while demanding higher wages.

In the end, the broadcast segment demonstrated that clarity can pierce propaganda. A single, well‑informed voice reframed the conversation from racial grievance to class solidarity. Should that perspective spread—bolstered by independent media, grass‑roots organizing, and a labor movement newly energized by 2024’s UAW and Teamsters victories—MAGA loyalists may yet recognize that their enemy is not the immigrant neighbor or the queer teacher but the billionaire donor class laughing to the Cayman Islands. Once the many unite against the few, those “isms” lose their potency, and the promise of economic democracy finally comes into view.