I never said fatherlessness isn't a serious issue. I'm saying that you have yet to prove that it's an issue in the black community. You're taking statistics about marriage and living situation and conflating that with parental involvement. Just because two people aren't married or living together, doesn't mean that both parents aren't involved. Why do you keep making that assumption? Do you have any statistics that prove that black children are "fatherless" at a higher rate than white children?

I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make about class? You said that most leftist rhetoric isn't working class. Ok, that's not my experience. Just because you're only listening to the loudest, richest, and most influential voices, doesn't mean that lots of leftists aren't discussing real world solutions that actually make sense for them as the working class. You've been trying to push this rigid definition of leftists but at every turn you seem to move the goal posts. So, are leftists out of touch with the working class or are they actually more likely to be working class while the minority of leftists are out of touch richies?

Hahaha, yes, dude. I, as an anti-authority, queer, disabled atheist woman who comes from a family of criminals living in a dying rust belt town, know nothing of being considered a heretic!

Can you not see that this is a deflection that kinda totally proves my point? I point out that you're more concerned with confronting leftists about appearances than confronting racists about their racism and you ask me how you think I appear as a leftist confronting racism? Um, I'm not too concerned with appearances, to be honest. I don't really care if people think I'm virtue signaling or scolding or whatever. I'm not in control of what other people think. I'm in control of what I do and say. And, I do and say based on what I believe is right. If you, like others, choose to focus on how offended you are because someone said that your behavior or words could be construed as racist rather than doing the hard work that comes with examining those claims then that's on you.

Hahaha, ok, which political party that's winning, doesn't take the moral high ground, doesn't scold, doesn't virtue signal?

No, I absolutely do not think that union heads were chastising workers for their social prejudices. Know why? Because it's pretty well known that the early unions were extremely racist and discriminatory. They didn't bring together a diverse group of working class men". In fact, you'd be amazed at how many unions were started because of or motivated by the threat of cheap black labor or simply integration. It's believed that black wealth has fallen so far behind in large part because of the discrimination and exclusion of black people in unions for decades. That bigotry was never overcome. Instead it was institutionalized. So, yeah, the union was successful... at improving the status of lots of white folks at the expense of black folks. Are you sure that this is the model that you'd like to follow?