White Privilege

  • Thread starter Earth
  • 1,707 comments
  • 89,133 views
What is that difference? It's not clear to me. I tend to think of supremacist groups as hate groups more or less by definition; they think that their race is superior to all others.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_supremacy



We could say that about white supremacist groups as well. They're on the fringe and full of crazy people. It doesn't really change anything about them.



Why? It seems to me that racial hate is racial hate.

Supremacist groups =hate groups but hate groups do not equal supremacist groups.
The white supremacist has much more influence and following in a white society then any minority supremacist groups. Theyfar outnumber any other group. If you fail to see the context I am talking in, then you chose to ignore the issues it brings to the daily lives of minorities. There are for more people killed because of white supremacy then any other by a huge margin.
 
Supremacist groups =hate groups but hate groups do not equal supremacist groups.
The white supremacist has much more influence and following in a white society then any minority supremacist groups. Theyfar outnumber any other group. If you fail to see the context I am talking in, then you chose to ignore the issues it brings to the daily lives of minorities. There are for more people killed because of white supremacy then any other by a huge margin.

You’re missing the point, white suprematists are a small minority of the total population so their effects on the daily lives of minorities is minimal. They may have a lot more influence than other supremacist groups but a lot more of nothing is still nothing.
 
You’re missing the point, white suprematists are a small minority of the total population so their effects on the daily lives of minorities is minimal. They may have a lot more influence than other supremacist groups but a lot more of nothing is still nothing.
Im not missing the point Historically white supremacist groups in one form or another have always had large influence in the US governement. This reflects back to day to day society. The number of hate groups and surpremacist have only grown since Trump has become president. And that isnt a coincedence.
 
This reflects back to day to day society. The number of hate groups and surpremacist have only grown since Trump has become president. And that isnt a coincedence.

That's sort of hard to say since that stat comes from the SPLC, which isn't the most reliable source of late and looking at their Hate Map it's obvious they do what they can to bloat their numbers by listing some groups multiple times usually once as statewide as well as locally.
 
The number of hate groups and surpremacist have only grown since Trump has become president.

How much is this due to Trump himself? Clearly the groundswell of public opinion that led to someone like Trump being elected was in place well before he even started campaigning. If supremacist groups are on the rise, to what extent was this true before Trump? Has it changed after Trump?

I'd imagine that if supremacist groups were on the rise, they'd have been doing so during Obama as well. It might be tough to argue that Obama is responsible for encouraging white supremacist groups, and so while Trump might be an intolerant bigot, as long as things haven't really changed since Obama's era it would be wrong to attribute the rise to him.

upload_2018-7-30_2-24-47.png

https://www.splcenter.org/hate-map (about halfway down the page)

It would seem that a) hate groups are on the rise generally, and b) that they've actually slowed since a major increase in 2014-15. Trump very much wasn't around politically then. Add in that hate groups still haven't reached the peaks of 2010-2012 and I'm not sure that your argument holds up, at least based on the statistics.

I'd question what caused the huge drop from 2012 to 2014, but it wasn't Trump and it probably wasn't Obama either.
 
How much is this due to Trump himself? Clearly the groundswell of public opinion that led to someone like Trump being elected was in place well before he even started campaigning. If supremacist groups are on the rise, to what extent was this true before Trump? Has it changed after Trump?

I'd imagine that if supremacist groups were on the rise, they'd have been doing so during Obama as well. It might be tough to argue that Obama is responsible for encouraging white supremacist groups, and so while Trump might be an intolerant bigot, as long as things haven't really changed since Obama's era it would be wrong to attribute the rise to him.

View attachment 754995
https://www.splcenter.org/hate-map (about halfway down the page)

It would seem that a) hate groups are on the rise generally, and b) that they've actually slowed since a major increase in 2014-15. Trump very much wasn't around politically then. Add in that hate groups still haven't reached the peaks of 2010-2012 and I'm not sure that your argument holds up, at least based on the statistics.

I'd question what caused the huge drop from 2012 to 2014, but it wasn't Trump and it probably wasn't Obama either.

Trumps policies and hist worldview have definately encouraged white nationalists, like no president in recent times.
 
Trumps policies and hist worldview have definately encouraged white nationalists, like no president in recent times.

Encouraged perhaps, but do you have any proof of it having a concrete effect? Clearly from that graph I posted there's been no real effect on the number of hate groups, at least in the way that SPLC counts it (which if anything, is to the disadvantage of right-leaning hate groups).

There's a difference between speech and action. If all the president is doing is running his mouth without it actually doing anything, I fail to see the problem other than making the US look bad.
 
Yep Black lives matter fired up a lot of black people to "fight the establishment". Makes me glad I dont live in the US.
Dude you act like the US is falling apart and in full on anarchy. Believe it or not, it's no where near as bad as the news wants you to think it is. FYI BLM has quieted down since the news stopped the whole police slaughtering blacks narrative.
See how they intertwine?
 
Dude you act like the US is falling apart and in full on anarchy. Believe it or not, it's no where near as bad as the news wants you to think it is. FYI BLM has quieted down since the news stopped the whole police slaughtering blacks narrative.
See how they intertwine?

I do know that. Life ultimately goes on. But its your president that makes it a larger issue by his tweets and rallies. I certainly dont believe it was that much better under Obama and Bush. But I have never encountered someone who spreads so much controversy and message of populism and hate that is fueling the message of white supremacy (perhaps unintentially) .

Or did they finally figure out that black on black crime is a much, MUCH bigger problem?

Black on black crime has its origins in poverty. And the origin of black poverty is that they never received reparations for slavery.
 
Last edited:
I do know that. Life ultimately goes on. But its your president that makes it a larger issue by his tweets and rallies. I certainly dont believe it was that much better under Obama and Bush. But I have never encountered someone who spreads so much controversy and message of populism and hate that is fueling the message of white supremacy (perhaps unintentially) .



Black on black crime has its origins in poverty. And the origin of black poverty is that they never received reparations for slavery.
In 2 or 6 more years we'll have another President to complain about and I'll bet things will still be the same even after Trump stops Tweeting.
That said, what has he Tweeted encouraging white supremacy?
 
In 2 or 6 more years we'll have another President to complain about and I'll bet things will still be the same even after Trump stops Tweeting.
That said, what has he Tweeted encouraging white supremacy?

Not only tweets, but also his public statements that put certain minorities/countries/ religion in a negative daylight. This very likely indirectly encourages white nationalists believing that Trump being on "their" side.
 
Have you ever even been to the US? To you have any experience at all as to the culture of America or are you living the "American life" vicariously through MSM sound bites, FB posts and youtube videos.
 
Yep Black lives matter fired up a lot of black people to "fight the establishment". Makes me glad I dont live in the US.

Lol, did you just completely ignore the point of a post that showed categorically that your claim of increased white supremacists thanks to Trump was actually an increase of black supremacists?

I think you did! Bravo!

Seriously, I like Trump as little as the next person but you're taking this whole "Trump is evil and is turning America into a cesspool of racism and hatred" thing entirely too seriously. Back up, take a breath, and maybe look at the whole situation before going off half-cocked at the latest Twitter controversy. Social media is not the real world.
 
Im not missing the point Historically white supremacist groups in one form or another have always had large influence in the US governement. This reflects back to day to day society. The number of hate groups and surpremacist have only grown since Trump has become president. And that isnt a coincedence.

Historically yes, maybe a few decades ago, but not any time recently. Trump, as far as I'm aware, has never said anything to suggest he's a white supremacist, he's a nationalist sure and seems to think a lot of the countries problems are the fault of other countries but that has nothing to do with white supremacy. More racists coming out of the woodwork since Trump becoming president (assuming that is correct) is probably because his nationalist views are seen as racist (when they're not), I wouldn't be surprised if labeling him as a racist makes racists even more outspoken because they think the president agrees with them. But still even if there has been a growth in white supremacist groups, they are still far from large enough to have a meaningful impact on the lives of minorities, and they are still seen by the vast majority of the population as a bunch of fringe idiots.

Reading through your posts in the this thread I've yet to see you, or anyone for that matter, give any actual evidence that all white people are privileged and benefit from the colour of their skin. All you have essentially done is try to argue that white people are less likely to encounter people who are racist against them or be disadvantaged in some way by racism, but you fail to realise that it being less likely does not mean that all white people encounter it less than all minorities and therefore not all white people will be advantaged by the colour of their skin.

But even that argument has flaws because why do you assume that racists only negatively impact the minorities that they are racist against? I would say that they have a far more negative impact on anyone who has to put up with their bigoted behaviour on a daily basis (who are probably going to be white) than they do with the odd racist remark to a minority person.
 
Historically yes, maybe a few decades ago, but not any time recently. Trump, as far as I'm aware, has never said anything to suggest he's a white supremacist, he's a nationalist sure and seems to think a lot of the countries problems are the fault of other countries but that has nothing to do with white supremacy. More racists coming out of the woodwork since Trump becoming president (assuming that is correct) is probably because his nationalist views are seen as racist (when they're not), I wouldn't be surprised if labeling him as a racist makes racists even more outspoken because they think the president agrees with them. But still even if there has been a growth in white supremacist groups, they are still far from large enough to have a meaningful impact on the lives of minorities, and they are still seen by the vast majority of the population as a bunch of fringe idiots.

Reading through your posts in the this thread I've yet to see you, or anyone for that matter, give any actual evidence that all white people are privileged and benefit from the colour of their skin. All you have essentially done is try to argue that white people are less likely to encounter people who are racist against them or be disadvantaged in some way by racism, but you fail to realise that it being less likely does not mean that all white people encounter it less than all minorities and therefore not all white people will be advantaged by the colour of their skin.

But even that argument has flaws because why do you assume that racists only negatively impact the minorities that they are racist against? I would say that they have a far more negative impact on anyone who has to put up with their bigoted behaviour on a daily basis (who are probably going to be white) than they do with the odd racist remark to a minority person.

I never claimed he suggested he himself is a supremacist. However he very much nows a his following consists in part of white supremacists. He has perhaps attempted to halfheartedly distance himself from them, but not condemn them. His nationalist views are certainly racist when he is quoted of saying that he doesnt want people from ******** countries. Strict immigration policy based on merit is based on economic reasoning and should not factor in origin or race, but merit. Him calling mexicans rapists and murderer without nuance and calling haiti and countries in africa ****holes is disrespectfull and suggests the idea that Trump favors "white" countries. It might not have been his intention, but this causes his public image to reflect bias toward white people.

I agree that it is difficult to find actual evidence, but experience it personally on a regular basis. It is very nuanced and in my personal situation hasnt hindered my career as such. But that doesnt mean it happens. The law here says one is not allowed to hire someone based on race for example. For example in a lot of cases when there are multiple applications for a certain job, more often then not they ignore names like Mohammed, Khaled etc. and prefer " white" names instead of solely merit. This example is just very hard to prove I must admit. But hopefully you are a person that does not consider race, but if you yourself had to hire someone for a job and you had 3 applicants with equal merit for example: John, Mohammed and Xu. People have a tendency to choose what they are familiar with. This premise does prove bias towards a certain race. It does not happen everywhere but I believe more often then not. And again I have no evidence to prove this. Stating that I believe that all white people are priviliged is not what I was trying to say. I was saying that being white had advantages in a white society and being a minority has a disadvantage in a lot, but not all situation.

Lol, did you just completely ignore the point of a post that showed categorically that your claim of increased white supremacists thanks to Trump was actually an increase of black supremacists?

I think you did! Bravo!

Seriously, I like Trump as little as the next person but you're taking this whole "Trump is evil and is turning America into a cesspool of racism and hatred" thing entirely too seriously. Back up, take a breath, and maybe look at the whole situation before going off half-cocked at the latest Twitter controversy. Social media is not the real world.

I did adress it? The rise of black hate groups is a reaction to the Black lives matter movement. I wasnt aware of black supremicist groups as I stated and you have informed me about them. You used this source that black hate groups are on the rise as a counterclaim of sorts. I am not familiar with SPLC but I also dont know what your point is? Looking at the website the high number of black hate groups is because of the various chapters of certain organisations. I cant find the number of members of each though which probably is more important data. The rise of black hate groups is most probably a counterreaction to white hate groups. If white hate groups didnt exist, probably the black wouldnt have and visa versa. That is what spreading hate does.

Dont worry about my dislike of trump I am as chilled as a dutchman can be. Perhaps you are reading more in my posts then I intended to. :cheers:

edit: added reaction to @Imari
 
Last edited:
Good grief! Do you have one single shred of actual, hard evidence to base that statement on?
Quote the whole sentence. I stated clearly that one wouldnt exist without the other. It is a hypothtical situation I personally cannot prove. But using common sense you know hate provokes hate.
 
His nationalist views are certainly racist when he is quoted of saying that he doesnt want people from ******** countries.

That's not racist. That's a poorly expressed and foolish economic view.

I did adress it?

You did not. You claimed that thanks to Donald Trump white supremacists were increasing. That post showed that on the contrary, white supremacist groups are declining.

Would you like to address that?

Dont worry about my dislike of trump I am as chilled as a dutchman can be.

You are not. I've met some chill Dutchies, and you're not one of them. You're very vocally against a lot of things that you apparently don't understand well at all. That is not what "chill" means in English.
 
That's not racist. That's a poorly expressed and foolish economic view.



You did not. You claimed that thanks to Donald Trump white supremacists were increasing. That post showed that on the contrary, white supremacist groups are declining.

Would you like to address that?



You are not. I've met some chill Dutchies, and you're not one of them. You're very vocally against a lot of things that you apparently don't understand well at all. That is not what "chill" means in English.
I did react. I made the connection between the black and white hategroups. Perhaps I should have posted a link:
http://time.com/5168677/donald-trump-hate-groups-splc/

I am very chill. But i have my principles. Also we have only communicated on this forum. The person I potray through the written word, does not neccesarily reflect the person I am in daily real life.
 
I did react. I made the connection between the black and white hategroups.

I know. I asked whether you'd like to address that the data also shows that white supremacist groups are not increasing. You still haven't addressed that particular part.

Seriously, I know English is not your first language but there's nothing particularly complex about that. Run it through Google Translate or something if you must.

I am very chill. But i have my principles. Also we have only communicated on this forum. The person I potray through the written word, does not neccesarily reflect the person I am in daily real life.

The person you are online and the person you are in "real life" are the same person. If you're not "chill" on here, you're not chill. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. Just because you think you are a certain way doesn't make it true. We can all observe your personality from here.

Chill means relaxed and easy-going. That does not describe your persona on these forums. You have principles, and you're profoundly un-chill in the way that you express them. You do not take criticism well, nor are you particularly willing to break down the logic of your arguments or reassess them.

On the day you can express your principles in a chill manner, I will admit that you may be chill. But you've got a long way to go.
 
Could you point me to these black supremacy groups? (im not black) Silly me always thought that all black hate groups want is equal rights and not superior rights. And there undoubtly be latin surpremacy or asian surpremacy groups/ These are mostly on the fringe (small following) and crazy people.
Silly you indeed.
https://policy.m4bl.org/platform/
Reparations for the systemic denial of access to high quality educational opportunities in the form of full and free access for all Black people (including undocumented and currently and formerly incarcerated people) to lifetime education including: free access and open admissions to public community colleges and universities, technical education (technology, trade and agricultural), educational support programs, retroactive forgiveness of student loans, and support for lifetime learning programs.
  • Cover all living costs, including but not limited to housing, transportation, childcare, healthcare, and food for students attending public universities, colleges, and technical educational programs (including technology, trade, and agricultural).
  • Fully fund and provide open access to K-12, higher education, technical educational programs (including technology, trade, and agricultural), educational support programs and lifelong learning programs to every individual incarcerated in local, state, and federal correctional facilities (juvenile and adult).
  • Provide full access to all undocumented people to state and federal programs that provide aid to cover the full costs, including living costs, to attend public universities, and colleges, technical educational programs, and lifelong learning programs.
That's a whole lot of free and full access to black people only, and this is just education.
  • A Universal Basic Income (UBI) provides an unconditional and guaranteed livable income that would meet basic human needs while providing a floor of economic security. UBI would eliminate absolute poverty, ensuring economic security for all by mandating an income floor covering basic needs. Unlike most social welfare and social insurance programs, it is not means tested nor does it have any work requirements. All individual adults are eligible.
Oh boy, it gets better. As long as you're 18, you get free income that covers all your costs of living. If you're black.
Black people are amongst the most affected by climate change. If we’re not serious about reducing emissions, the planet will keep getting hotter and Black people will continue to bear the biggest brunt of climate change. Divest from industrial use of fossil fuels and reinvest in community-based sustainable energy solutions to make sure communities most impacted (Black communities) are helping to lead that shift.

What are the solutions?
Shift toward Black community control of more local sustainable energy and food systems.
Because of climate change, they should be given more control over sustainable energy and food systems....

And then we get to cutting our military budget in half so:
  • Cuts the US military budget by 50%, which will lead to the closure of the over 800 U.S. military bases the U.S. around the world, the elimination of the the sale of weaponry to violators of human rights, reduces the use and stockpiling of nuclear weapons and return all troops back from the current theatres of war..
That's for black people. That's right; the US cuts its military spending and closes over 800 US bases around the world so black people can have free health care, free employment, free housing, free education.

This isn't equal rights, this is a handout for 1 race at the cost of everyone else.


The problem with all of this is one @Rallywagon already pointed out to you:
I am not that person, nor in that era, nor in any way affiliated with that trade, which was made illegal.
These groups don't care. They only see skin color. That's why they want him as a white man to pay for the sins of another, long dead white man the same way they feel as black men, they are entitled to compensation for the suffering of another, long dead black man. Most of these people have no interest in even trying to prove whose family was even linked back then; it's only about money. But, these groups do a good job masking that hidden goal by arguing that the reparations are for the race as a whole and its treatment in the US. But even then, rally's point still stands; he's not those people, not from that era, or was affiliated.

My family alone, in that era were in Holland, so thought of paying reparations isn't remotely entertaining. There's probably some dark history in the Netherlands we're more attributed to.
 
Silly you indeed.
https://policy.m4bl.org/platform/


That's a whole lot of free and full access to black people only, and this is just education.

Oh boy, it gets better. As long as you're 18, you get free income that covers all your costs of living. If you're black.

Because of climate change, they should be given more control over sustainable energy and food systems....

And then we get to cutting our military budget in half so:

That's for black people. That's right; the US cuts its military spending and closes over 800 US bases around the world so black people can have free health care, free employment, free housing, free education.

This isn't equal rights, this is a handout for 1 race at the cost of everyone else.


The problem with all of this is one @Rallywagon already pointed out to you:

These groups don't care. They only see skin color. That's why they want him as a white man to pay for the sins of another, long dead white man the same way they feel as black men, they are entitled to compensation for the suffering of another, long dead black man. Most of these people have no interest in even trying to prove whose family was even linked back then; it's only about money. But, these groups do a good job masking that hidden goal by arguing that the reparations are for the race as a whole and its treatment in the US. But even then, rally's point still stands; he's not those people, not from that era, or was affiliated.

My family alone, in that era were in Holland, so thought of paying reparations isn't remotely entertaining. There's probably some dark history in the Netherlands we're more attributed to.
I mean, my dads family is native american, my moms scottish and irish... when do I get to make these demands?
 
My family alone, in that era were in Holland, so thought of paying reparations isn't remotely entertaining. There's probably some dark history in the Netherlands we're more attributed to.

You're lucky, my grandma immigrated here from Germany as an adult in the early 1960's (I don't think she exactly disagreed with Hitler either). So if I need to make amends with any large group of people, it would be the Jews.
 
Quote the whole sentence.

As a matter of fact I did quote the entire sentence. Let's try it again, this time I'll even boldface the sentence I quoted, let's see if that helps you out:
I cant find the number of members of each though which probably is more important data. The rise of black hate groups is most probably a counterreaction to white hate groups. If white hate groups didnt exist, probably the black wouldnt have and visa versa.
There you go, there's three sentences, the middle one of which is the one I'd quoted earlier and boldfaced here. So yes, I quoted the complete sentence.

I stated clearly that one wouldnt exist without the other.

Again, have you a single shred of evidence that that's the case here?

It is a hypothtical situation I personally cannot prove. But using common sense you know hate provokes hate.

Common sense is not hard evidence. To be sure, I'd agree it may be a factor, but certainly not the entirety of it as you implied.
 
Back