White Privilege

[Danoff]

My brain is exploded after I've read this article:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/16/racial-inequality-niceness-white-people

How can somebody be this insane I don't even....Yes, we have to be nice to other people but the amount of nonsense in this article is literally melting my brain

Very racist article. Here's the conclusion

We can begin by acknowledging ourselves as racial beings with a particular and limited perspective on race. We can attempt to understand the racial realities of people of color through authentic interaction rather than through the media or through unequal relationships. We can insist that racism be discussed in our workplaces and a professed commitment to racial equity be demonstrated by actual outcomes

I'm out at the first sentence. We are not racial beings with a particular and limited perspective on race. Pinning down a particular race is about as messy an ordeal as it gets. Granted, everyone's perspective on every subject is limited by the power of their brain, imagination, and experiences. But that makes the "limited perspective" claim vacuous. A black person's perspective on race is no more correct or real or important than a white person's.

Let me say that again, the color of your skin does not determine the quality of your opinions, even on the topic of skin color.

Also, inequality of outcome does not guarantee racism going in. I fought this with the gender pay gap, and I'd fight it with racial differences as well (though not in exactly the same way). The most racist, and harmful message that I see out there is exactly what this article is preaching - that people of particular "races" are perceived as victims who have been wronged by others either intentionally or unintentionally, and that any lack in outcome is due to that victimhood. I can't think of a much better way to keep a group down than to tell them they have a scapegoat for everything and anything.

 

[PocketZeven]

Very racist article. Here's the conclusion



I'm out at the first sentence. We are not racial beings with a particular and limited perspective on race. Pinning down a particular race is about as messy an ordeal as it gets. Granted, everyone's perspective on every subject is limited by the power of their brain, imagination, and experiences. But that makes the "limited perspective" claim vacuous. A black person's perspective on race is no more correct or real or important than a white person's.

Let me say that again, the color of your skin does not determine the quality of your opinions, even on the topic of skin color.

Also, inequality of outcome does not guarantee racism going in. I fought this with the gender pay gap, and I'd fight it with racial differences as well (though not in exactly the same way). The most racist, and harmful message that I see out there is exactly what this article is preaching - that people of particular "races" are perceived as victims who have been wronged by others either intentionally or unintentionally, and that any lack in outcome is due to that victimhood. I can't think of a much better way to keep a group down than to tell them they have a scapegoat for everything and anything.

As soon as we can agree we are all the same and there is no such thing as different races, then perhaps we can move further. It is a small detail perhaps, but would make a world of difference.

Everytime someone speaks about battling racism and still refer to ethnicities as races, clearly doesnt get that we are all one human race. They start with the assumption that because of race, people are different, but should be respected and treated as equal. In my opinion this is incorrect. The assumption should be that we are all humans and equal in the first place, with different ethnic origins and therefore we should respect each others origins. We are different not because supposedly of race, but because of culture and ethnic origins.

edit: poor wordchoice

 

[Dobermann92]

Have you visited the flat-earth thread?

I consider flat-earthers either too dumb or too ignorant to be taken seriously, thus I'm mostly uninterested in the topic. Racism and white supremacy is a bit more nuanced topic, but as the example shows above there are ignorant people talking about the topic too. Poor fella can only think about race all day and she is very sorry for that which I completely understand, if I would be this blatantly racist I would be ashamed myself too.

 

[Supaboost]

Pops worked construction 50 hours a week mom as a cook for near 60.

No privilege just work ethic and ambition to better ones life which s missing from many lazy people these days.

 

[PocketZeven]

I consider flat-earthers either too dumb or too ignorant to be taken seriously, thus I'm mostly uninterested in the topic. Racism and white supremacy is a bit more nuanced topic, but as the example shows above there are ignorant people talking about the topic too. Poor fella can only think about race all day and she is very sorry for that which I completely understand, if I would be this blatantly racist I would be ashamed myself too.

Because of @kikie I have been bizarrely interested in trying to understand the flat-earth mindset. The most vocal proponents arent actually that dumb, they just believe in conspiracy theories. Almost every flatearther I have read about or watched a video also believe in other conspiracy theories. They genuinly think they are thinking outside the box and are "freethinkers".

Perhaps people who are this ignorantly racist apply the exact same thought with LGBTQ. And by doing so think they are not racist, because of their awareness and that their intention is good.

Pops worked construction 50 hours a week mom as a cook for near 60.

No privilege just work ethic and ambition to better ones life which s missing from many lazy people these days.

That is quite relative. How many hours do you work?

 

[th3o]

The funny thing in all this is the most simple but totally overlooked thing: None of these so called people of color who these white knights try to 'protect' or whatever, ever had any issues with this whole thing whatsoever. And neither did they demand any special treatment. It's the white crazy knights who are annoying even for those. Talked to so many so called PoC's and when confronted with this white knight ******** they were like: We don't need your help, leave us alone.

 

[TenEightyOne]

None of these so called people of color who these white knights try to 'protect' or whatever, ever had any issues with this whole thing whatsoever.

Source required. This should be interesting.

 

[PocketZeven]

The funny thing in all this is the most simple but totally overlooked thing: None of these so called people of color who these white knights try to 'protect' or whatever, ever had any issues with this whole thing whatsoever. And neither did they demand any special treatment. It's the white crazy knights who are annoying even for those. Talked to so many so called PoC's and when confronted with this white knight ******** they were like: We don't need your help, leave us alone.

That sounds like the common "I have coloured friends" argument. Or more accurately "My coloured friends told me this". Trust me that racists are still more annoying then white-knights or more accurately social justice warriors. The difference though is that the intentions are clearer with true racists and suspicious with white knights, which the article actually did highlight.

Racism is such a difficult thing for a lot of people, if you ignore it, you are racist and when you try to do something about it you are still actually racist in todays Social justice warrior (SJW) climate.

The key is to try to treat everyone the same and not better (or worse). That concept is too difficult for a lot of people to grasp.

 

[novcze]

As soon as we can agree we are all the same and there is no such thing as different races, then perhaps we can move further

imo, there is not something inherently wrong with acknowledging different races, after all we have different physical characteristics.

Look at definition of race :
"a group, especially of people, with particular similar physical characteristics, who are considered as belonging to the same type, or the fact of belonging to such a group:"

Problem starts when someone start to use race as a basis for discrimination, etc. because that is racism.

 

[Mr Tree]

imo, there is not something inherently wrong with acknowledging different races, after all we have different physical characteristics.

Look at definition of race :
"a group, especially of people, with particular similar physical characteristics, who are considered as belonging to the same type, or the fact of belonging to such a group:"

Problem starts when someone start to use race as a basis for discrimination, etc. because that is racism.

I do not want to act like there are no diffrences between people but I think the defenition of rascism you use is useless as it would probably be more accurate to sat etnicity. Also the defenitions doesn't explain where the line should be drawn between races as often it's not a hard cut line but a blend, moving from one place to the other things gradually change.

 

[PocketZeven]

imo, there is not something inherently wrong with acknowledging different races, after all we have different physical characteristics.

Look at definition of race :
"a group, especially of people, with particular similar physical characteristics, who are considered as belonging to the same type, or the fact of belonging to such a group:"

Problem starts when someone start to use race as a basis for discrimination, etc. because that is racism.

The problem is race has another meaning in biology defining breeds in species in other animals, akin to the human race. That association opens the door for one believing a race/breed being superior/inferior, because of genetics. It is in my belief that categorization is incorrect since most people are X% of mixed heritage. The word also emphises there are differences between "races" (or breeds). We are however all of the human race and that emphasizes the similarities and not the differences. We are of different ethnicity and that word is far deeper and more accurate to explain the difference in appearance. Instead of white, black, brown, asian etc. we are chinese, african-american, white/black(native) south african, italian-american, mexican-latino etc.

 

[novcze]

@PocketZeven usage of race and breed is different, because breed is result of intentional breeding and race is result of natural distinctions.

Use of ethnicity is more accurate, however people will use just about anything to differentiate, ever heard of ethnicists?

 

[PocketZeven]

@PocketZeven usage of race is reserved for humans and breed for animals. Also I belive it's not the same thing, because breed is result of intentional breeding and race is result of natural distinctions.

Use of ethnicity is more accurate, however people will use just about anything to differentiate, ever heard of ethnicists?

Perhaps, but why call humans, the human race?

Maybe it is a language thing, because race is used to catogorise subspecies in horses, dogs, plants etc in dutch. Biologically there are no races within the human race (Homo Sapiens). I did some digging and the reason we dont use the word race anymore over here is because Hitler used it to classify certain races as inferior (biologically). Therefore the use of race has been charged with controvercy.

Another benefit would be that the word racism will have a different gravitas.

Edit: spellcheck

Edit 2: Ethnicists thats the first time I heard it. Saying it out loud doesnt sound very offensive though. It would be a great replacement for racist.

 

[Groundfish]

Where I am from, the big issue is economic privilege.
Where I am from that powers that be want nothing more than lower classes remaining divided by bickering about things like culture and skin color.
The real problem where I am from is middle class shrinking. Historically when this happens a society will eventually have big problems.
Until people here unite against corruption they will continue to allow themselves to be divided and controlled.
The real issue here has nothing to do with the color of a persons skin, it’s economic.
Here, if you are just above poverty it is disadvantageous to be young and white in terms of both educational oppurtunity and employment.
Basically, when folks cry white privilege here they are talking about rich white.
People don’t like the power aspect economic privilege provides.
It just so happens that a large majority of economically privileged people here have a certain skin color.
I would hope that a few folks might consider this.
It’s more than just being a skin color. The issue here has much more depth than that imo.
Ever heard the phrase divide and conquer?

 

[TenEightyOne]

Basically, when folks cry white privilege here they are talking about rich white.

Have you read the "knapsack" document that this whole discussion is based on? It sounds as if you've decided what you think the term "white privilege" means and you're having an argument about that instead.

 

[Danoff]

Where I am from, the big issue is economic privilege.

I'm trying to think of a country where that is the case... A few come to mind but nothing really striking. There are a few countries on Earth where I'd rather have the privilege of rich parents than the privilege of loving parents, for example, but not very many.

Where are you from anyway. You keep bringing this up and then not volunteering it. If you don't want to talk about it, why do you keep talking about it?

 

[Scaff]

imo, there is not something inherently wrong with acknowledging different races, after all we have different physical characteristics.

Look at definition of race :
"a group, especially of people, with particular similar physical characteristics, who are considered as belonging to the same type, or the fact of belonging to such a group:"

Problem starts when someone start to use race as a basis for discrimination, etc. because that is racism.

Race is a social construct and has no basis at all in genetics.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/political-correctness.166413/page-62#post-12606902

 

[PocketZeven]

Where I am from, the big issue is economic privilege.
Where I am from that powers that be want nothing more than lower classes remaining divided by bickering about things like culture and skin color.
The real problem where I am from is middle class shrinking. Historically when this happens a society will eventually have big problems.
Until people here unite against corruption they will continue to allow themselves to be divided and controlled.
The real issue here has nothing to do with the color of a persons skin, it’s economic.
Here, if you are just above poverty it is disadvantageous to be young and white in terms of both educational oppurtunity and employment.
Basically, when folks cry white privilege here they are talking about rich white.
People don’t like the power aspect economic privilege provides.
It just so happens that a large majority of economically privileged people here have a certain skin color.
I would hope that a few folks might consider this.
It’s more than just being a skin color. The issue here has much more depth than that imo.
Ever heard the phrase divide and conquer?

That is what happens everywhere in the world. Conservatives want to keep the status quo and liberals want more equality. Ironic how often the lesser income part of the world are conservative.

 

[Groundfish]

I'm trying to think of a country where that is the case... A few come to mind but nothing really striking. There are a few countries on Earth where I'd rather have the privilege of rich parents than the privilege of loving parents, for example, but not very many.

Where are you from anyway. You keep bringing this up and then not volunteering it. If you don't want to talk about it, why do you keep talking about it?

Well, this thread has a lot of folks expressing their opinions about racism ‘race’ etc.
To me the issue that has caused problems more than any other is economic and cultural more than a persons skin color.
I was reading online accounts of the rioting that happened in Los Angeles...The Watts riots.
The folks who rioted were pretty economically disadvantaged. I believe it’s a question of economics and power.
The power structure is hardly based on skin color in my view. Everyone resents it when others have power over them and that power is used in an immoral fashion.
The differences between groups of folks are cultural and economic more than skin color imo.
Also I find a bit of irony in the thread title and folks discussing how bad racists are while happily using the racist term ie ‘skin color’ privilege.

 

[Danoff]

Well, this thread has a lot of folks expressing their opinions about racism ‘race’ etc.
To me the issue that has caused problems more than any other is economic and cultural more than a persons skin color.
I was reading online accounts of the rioting that happened in Los Angeles...The Watts riots.
The folks who rioted were pretty economically disadvantaged. I believe it’s a question of economics and power.
The power structure is hardly based on skin color in my view. Everyone resents it when others have power over them and that power is used in an immoral fashion.
The differences between groups of folks are cultural and economic more than skin color imo.
Also I find a bit of irony in the thread title and folks discussing how bad racists are while happily using the racist term ie ‘skin color’ privilege.

You just really don't like direct questions do you?

 

[Scaff]

Well, this thread has a lot of folks expressing their opinions about racism ‘race’ etc.
To me the issue that has caused problems more than any other is economic and cultural more than a persons skin color.

Where?

Globally? The USA? Canada? Europe? South Africa?

Without context that's so pointlessly vague as to be worthless.

I was reading online accounts of the rioting that happened in Los Angeles...The Watts riots.
The folks who rioted were pretty economically disadvantaged. I believe it’s a question of economics and power.

Has it not occurred to you that it might be due to more than one thing?

The power structure is hardly based on skin color in my view. Everyone resents it when others have power over them and that power is used in an immoral fashion.

Its based on many things, to dismiss colour as a factor within power structures in to ignore a rather massive amount of human history since the 14th Century.

The differences between groups of folks are cultural and economic more than skin color imo.

Which differences?

As once again your making a point without context that is so vague as the be useless.

Also I find a bit of irony in the thread title and folks discussing how bad racists are while happily using the racist term ie ‘skin color’ privilege.

Citation for 'skin color' being a racist term please.

 

[Groundfish]

I found this video from an American political commentator. He would agree about the terms use.


On liberal equality vs conservative status quo...
A question comes to mind...What equality?
economic?

 

[Scaff]

I found this video from an American political commentator. He would agree about the terms use.


On liberal equality vs conservative status quo...
A question comes to mind...What equality?
economic?

And his qualifications as a source are?

(Aside from his rather massive idealogical bias on the topic).

Allow me to counter with a namesake that is qualified in the area... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Shapiro

Your Shapiro talks from the point of a political hack with a background as a Brietbart editor. Mine has dedicated his life and professional qualifications to the study of wealth inequality and its causes.

Oh and as for his video, it's based utterly on a strawman

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/shatteringparadigms/2017/11/privilege-part-2-is-it-a-myth/

 

[Groundfish]

@Scaff
He’s not ‘my’ Shapiro. I simply posted that because you requested it. I do not think in lockstep with him.
He is well educated and grad of Harvard so it seems a valid opinion to me.

 

[Scaff]

@Scaff
He’s not ‘my’ Shapiro. I simply posted that because you requested it. I do not think in lockstep with him.

Its a turn of phrase, you cited him, so he's 'yours'.

He is well educated and grad of Harvard so it seems a valid opinion to me.

He has a BA in political science, not sociology.

Given this kind of logic I'm sure if you required surgery you would be happy for my brother to operate on you (he well educated, his degree is in civil engineering - but that's OK).

Its a strawman and appeal to authority (the wrong kind).

Not that this is a surprise, you keep not answering very specific questions that a number of member have asked, instead opting to use logical fallacies, avoidance and misdirection.

I asked what qualified him, simply stating "He is well educated and grad of Harvard" isn't an answer to that.

Nor is he stating it as opinion, he's citing it as fact (and in doing so is both wrong and misleading).

 

[huskeR32]

Have you read the "knapsack" document that this whole discussion is based on? It sounds as if you've decided what you think the term "white privilege" means and you're having an argument about that instead.

Apt summary of much of this thread's history, if we're being honest.

--

The power structure is hardly based on skin color in my view.

As Ten said above, you're pretty casually dismissing an entire concept without having, to this point, displayed any sign that you understand it in the first place. Have you read that document? What parts do you disagree with? Why?

People who have spent entire careers thinking about and studying race relations have come to the opposite conclusion than you have. What makes you so confident in your dismissal of their work?

I found this video from an American political commentator. He would agree about the terms use.

Ben Shaprio is an idiot. I'm far more interested in your thoughts than his.

 

[Groundfish]

Its a turn of phrase, you cited him, so he's 'yours'.



He has a BA in political science, not sociology.

Given this kind of logic I'm sure if you required surgery you would be happy for my brother to operate on you (he well educated, his degree is in civil engineering - but that's OK).

Its a strawman and appeal to authority (the wrong kind).

Not that this is a surprise, you keep not answering very specific questions that a number of member have asked, instead opting to use logical fallacies, avoidance and misdirection.

I asked what qualified him, simply stating "He is well educated and grad of Harvard" isn't an answer to that.

Nor is he stating it as opinion, he's citing it as fact (and in doing so is both wrong and misleading).

If you accuse someone of a given skin color as having a trait across the board isn’t that racism?

The reason I am saying it’s economic is my own personal experience of being bullied harassed and in general treated as an inferior because of family income level.
People exerted power over me because of the fact their economic and political status was greater than mine at one time.
I’m talking about people the same as myself in appearance.

I grew up sucked it up and put my nose to the grindstone to earn a level of economic ‘success.’

I am absolutely disgusted by and offended by the term white privilege.

It’s because of my experience. I grew up toughened up and played the hand Inwas dealt. I have plenty of right to state my opinion on it.

I do not wish offense. I am simply relating my individual experience.

 

[Scaff]

If you accuse someone of a given skin color as having a trait across the board isn’t that racism?

That's not what you said, don't move the goal posts.

The reason I am saying it’s economic is my own personal experience of being bullied harassed and in general treated as an inferior because of family income level.
People exerted power over me because of the fact their economic and political status was greater than mine at one time.
I’m talking about people the same as myself in appearance.

I grew up sucked it up and put my nose to the grindstone to earn a level of economic ‘success.’

And you think your the only white person to have ever experienced that? Take a ticket and join the line.

Your personal experience doesn't invalidate the data.

I am absolutely disgusted by and offended by the term white privilege.

Feel free to do so, no ones stopping you.

Is doesn't however mean you're correct

It’s because of my experience. I grew up toughened up and played the hand Inwas dealt. I have plenty of right to state my opinion on it.

Again no one is stopping you, it just doesn't invalidate the data that's been gathered for thousands of others.

I do not wish offense. I am simply relating my individual experience.

And again no one is stopping you.

The simple fact is that has you had exactly the same hand dealt you, but had not been white, it would have statistically been harder for you.

 

[Groundfish]

Look it’s quite clear this is not an open forum for honest discussion.
I’m done.

 

[Danoff]

Look it’s quite clear this is not an open forum for honest discussion.
I’m done.

I'm not surprised you ran through this the same way you ran through the transgender thread. You came in with an opinion, were challenged, were annoyed that anyone had questions for you, and quit. More than anything I want to convey that that's what we do here. We challenge each other's opinions, and it's very valuable.