2016 US Election

[Raver]

Im definitely not coming from a more desirable position than most western white people, but I think I would have had a harder time coming as far as I have out of my background if I wasnt white. I do remember getting defensive once when I was poking around on a black nationalist forum and saw the assertion that any white person who isn't a millionaire by 30 is stupid, haha. But I don't get defensive over the concept of privilege in general because it's just social science and i don't think it's as personal as people take it, thinking they're expected to repent and hate themselves or that they never have any problems or something, like there are some people who think that, people think lots of dumb things, but it's not really the point of it all.

I think maybe you feel less affected by it because it's typically white males that are seen as being privileged the most rather than white females. They're an easy target because there was such thing as white male privilege only several decades ago (there wasn't such thing as female white privilege back then). Nowadays, the old white men are still reaping the awards of the privileges of being a white male, but young white males who don't have the same privileges feel disenfranchised.

Being a young white male means you get looked upon as having white male privilege, but not actually having the same privileges as their father or grandfather did so it's an undesirable position to be in. I think we're moving towards equality nowadays even though we're not there yet. It's basically an awkward transition period where people act as if it's 1966 when it's 2016 IMO.

What do you even mean by neutral. Are you trying to say that that it's the "norm"? Sure white is the baseline of what people think is American or western and you can see that everyday in Hollywood where they'll cast Scarlett Johanson in Ghost in the Shell. Is it a norm, sure, but it's not neutral.

If blacks are disadvantaged vs whites, then whites are privileged. Lucky you that you look white and don't get to experience the glass ceiling or driving while black, but I see how black people and people of color are treated everyday and it's not neutral their life. I think a lot of what is called white privilege is this blindness and willful blindness to the inequities they do not experience.

Neutral as in no special advantage for hiring for jobs, but no disadvantage in being treated worse by cops as one example. I'm not denying that blacks are disadvantaged, but that doesn't make whites automatically privileged. It just makes everyone else more privileged than them. Unless you're implying that everyone is treated worse than white people?

[mu4]

Your standard redneck & Texan: "Obama can't take way r gunz. Murica."

I am pro-gun freedom in most ways and I sort of wish the progressive left would adopt more pro-gun mentality. If you armed every black, Muslim, Mexican, Hispanic, Asian citizen, I think it would be good for this democracy.

Orwell said, "inherently democratic weapon" and “gives claws to the weak;” about guns and I agree.

The working class and the minorities of this country should embrace gun culture and what it represents as a symbol of self-empowerment(many do already). Second, the left embracing gun culture will inevitably lead the right to start doing background checks at gun shows.

It's a counter intuitive solution but being naively against guns like many on the left are currently is a weak point.

I think for the left to reclaim a dialogue with the disenchanted working class, it needs to and logically should embrace guns as a symbol of resistance against the strong and powerful.

I think racism is a complex issue in the south(where I live) and people are more racists in some ways then they think of themselves and less racists than how others may think of them. People can work past racism and personal prejudice much more capably than we give them credit for. I assume this can occur for other parts of the country as well.

[rat200Turbo]

You can say "whites are privileged in comparison to blacks" but you can't refer to my "white privilege". You can observe the past, you can't prescribe remedial measures based on race. I don't see how race is any useful measure for setting policies around.

[mu4]

Neutral as in no special advantage for hiring for jobs, but no disadvantage in being treated worse by cops as one example.

White males have plenty of advantage over even white women, so how could white males not be privileged?

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0882775.html

2013 100 75.1 67.2 78 64 54

White men makes for 100 dollars what every other group make no more than 80 dollars.

Even taking this basic metric white men are privileged.

The facts do not support your experience, seeing as you have admitted don't experience the same disadvantage many people of color and women experience daily.

[marooned]

i keep trying to say it. "white privilege" isn't about individuals; it's about how overall the systems in society are slanted disproportionately to benefit whites as a group. this is overall and on average. it doesn't mean that any white person will have a blessed life in the u.s. or that whites never experience things that are unfair. it doesn't mean that if you are the only white person in a black neighborhood that you won't be discriminated against in that neighborhood. (as in there may be micro pockets of privilege favoring certain groups within something like a neighborhood, but as soon as they connect to the larger society, white priv is there.)

racism is systemic and "white privilege" is referring to things at the level of the system. if someone is trying to make it personal based on your skin color and all these factors that you had no choice in, i would question if they even understand the term.

i think it's natural that a lot of whites might feel personally guilty when racial topics are brought up (this is perfectly human) while some might lash out against it because they feel they're being made to feel guilty about it and it's unfair; but these feelings aren't actually a logical match to the topic.

[Raver]

White males have plenty of advantage over even white women, so how could white males not be privileged?

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0882775.html

2013 100 75.1 67.2 78 64 54

White men makes for 100 dollars what every other group make no more than 80 dollars.

Even taking this basic metric white men are privileged.

The facts do not support your experience, seeing as you have admitted don't experience the same disadvantage many people of color and women experience daily.

Yes, white men earn more than white women and most ethnic groups, that's hard to deny. I suspect a lot of it is due to old white men living off of the white male privilege they had from the past. I think we are moving towards more equal pay between the sexes and ethnic groups, but it will take time as we are not there yet. Apparently, there is a group that is earning more than white men nowadays though and that's asian men, which is good news:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...rns-white-men/

[rat200Turbo]

i keep trying to say it. "white privilege" isn't about individuals; it's about how overall the systems in society are slanted disproportionately to benefit whites as a group. this is overall and on average. it doesn't mean that any white person will have a blessed life in the u.s. or that whites never experience things that are unfair. it doesn't mean that if you are the only white person in a black neighborhood that you won't be discriminated against in that neighborhood.

racism is systemic and "white privilege" is referring to things at the level of the system. if someone is trying to make it personal based on your skin color and all these factors that you had no choice in, i would question if they even understand the term.

Well no, I don't really see an ongoing benefit to being white either. Yeah damage happened in the past, but actually we have payed our dues for that. Now we need to move forward.

[marooned]

Well no, I don't really see an ongoing benefit to being white either. Yeah damage happened in the past, but actually we have payed our dues for that. Now we need to move forward.

you're still looking at it on the individual level. it's not about paying dues (i don't owe "dues" for being "white"). it's about trying to counter the white group as a whole having disproportionate advantages that betray a system that is still slanted in its favor (though not as much as it was previously).

or i guess maybe a different way to say all of this is that many people have certain "group memberships" that grant them privilege and certain ones that put them at a disadvantage. so in my case i have white priv going for me (which is to say i don't have to worry about a bunch of stuff because "white" is still considered the "default" american); coming from the working class is a disadvantage i've noticed in numerous ways (underprivileged); it's more difficult for me to personally connect to how being female fits into all of this because i've in some ways absorbed so many of the messages about being female--what it means you can or can't do, what it means you are or aren't by nature, what roles you won't be called out in and what roles you will be, etc.--that it's just part of my existence that i simply live with.

basically there are certain "memberships" that can make stuff more of an uphill struggle and certain ones that make it easier to coast. the rest is up to the individual and individual factors.

[rat200Turbo]

you're still looking at it on the individual level. it's not about paying dues (i don't owe "dues" for being "white"). it's about trying to counter the white group as a whole having disproportionate advantages that betray a system that is still slanted in its favor (though not as much as it was previously).

No, I am thinking about the white race. I don't see any real advantage going forward for individuals which are white, on the whole / as a trend. I don't see this "systemic racism" you're referring to. For example, the police already have taken dramatic steps to control for racial bias within the police force... black's aren't being shot in mass numbers like we're led to believe. We have provided an overwhelming amount of government assistance to the poor...

[marooned]

No, I am thinking about the white race. I don't see any real advantage going forward for individuals which are white,

well, good? the idea is that everyone should be on an equal field. no "group" should have advantages, if possible, at least wrt biological things that no one can help.

[rat200Turbo]

Trying to undo this from a top down government standpoint is a misdirection of resources, and impossible. Better to target those resources at the poor in general, that's a proper use of resources.. after you truly stop seeing race you will see that this is an equal playing field. It's up to the individuals themselves to pull themselves out of poverty.

[marooned]

after you truly stop seeing race you will see that this is an equal playing field.

i think that this would just mean the race problems would continue but we all turn a blind eye (or those of us who have that privilege), at least at this point. anyway i guess it's up to the stats on this overall though. i don't feel around me that the scales are balanced yet. in any case i'm rather sensitive to if i think things are unfair to me on a societal level (for instance, all of my thoughts about class); and i'm not detecting any broad scale unfairness wrt my supposed "race" except for that which still favors whites as a whole.

as for the approach (top down) that you mention, i really don't know if i think that is the best approach or not. mainly i think it probably isn't the best approach, but it's what we have (and it seems to be doing the job just perhaps in a very sloppy way), and i don't know how to fix the problem either (as in, i don't have a better idea).

[rat200Turbo]

i think that this would just mean the race problems would continue but we all turn a blind eye (or those of us who have that privilege), at least at this point. anyway i guess it's up to the stats on this overall though. i don't feel around me that the scales are balanced yet. in any case i'm rather sensitive to if i think things are unfair to me on a societal level (for instance, all of my thoughts about class); and i'm not detecting any broad scale unfairness wrt my supposed "race" except for that which still favors whites as a whole.

as for the approach (top down) that you mention, i really don't know if i think that is the best approach or not. mainly i think it probably isn't the best approach, but it's what we have (and it seems to be doing the job just perhaps in a very sloppy way), and i don't know how to fix the problem either (as in, i don't have a better idea).

Yeah, where does our society still discriminate against blacks? And what would you want done?
This sort of talk leads to this idea of the government paying reparations. Why should poor white people not get government reparations while their black neighbors do get them? They were born into their poverty just like their black neighbors. The concept is just ridiculous. Should we give children who have bad parents reparations too? Everyone has a reason for their failures. It just comes down to bringing yourself out of it. We already have social welfare systems, fortunately they don't discriminate based on race.

[marooned]

Yeah, where does our society still discriminate against blacks? And what would you want done?

here's an article: 10 ways white people are more racist than they realize, though you may disagree with the claimed facts...

basically it's interwoven into the fabric of society and racist attitudes are passed from parents to children (largely indirectly i'd imagine). media probably reflects it quite keenly, and so we can absorb racist attitudes that way too. i guess i personally would look at it as a problem of culture, so if there was something i thought the government could do it would be to somehow facilitate dialogue in communities about it (ofc it would be up to people to participate). i really think it is a problem that most whites (myself included) don't feel comfortable talking about it and avoid the entire subject, because that suggests basically freezing any progress. meanwhile all the racist attitudes continue to recycle through culture. basically people need to change their attitudes and need to be able to talk to those with different cultural backgrounds in order to come to understand something beyond "people like me." anyway i'm not sure what the best way to "facilitate this" would be, and it seems when the govt goes forth on any project (education, health care, the eternal war in the middle east, etc.) it turns out to be an expensive and utter failure. and this one would probably not be an exception.

(by "facilitate" i mean in a non-creepy way, like not a weird government club that forms in all the major cities with a terrible sounding name that brainwashes you with the "right" govt-approved way of thinking while strongly encouraging everyone to smile and hold hands)

another thing i would add is that not only is race a "cultural construct" but it is one that is consistently used to keep power away from certain "others." the concept is used to define differences between people, so you can carve out a section of the population (linked through culture and/or ethnicity), assign them a label, and deny them equal footing. to define a 'race' is already racist.

anyway the point about slavery is that thought constructions in the minds of the people back then are still here because they've been passed to children and grandchildren and so on.

[LinguiniPig]

Lol for some reason I can't help but think of these:

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/7nnosh...1---uncensored

And these...

https://youtu.be/qy63L6ZEaIY
https://youtu.be/NBGNKjhqycI
https://youtu.be/Q6qwO53n3Uw

These clips are so stupid it's practically comedy. Almost every Steven Seagal movie involves beating the crap out of redneck extras followed by him teaching someone some moral lesson.

This just reminds me of the stereotypes of redneck people in the media that get hilariously over exaggerated.

Then there is this also (80's 90's movies with similar themes)

https://youtu.be/mzg3ND-ITjU
https://youtu.be/l_qa_mLrQmY

Basically I could spend all day reviewing these stereotypes, got to love the silver screen. Hopefully 1000 years from now people won't be holding these up on a pedestal like enlightenment age philosophers held up the classics from Ancient Rome and Greece.

[marooned]

http://danaloeschradio.com/the-exploitation-of-rednecks

[rat200Turbo]

here's an article: 10 ways white people are more racist than they realize, though you may disagree with the claimed facts...

basically it's interwoven into the fabric of society and racist attitudes are passed from parents to children (largely indirectly i'd imagine). media probably reflects it quite keenly, and so we can absorb racist attitudes that way too. i guess i personally would look at it as a problem of culture, so if there was something i thought the government could do it would be to somehow facilitate dialogue in communities about it (ofc it would be up to people to participate). i really think it is a problem that most whites (myself included) don't feel comfortable talking about it and avoid the entire subject, because that suggests basically freezing any progress. meanwhile all the racist attitudes continue to recycle through culture. basically people need to change their attitudes and need to be able to talk to those with different cultural backgrounds in order to come to understand something beyond "people like me." anyway i'm not sure what the best way to "facilitate this" would be, and it seems when the govt goes forth on any project (education, health care, the eternal war in the middle east, etc.) it turns out to be an expensive and utter failure. and this one would probably not be an exception.

(by "facilitate" i mean in a non-creepy way, like not a weird government club that forms in all the major cities with a terrible sounding name that brainwashes you with the "right" govt-approved way of thinking while strongly encouraging everyone to smile and hold hands)

another thing i would add is that not only is race a "cultural construct" but it is one that is consistently used to keep power away from certain "others." the concept is used to define differences between people, so you can carve out a section of the population (linked through culture and/or ethnicity), assign them a label, and deny them equal footing. to define a 'race' is already racist.

anyway the point about slavery is that thought constructions in the minds of the people back then are still here because they've been passed to children and grandchildren and so on.

More lists. I'm not going to discuss all 10 of these. But most of them are flawed, actually. Just this one for example:
4: Black people are sentenced longer for the same crimes statistically.
When a judge sentences a person they are not thinking "how should I punish this person?". They are thinking: "what is the likelihood this person will repeat offend? What amount of time is needed for reform.". Now, black culture is poor and separated from the mainstream white culture. This makes blacks less likely to reform. Many of the reasons they committed crime were related to these systemic problems which will remain: poverty, gangs, cultural isolation, unemployment, their background, etc.. Reporting a blanket statistic is no way of showing there is racism. Racism has a strict definition: prejudice against a person based on their skin color. If you want to solve a problem (assuming that's your intention here) you do not make any progress by misidentifying the problem. Why don't you discuss poverty as being the issue? Why don't you mention cultural isolation or their culture itself? You immediately say that racism is the culprit. This explanation is hysteria, it's a non-thought. It does not help.
Realize what racism is: racism is a personal prejudice against a person based on their skin tone. Racism is not a systemic problem with poverty for a given group of people. Racism is not a cultural difference. Racism is very much about the skin tone and the race itself.
Let's just read the definition:
rac·ism
ˈrāˌsizəm/
noun

• the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
  
  • prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.
  
  
  
  
  • 1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
  
  

Nowhere does it say: "the failure to politically identify with or sympathize with systemic problems which statistically disproportionately effect a particular race"
Pretty much every point on that list has this flaw embedded in it.

[squark]

those were children who hadn't had time and reason to justify things to themselves and engage in mental gymnastics to ensconce their worldview. I'd like to see if adults would respond similarly, but I doubt it.

I was somewhere where that game show network was playing in the background, and a question came up on one of these old game shows, asking a woman what percentage of women would rather be male. It was much lower than I had expected, but much higher than the woman who answered the question had expected. The game show was from the 60s? I'm not sure, I'm not great at judging exact timeframes, but she talked about how much she liked being a woman. It was interesting - I could tell she really meant it, and she had good reasons for it. She gave the impression of feeling more privileged as a woman than men were, like she'd have to give up a lot of things she liked and valued to be a man.

It makes me think of a presentation I went to a few days ago where a historical fiction author talked about how characters need to speak from the cultural values of their time rather than trying to superimpose modern values onto supposedly historical characters. He was saying how in the same circumstances, in the same cultural environment that we too would probably have different values, and how people consider that we are so much more evolved now than in the past, but in the future people might look back on how we are and be shocked at some of our values - and they might not be the values that so-called progressives think are the ones that need to be changed.

It makes me wonder what was going on right that made that woman and so many other women of her time feel so good about being women: happy, proud, and valued when by all accounts the material and political situation for women was not better then than it is now. I think it may have to do with the emotional environment - there seems like there was much less animosity between the sexes, more support of each other, more respect. Obviously there were problems, but I wonder if in trying to fix some of the problems we've made other problems worse. I don't advocate those retrograde movements trying to recreate a dynamic of subservient housewife and dominant male kind of thing, because that's one of the things that did need to be changed, and I appreciate the more egalitarian nature of current culture. But something has made women in general less happy about their situation in life. Are men also less happy - it seems so, but I don't know.

What I think may have been lost along the way is the general idea of men and women as teammates with common goals which has been replaced by a lot of hatred towards each other that is just not necessary. The whole women are bitches, hoes, nags, drama queens and shrieking harpies and men are whatever labels men get, and both are rolling their eyes at each other and complaining, seeing the other as some enemy that needs to be reined in, conquered, subdued, defeated, or just changed. That part of our current culture just sucks and the constant focus on not getting this or not getting that just permeates everything.

It sucks to have certain things attributed to you just because of your sex, regardless of what sex you are, same as it sucks to have traits ascribed to you based on race or religion or a number of other factors, but when every single person can claim bias of some sort against them and they ALL have a point I think it's time to figure out what's really going on and if it really is a general cultural bias holding everyone down or if it's that everyone is so focused on fighting each other that they're missing the bigger picture.

[mu4]

It makes me wonder what was going on right that made that woman and so many other women of her time feel so good about being women: happy, proud, and valued when by all accounts the material and political situation for women was not better then than it is now. I think it may have to do with the emotional environment - there seems like there was much less animosity between the sexes, more support of each other, more respect. Obviously there were problems, but I wonder if in trying to fix some of the problems we've made other problems worse. I don't advocate those retrograde movements trying to recreate a dynamic of subservient housewife and dominant male kind of thing, because that's one of the things that did need to be changed, and I appreciate the more egalitarian nature of current culture. But something has made women in general less happy about their situation in life. Are men also less happy - it seems so, but I don't know.

I think the emotional enviroment is one of the big issues with the vast amount of modernizing that has occurred in the past 100 years, much in the West but also everywhere on the globe. Rationally most educated people have recognized the benefits of equality but men and women still emotionally expect and perhaps even want many of the emotional experiences of the past, even if they were less than ideal.

From what I've read men seem quite willing to let women be nearly as equal as them, but when the tables are turned and women are in a position of advantage, the animosity begins.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/ar...s-cook/505067/

Emotionally it's probably difficult to experience such a shift in one's life when one's primary experience is one of advantage, no matter one's rational perspective there would be a sense of loss which can turn into ressentiment or anger as well. This experience of loss is legitimate and cannot be ignored. Repressing this sense of loss or shaming individuals because they experience this sense of loss is not likely to produce a positive result. However this is not the only possible reaction, loss, even the loss of privilege and entitlement has the ability to teach and produce newer coping mechanisms which will create a positive emotional enviroment. As you can see in men taking up cooking in the article I noted.

As equality advances, this sense of loss from the privileged will increase, and society does not have to shame and force individuals to repress this. Acknowledging these emotions and having a discourse around it is preferable to the shame based mechanisms which have developed in our society. I think the shame based behavior which progressives have adopted in this culture war is hurting the course of the great egalitarian movement of the 20th and 21st century, as a emotional repressive mechanism it helps to create the mask which many individuals feel forced to wear in order to survive in society. And those who do not have the wherewithal to wear the mask hide in friendly territory, nostalgic for a time which hopefully will not return.

I believe society needs to change again but this time acknowledge and understand the legitimate loss that is being experienced and also a way to create mutual benefit(emotionally, perhaps materially, etc) to the individuals who have these experiences as well as those who are around them. If there is a solution for society to overcome the stresses of modernity, it will be something that shows men(as they have the most to lose in many ways) that they have something to benefit from this new paradigm and that they will be respected and loved even if they're imperfect. This change cannot be accomplished thru shame and shame based behaviors as these impede the rational development of ethical reasoning necessary for individuals to process these great changes and accept them if not agree with them.

[marooned]

More lists. I'm not going to discuss all 10 of these. But most of them are flawed, actually.

i have a feeling you would take issue with most examples one could supply.

[rat200Turbo]

Worthless.

[strangeling]

The people espousing conservative views in this thread just happen to be angry white guys with a lot to say about race, so I don't know what kind of responses you would expect. I also haven't seen anybody being called a redneck or whatnot but maybe I missed it.

Well, I didn't mean that people in the thread are being called those things, but just that the labels are thrown around to invalidate any argument for Conservatives having any positive merits. But that suddenly that seems to have dropped.

Lol, I've been a shrill feminist on the internet so I could write several paragraphs cluing you in.

I have a feeling you're going to say it's the only way to fight back for those that are disadvantaged or abused. But I'm curious anyway, if you want to.

[ashlesha]

I have a feeling you're going to say it's the only way to fight back for those that are disadvantaged or abused. But I'm curious anyway, if you want to.

That was in response to the idea that left wingers aren't called names or degraded or whatever to the same degree. But Id kind of rather not, lol.

[strangeling]

What do you even mean by neutral. Are you trying to say that that it's the "norm"? Sure white is the baseline of what people think is American or western and you can see that everyday in Hollywood where they'll cast Scarlett Johanson in Ghost in the Shell. Is it a norm, sure, but it's not neutral.

If blacks are disadvantaged vs whites, then whites are privileged. Lucky you that you look white and don't get to experience the glass ceiling or driving while black, but I see how black people and people of color are treated everyday and it's not neutral their life. I think a lot of what is called white privilege is this blindness and willful blindness to the inequities they do not experience.

It's just not cool to make it about race. If people want to identify parts of the population as disadvantaged for one reason or another, fine. It's also fine to notice most of them happen to be latino or black in some cases, but when we start saying "white privilege", despite that some white people are not privileged, it's racist. Just called it privilege. Some people are privileged and a lot of them happen to be white, okay. But making it about race is fucked up. The focus should be on identifying those that are at a disadvantage and helping them help themselves, not pitting races against each other.

I mean shit, what the fuck is the point of anything if we're all going to hate each other regardless?

[Kim]

It's just not cool to make it about race. If people want to identify parts of the population as disadvantaged for one reason or another, fine. It's also fine to notice most of them happen to be latino or black in some cases, but when we start saying "white privilege", despite that some white people are not privileged, it's racist. Just called it privilege. Some people are privileged and a lot of them happen to be white, okay. But making it about race is fucked up. The focus should be on identifying those that are at a disadvantage and helping them help themselves, not pitting races against each other.

I mean shit, what the fuck is the point of anything if we're all going to hate each other regardless?

Privilege is not just about race. There is male privilege, citizenship privilege, straight privilege, etc. Privilege is intersectional.

[mu4]

It's just not cool to make it about race. If people want to identify parts of the population as disadvantaged for one reason or another, fine. It's also fine to notice most of them happen to be latino or black in some cases, but when we start saying "white privilege", despite that some white people are not privileged, it's racist. Just called it privilege. Some people are privileged and a lot of them happen to be white, okay. But making it about race is fucked up. The focus should be on identifying those that are at a disadvantage and helping them help themselves, not pitting races against each other.

I mean shit, what the fuck is the point of anything if we're all going to hate each other regardless?

Um, sure white people aren't always in a good situation because of their class but that's another factor which can be analyzed,

I mean there's a whole branch of sociology dedicated to class.

In the west race is the social construct created to oppress minorities, and it's fundamental existence is created and maintained by white people and the laws that dictate who is black/colored and who is not white. Racial purity is in the laws themselves, and in the used to restrict the vote, interracial relationships and many other factors in people's life. It's called white privilege because some of these laws still happen to exist and the social construct themselves are persistent. Other laws were created to oppress groups(drug laws, voting right laws) that are easily disadvantaged by these laws. White privilege is not about individuals as inumbra noted but the systematic issues which oppress minorities and leave whites and those that appear apparently white can often never experience. It's not about individuals being racist at all, but rather about the system which exists today.

White people made this about race and created this construct called race in the west, they made this about race and now it is the fabric of the system and society. The creation of whiteness was used as a oppressive mechanism against those seen as colored, thus the no colored allowed signs and racial segregation and the restrictions on inter-race relations.



The reason why it's called white privilege is because this sign doesn't affect them(today there are many other things like racial profiling). This term is historical and you cannot ignore the facts of history and some of these issues still exist today.

White privilege(and it is white due to the sign above as well as many lingering issues) is something which is largely invisible to whites because they do not experience the everyday oppression which can occur due to a different skin color.

[marooned]

whites are infected with thought constructions

[LinguiniPig]

http://danaloeschradio.com/the-exploitation-of-rednecks

Yes now your speaking my language!

The coasts. So you have America and Ellis island, everyone came here to get a fresh start from European aristocracy. Then they all moved west for opportunity- gold rush. Hence the Beverly Hillbillies and "Black Gold" (Oil). The whole "grapes of wrath" thing.

This is largely responsible for the distribution of people of different mentalities. The various sequence of events that capitulated into these. There's got to be some social psychology term for this. But yes, due to this there's all these colorful aspects to our culture.

I didn't find the article too interesting though, it seemed to talk too much about politics in the present and attribute things to the "media". Media in some ways may be the new "west" of American culture. People go viral, that's like the new silver patina. Every era just layers on new opportunities. In the 19th century you panned for gold nuggets lol.

[rat200Turbo]

Privilege is not just about race. There is male privilege, citizenship privilege, straight privilege, etc. Privilege is intersectional.

Hello again my sweet dual. You forgot attended pre-K privilege, breast-fed privilege...
could also mention gay privilege if we wanted to but I'd rather not bother with it.

whites are infected with thought constructions

Well that was profound.

[mu4]

http://danaloeschradio.com/the-exploitation-of-rednecks

This is in my opinion the lingering effect of Mccarthyism, the working class ideologies of the Left was suppressed by Mccarthyism because the ideology more often resembled Communism, this side was not afraid of violence, focused on the working class. Many in the left also worked to suppress communist during this time to unify their own ranks. Althrough this had limited effect in some ways and many of the people suppressed were not of the working class, it did shift the left's direction from revolutionary action to a rhetoric of non-violent protest.

Bernie Sanders mentality is approaching what the left needs to be in order to appeal to the working class and their needs, the current left leadership is mostly individuals inherited the post Mccarthy leftist mentality and it is not a message that works with working class individuals. The college educated academic which I think characterizes the current left's approach has little in common with the working class and seems little better than a stern and distant pedagogue who seems to know better than them what they need. This I think worked for a while but now it is in need of change.

It’s people like us who give up our sons for the country. The business people, they run the country and make money from it. The college types, the professors, they go to Washington and tell the government what to do…. But their sons, they don’t end up in the swamps over there, in Vietnam. They’re deferred…. Let’s face it: if you have a lot of money, or if you have the right connections, you don’t end up on a firing line in the jungle over there, not unless you want to….
I think we ought to win that war or pull out. What the hell else should we do—sit and bleed ourselves to death, year after year? I hate those peace demonstrators. Why don’t they go to Vietnam and demonstrate in front of the North Vietnamese?… The whole thing is a mess. The sooner we get the hell out of there the better. (p. 42)

You can see the mentality even as early as Vietnam War when a firefighter said this.

Last week, I had to be in Chicago; I ran into a “Resist the Draft” rally on the street. At first I smile: kids at it again, just a fad. Then I started getting sore. About how I had to go and they could stay out. Cosco went in and he was the straightest guy I ever knew. My Negro buddy didn’t like the war, but he went too. I just stood there and got sore at those rich kids telling people to “resist the draft.” What about us poor people? For every guy who resists the draft one of us gotta go and he gets sent out into the boonies to get his backside shot at. One of their signs read “We’ve Already Given Enough.” And I thought, “What have they given?”

Similarly a returning veteran.

However this was during a time of a great distancing of the left and the working class, where Boomer college students and Boomer working class had little dialogue.

I think the US is in the midst of change where the working class and left are reuniting, Millennial college students are in a similar boat as many Millennial working class, with little jobs and opportunity, if the new generation of voters can get together and see their collective problems and take charge of solving these problems then there is a good deal of hope for the future. And the current generation of voters are the most racially integrated generation yet.

Race and racism is the divisive force in America that must be countered. The message to the working class should not be, "You're racists, you don't deserve a job, good things, etc", but rather, "I want to give you a job/good things, etc". If the left can successfully shift the overall message towards this direction, the white working class may return to a more progressive mentality.

This election in many ways showed the same mentality and ideas of the Vietnam era, with the same actors in many ways, the problem was a rich draft dodger hoodwinked a generation of working class to join him instead of siding with a rich war protester.

Note: (I use generational terms to specify the birth years and not any marketing traits associated with them)

[marooned]

Well that was profound.

it must be strange looking from the outside in; the white people glorify themselves in entertainment, though they are sure to include token other-race characters in most films. they have heads full of slanted thinking that they try to correct for while talking, making conversation as awkward as possible. they won't talk about racism, the thing they are infected with through no fault of their own, and soon might start crying and saying they are being attacked shortly into the conversation. they're like the spoiled older sibling to everyone else, and apparently one must just tolerate it because they know no other way. they receive messages all around them telling them they are superior and valuable and so on. and they're the best. the best action heroes, fashion models, teachers, scientists. i mean it's okay if asians are doing better in math and science because there's such an adorable stereotype about that. it gives the whites a chuckle.

thoughts about racism or how to solve it might be interesting to entertain sometimes, but as soon as it grows tiresome, the topic can be dismissed and a white can go through the day blissfully unaware of racial issues. they may think in general that things just keep getting better and better for minorities. soon racism won't even be a problem. so many people are like them after all, wanting a world in which everyone is equal. whites can just sit back in their office parks and watch the world transformed. meanwhile their bad programs continue to run and their biases leak into so much of what they say and do.

ironically by creating an "other" out of everyone else on earth for hundreds of years, whites have outnumbered themselves. all the non-whites can look around them at a world run by white people with flattering white images everywhere and observe the false egotism that arises of this in the behavior of whites. they can look to one another and ask "do you see it too?" they all see it, but the whites don't. and they don't want to talk about it.

[rat200Turbo]

White people glorify themselves in entertainment? You mean they glorify their whiteness, specifically? Remember that we are talking about racism. You seem to be moving this more towards American culture vs. an imagined primitive outside culture. A culture clash is really not a racial issue, ... there are many black and white people from outside cultures. Racism is very much about race itself, like I have told you. If culture is what you want to discuss than you need to identify that as the problem and discuss it directly.

if you do not correctly identify the problems at hand, but you instead put this inflammatory, illogical label on them: "racism"; when you should instead be saying... "modern society", you actually impede progress. How can we focus on our problems if we have misidentified them as being related to "racism" and set aside the actual problems? And then created this massive division which is totally unnecessary and which cannot be reasoned with. ...

[marooned]

racial issues *are* cultural issues, because there isn't any such thing as "race." and yes, the mainstream culture in the u.s. is a white culture. though not to the extent it used to be.

what i mean in entertainment is that whites dominate the industry still and make a lot of tv and other media about white people so they can watch themselves. it's all very disproportionate to the general population. it's blaring this message of "it's all about us: WHITE PEOPLE!"

[Raver]

[rat200Turbo]

racial issues *are* cultural issues, because there isn't any such thing as "race." and yes, the mainstream culture in the u.s. is a white culture. though not to the extent it used to be.

what i mean in entertainment is that whites dominate the industry still and make a lot of tv and other media about white people so they can watch themselves. it's all very disproportionate to the general population. it's blaring this message of "it's all about us: WHITE PEOPLE!"

No Inumbra, cultural issues are not racial issues... they are simply cultural issues. For example, there are black people from all cultural backgrounds. Racial issues are very much about race itself. Ok?
Go read the definition of racism, and understand it, before you continue with this discussion. It's up above, I already gave it to you. I noticed you edited it out of your response...

Competing cultures made up of differing races are not by definition racist... This is just not the definition of racism, Ok?
It would very much dilute the term 'racism' and remove it from its root word. ... literally does not even correspond to the root word 'race' at all.

because there isn't any such thing as "race."

If race doesn't exist than racism cannot exist. You have just refuted yourself.
How can you say the word 'race' is nothing and race does not exist, and then use that as the root word to define your message? You have just destroyed the term yourself...

At this point you should understand why I consider this topic to be so inflated and pointless. If you want to identify cultural problems and think of ways to solve them than go ahead. You are not helping solve cultural problems by dragging that discussion down into finger pointing about racism, at all.

[marooned]

racism: : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.

the differences being observed in the behavior of people of different races reflect that person's culture, but are attributed to the social construction: their race.

so racism is entirely a cultural issue. and the "white race" has gone through numerous changes before about who can and can't be included. for instance, irish immigrants were not "white" when they first came to the u.s. the entire idea of "white" is to distinguish the superior/dominant culture. the dominant culture is able to justify its status through cultural memes regarding people in non-dominant groups in the society.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Wow I don't even know where to begin with this.

First off- you both say it's not really about sex and gender maybe in an attempt to be polite to each other and not to rip each other's hair out maybe - but I don't think that's entirely true at all. Nowadays women are choosing black males as mates more and more, and so their subjective biases in what they want in a partner has a lot do with defending them. Not that it's still also not noble- I mean you see a lot of lesbians jumping on this black people SJW thing as well and they obviously aren't into black dick. Actually a lot of the more extreme racist white types the media loves to poke fun of are bitter and hateful that women do not choose them as sexual mates. That they would literally have to rape a woman to get her to have sex with him. This is sexual insecurity lashing out in the highest degree. These men are also often bisexual - but we have a subconscious desire in society for males to be 'pure' so this gets erased as a bridge way to gaytown or just needing more macho self-confidence to be all the way straight.

I can't really blame women for wanting to fuck black guys- they have that macho thug appeal or whatever (and are often less insecure and more in their bodies and less in their heads- something that women are obviously going to notice and take into consideration when choosing a mate) - but it does cause a lot of cultural rifts and for black men to abandon black women because a white female middle class girl will often be so passive around him and be like putty in his hands. That reinforces a male's sense of identity very much- I don't think you can ignore that or sweep it under the rug just because it's maybe a bit too un-PC like to say or something? I really don't get pretending that it's not about sex or gender when it actually kind of is...

But this issue gets mixed up into things like sexual orientation and gender roles and traditional society too. Rat, I get what u mean - but we just cannot view racism in a vacuum. Because often in the african communities- homosexuality is still not very accepted much at all and is considered something to be for white middle class and upper class (mostly upper probably) men. Black and gay/bi? Double dose of self loathing. But this anti-gay thing actually reinforces the black straight male hunk's sexual security even more. Often they will condescend/tease gay men and say 'nothing will go near my ass' and that will just make the straight women confident that they are choosing a 'real straight alpha for a man.'

So yeah, beta white CEO guy gets this really prestigious job and can care for her but Sarah Straight Girl just yawns in boredom and ends up fucking hot black drug dealer instead. I know by now you guys are tired of me talking about this stuff- but it's real life man- it's what happens behind all the veils and all the nicey nice shit in society people say. Are you really saying he shouldn't be mad that he got chosen instead? Wow... that is just kind of cruel, women don't really understand what it's like to be a guy sometimes lmao. But are they poor babies? No... there is tons of primal jealousy going on here.

The blacks too are jealous of the whites, since institutions are built primarily for white males and IQ tests are very horribly biased to white men as well- making the corporate/beta CEO thing so in favor of the whitey. This kind of goes both ways- in my annoying need to mediate/balance everything. But look at how black fathers are treating their own black children. It's downright gross- the levels of abandonment and shitty I-don't-care attitude and I don't see any justifiable excuse for that. No matter how you were treated by others in society- and yes, when it comes to the business/corporate world black guys are definitely not given a fair treatment at all. Unless you are Bill Cosby but he made it because he's an asshole narcissist- not because he's black. So shut up bill cosby- so easy to preach at how black ppl are the cause of their own downfall when you basically raped and drugged and perved your way to the top you goddamn narcissitsic celebrity.

[rat200Turbo]

racism: : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.

the differences being observed in the behavior of people of different races reflect that person's culture, but are attributed to the social construction: their race.

so racism is entirely a cultural issue. and the "white race" has gone through numerous changes before about who can and can't be included. for instance, irish immigrants were not "white" when they first came to the u.s. the entire idea of "white" is to distinguish the superior/dominant culture. the dominant culture is able to justify its status through cultural memes regarding people in non-dominant groups in the society.

No, ... If a black person is born a part of the upper class American culture he will not have any of these outside cultural patterns you're referring to. If a white person grows up in a ghetto than he will have the fringe cultures patterns. Do you understand? Race is not culture. These are two different words and different concepts.
Read the definition again.
It says "primary determinant". Nowhere does it mention culture. Nowhere does it say: "a belief that, due to cultural differences, a person of another race possesses traits which are inferior"

Racism, as it's properly defined, is a baseless prejudice and irrational thing. That's why we don't count it as a morally sound or reasonable position. But your proposed definition (which makes no sense) would make racism a completely reasonable thing. Infact, I'd hardly see what point could remain for you. The assumption all along is that 'racism', as we define it, is morally wrong. And that assumption is based on the knowledge that skin tone - RACE ITSELF - is no determinant of inherent negative traits such as would form a prejudice.

I think you need to go actually read some history and learn what racism looked like back in the day when slavery was popular. It was very much related to skin tone and the black race. For example, in Alabama you were a slave under the law if your skin tone was black, no exceptions. That is racism - that is specifically related to race. Ok?

[marooned]

No, ... If a black person is born a part of the upper class American culture he will not have any of these outside cultural patterns you're referring to. If a white person grows up in a ghetto than he will have the fringe cultures patterns. Do you understand? Race is not culture. These are two different words and different concepts.

yeah, but how will people around them consider these people? they will be associated with both the stereotypes of their inborn "race" even if they don't actually fit most or any of them; they will be considered to have the other racial identity ("you look black, but you act white"); they will be considered a special exception, like being one of the okay black people.

as you can see everything the brain matches to their "race" is actually speaking to their upbringing/culture.

[rat200Turbo]

yeah, but how will people around them consider these people? they will be associated with both the stereotypes of their inborn "race" even if they don't actually fit most or any of them; they will be considered to have the other racial identity ("you look black, but you act white"); they will be considered a special exception, like being one of the okay black people.

as you can see everything the brain matches to their "race" is actually speaking to their upbringing/culture.

No, I treat these people positively and feel positively about them, and most people do.
Actually I can tell what culture a person is a part of pretty easily by observing them.
But even for what you're saying, we may know that statistically a person from a certain race is more likely to be involved in crime while simultaneously maintaining uncertainty about that and keeping an open mind. Many people I'm sure are subliminally aware that a specific race is statistically more likely to be involved in something. That is not racism, it's just using the brain. Racism is, by definition, the belief that race is the primary determinant of a set of inherent, negative traits. Not a belief that culture is a primary determinant which is then associated with a race. You can see that the definition makes this very clear.
We have a culture clash happening related to poverty and other things.