White Privilege Conference

[Kilgore Trout]

You label others as racist yet you are the one judging an entire race of people simply because the color of their skin.

Apparently, you haven't gotten the memo. You can't be racist against white people. Assuming you can identify who's white, since race seems to be a real thing when it comes to white people, yet an artificial social construct when it comes to non-white people. It's all very complicated and confusing - so, just remember: if you're white, then you're probably racist, even if you don't know it.

 

[brokensymmetry]

I'm labeling other white people as racist when they can't admit the simple fact that whites have certain advantages in America over minorities.
Would you feel white privilege existed during the years of slavery? Did whites have the advantage in society? Next you're going to tell me white privilege died after desegregation.

Hmm, do Jews, specifically ones who happen to be white, constitute a minority?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Pffffft. The Democratic party is fairly centrist, especially when compared to leftist parties from around the world. What sort of radicalism are they purportedly rocking the boat with?

I'd call them center-right if anything. American Democrats aren't too far off from Canadian Conservatives.

 

[Father Heathen]

I don't think it's so much self-loathing, as it is culturally guilted and shamed.

That's the problem; people are indoctrinated to feel guilt and shame for things they themselves had no actual responsibility for. Suggesting that people should simply because they happen to be of the same "race" as someone who committed acts of prejudice and oppression is a form of racism.

 

[Father Heathen]

You label others as racist yet you are the one judging an entire race of people simply because the color of their skin.

Exactly. I haven't personally oppressed or discriminated against anyone based on the color of their skin, so why would I feel any guilt or shame for it?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

That's the problem; people are indoctrinated to feel guilt and shame for things they themselves had no actual responsibility for. Suggesting that people should simply because they happen to be of the same "race" as someone who committed acts of prejudice and oppression is a form of racism.

Unfortunately, "racism" isn't a concept that is consistently applied or defined. Then again, politicized-terms rarely are.

 

[Father Heathen]

Unfortunately, "racism" isn't a concept that is consistently applied or defined. Then again, politicized-terms rarely are.

A few months back, a RF member tried to claim that minorities can't possibly be racist because they're not the "ruling class" (whatever that means).

It doesn't matter who you are, if you judge or disparage another individual based solely on their race, you're a racist. Period.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

A few months back, a RF member tried to claim that minorities can't possibly be racist because they're not the "ruling class" (whatever that means).

It doesn't matter who you are, if you judge or disparage another individual based solely on their race, you're a racist. Period.

Yeah, I've heard this position espoused throughout my life. It often seems to be most ardently argued by people who want to play the victim card, while gaining privilege of their own. Generally, I find it to be an opportunistic position.

 

[Quiddity]

A few months back, a RF member tried to claim that minorities can't possibly be racist because they're not the "ruling class" (whatever that means).

It doesn't matter who you are, if you judge or disparage another individual based solely on their race, you're a racist. Period.

They may just think their criticisms and hate are justified. This guy seems to think it's an epidemic:

'White Girl Bleed A Lot': The Return of Racial Violence to America and How the Media Ignore It (Autographed) (Paperback)

But not toward minorities but against white people and ignored by a white media. Even if a mob of blacks say they are specifically going out to beat up white people; it's ignored or no one wants to touch it with a ten foot pole. Even worse, some minorities believe those white people deserved it.

Simply nuts...

 

[Father Heathen]

They may just think their criticisms and hate are justified. This guy seems to think it's an epidemic:

'White Girl Bleed A Lot': The Return of Racial Violence to America and How the Media Ignore It (Autographed) (Paperback)

But not toward minorities but against white people and ignored by a white media. Even if a mob of blacks say they are specifically going out to beat up white people; it's ignored or no one wants to touch it with a ten foot pole. Even worse, some minorities believe those white people deserved it.

Simply nuts...

And you can bet that some here on RF will ignore/be silent about that issue, too.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

And you can bet that some here on RF will ignore/be silent about that issue, too.

Okay I'll bite.

First, I'm a not a fan of getting my source material from World Net Daily, personally.

WND - RationalWiki

Plus, the book "White Girl Bleed A Lot" has received it's own set of criticisms by which it's journalistic ethics have been seen as highly problematic.

The most basic flaw in his argument is that his entire project is one big stacked evidence fallacy. If you only cite examples of black crime, of course you’ll conclude that there’s a national racial crime wave! Using that “logic” I can prove that any group is waging a secret race war (it is interesting to note that Robert Spencer of JihadWatch uses a very similar method to argue that Muslims are dangerous). On top of that egregious error, Flaherty entirely ignores all other characteristics of the crimes: social class, education, setting; nothing else matters except race to him. Any respectable criminologist would scoff at such a methodology, not because they want to be politically correct, but because it’s a gross reduction of the factors that actually contribute to crime. Next, Flaherty fails to recognize that correlation does not equal causation. So, because a black person commits a violent crime, his blackness must have caused it, in Flaherty’s logic. And because a black party got out of hand, it’s a “race riot.” Yes, that’s right, because the partiers were black, it was a “race” riot. Because “black” is a race. Makes perfect sense, right?

I think I've jumped into a thread filled with Archie Bunkers.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I think I've jumped into a thread filled with Archie Bunkers.

You don't have to be an Archie Bunker to recognize the inconsistency, hypocrisy, and gross politicization of racism in the US. In fact, you can both recognize that racism exists, but be able to identify when it is being misused or abused. I realize this isn't a skill present among many white, suburban quasi-liberals, but it can be learned with some honesty, objectivity, and analytical ability.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

You don't have to be an Archie Bunker to recognize the inconsistency, hypocrisy, and gross politicization of racism in the US. In fact, you can both recognize that racism exists, but be able to identify when it is being misused or abused. I realize this isn't a skill present among many white, suburban quasi-liberals, but it can be learned with some honesty, objectivity, and analytical ability.

Who you calling a white, suburban, quasi-liberal? Huh?

What I find interesting is when racism is charged against blacks of other people of color, I've found an instant counter-charge of "playing the race card." And then there's links to books about the knockout game and how roving bands of young blacks are going around beating up white folks and how that's the real racism while minorities are just lazy and playing the victim.

I've heard some interesting things, but probably what is most interesting is that there's no such thing as racial inequality anymore, no sexism, and pretty soon, I'm sure people will suggest that there's no such thing as hetero-sexism either. Because Obama, or something. And that what's really going on is the war against Christians, the war against men, and the war against whites.

However, I might call you an Archie Bunker because I think you're cute. Take it as a compliment.

 

[Quiddity]

Who you calling a white, suburban, quasi-liberal? Huh?

What I find interesting is when racism is charged against blacks of other people of color, I've found an instant counter-charge of "playing the race card." And then there's links to books about the knockout game and how roving bands of young blacks are going around beating up white folks and how that's the real racism while minorities are just lazy and playing the victim.

I've heard some interesting things, but probably what is most interesting is that there's no such thing as racial inequality anymore, no sexism, and pretty soon, I'm sure people will suggest that there's no such thing as hetero-sexism either. Because Obama, or something. And that what's really going on is the war against Christians, the war against men, and the war against whites.

However, I might call you an Archie Bunker because I think you're cute. Take it as a compliment.

I say this respectfully, but your relationships with minorities must be one layer deep because behind closed doors and in the comfort of our own people...."you're a cracker"......and it's often followed with expletives. And it was followed with smiles and as if nothing was going on the next day.

It's real.......and turning the tables that this it's really a war on Christians, men, etc. isn't going to make it go away. It's almost as if saying that a Mexican, Black, or Asian is a racist is something impossible and if there is something there, it's excused away.

It's a disservice to all the efforts to end racism to continue to ignore that this occurs and white American is too filled with guilt, shame, and bias to see it. If one really wants to help, one will see just how much racism exists in minority groups.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I say this respectfully, but your relationships with minorities must be one layer deep because behind closed doors and in the comfort of our own people...."you're a cracker"......and it's often followed with expletives. And it was followed with smiles and as if nothing was going on the next day.

That's quite a leap. Is there a reason why you're assuming such an existence on my part?

It's real.......and turning the tables that this it's really a war on Christians, men, etc. isn't going to make it go away. It's almost as if saying that a Mexican, Black, or Asian is a racist is something impossible and if there is something there, it's excused away.

I'm comparing the "war on whites" to the problematic argument that the culture has a "war on Christians." I have serious problems with your source claim, but if you have others, I'm open to reading them.

Plus, among many many various personal stories I have with professional, romantic, sexual, and familial relationships with people who are of a different race than me, I have plenty of experience being targeted or singled out for being white....one example was when I was dating a Punjab man in NYC, I listened to his mother ranting about how she didn't want him with me because of my race.

So, there's one example of where I've heard the equivalent of your "cracker" charge. Oh, darn...how I hear a term that reminds me of how white people used to own other people (all comedy credit goes to Louis C.K. with that joke).

But the arguments against critical race theory, against white privilege (as if that's an attack or an attempt to guilt and shame), I find to be examples of derailment.

It's a disservice to all the efforts to end racism to continue to ignore that this occurs and white American is too filled with guilt, shame, and bias to see it. If one really wants to help, one will see just how much racism exists in minority groups.

I have, and do, and it is not how it's being portrayed in this thread by those who argue against white privilege, IMO. I own a business in a town that has a home to a local branch of white Aryan Nation supremacists according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, and I employ people of color along with whites. I'm very aware as far as I'm concerned of the kind of racism that exists along the spectrum of skin color.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Who you calling a white, suburban, quasi-liberal? Huh?

All the white, suburban, quasi-liberals. Did you think I was referring to you?

Interesting.

What I find interesting is when racism is charged against blacks of other people of color, I've found an instant counter-charge of "playing the race card." And then there's links to books about the knockout game and how roving bands of young blacks are going around beating up white folks and how that's the real racism while minorities are just lazy and playing the victim.

I've heard some interesting things, but probably what is most interesting is that there's no such thing as racial inequality anymore, no sexism, and pretty soon, I'm sure people will suggest that there's no such thing as hetero-sexism either. Because Obama, or something. And that what's really going on is the war against Christians, the war against men, and the war against whites.

Yes, there are more than enough interesting and silly things from all sides to go around. This is why it's best to avoid the silliness, and focus on a balanced, consistent, pragmatic, rational, and fair approach to such issues, instead of reacting to every ridiculously inflammatory article, story, and opinion piece the media decides to throw out to get people to overreact.

However, I might call you an Archie Bunker because I think you're cute. Take it as a compliment.

Heck, I think Archie Bunker was the only genuine and interesting character on the show, so I'll take it as a compliment just based on that.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

All the white, suburban, quasi-liberals. Did you think I was referring to you?

Interesting.

It was a joke. I thought you didn't believe in smilies or I would have added this ---->

Yes, there are more than enough interesting and silly things from all sides to go around. This is why it's best to avoid the silliness, and focus on a balanced, consistent, pragmatic, rational, and fair approach to such issues, instead of reacting to every ridiculously inflammatory article, story, and opinion piece the media decides to throw out to get people to overreact.

I find Google Scholar to be more reliable. Or C-Span. Boring stuff, tbh. But reliable. Little to no spin and with a higher degree of integrity.

Heck, I think Archie Bunker was the only genuine and interesting character on the show, so I'll take it as a compliment just based on that.

He's a favorite of mine, too.

 

[Quiddity]

[/color]That's quite a leap. Is there a reason why you're assuming such an existence on my part?

It really isn't. Very few get that privilege and it shouldn't be taken as a reflection on you at all. Take it or leave it......but it's there.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

It was a joke. I thought you didn't believe in smilies or I would have added this ---->

Oh, I got it. I'm just surprised you didn't get mine. I'd add a smilie, but I'd rather cut off my right hand than resort to such a crass, unrefined, subhuman form of communication.

I find Google Scholar to be more reliable. Or C-Span. Boring stuff, tbh. But reliable. Little to no spin and with a higher degree of integrity.

I mean the type of stories which the media decides to promulgate in general and/or the type of narrative our society decides to ascribe to, rather than a specific source. A societal narrative is being communicated which people mistakenly think is the whole picture.

He's a favorite of mine, too.

As he is of any reasonable person.

 

[Sunstone]

You label others as racist yet you are the one judging an entire race of people simply because the color of their skin.

So, it's racist to admit that Whites have privileges in American society? Quite an interesting take on "racism".