+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums)
+--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0)
+---- Forum: P & R Archive (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-P-R-Archive)
+---- Thread: White Privilege? (/Thread-White-Privilege)
RE: White Privilege? - GMDino - 07-09-2018
(07-09-2018, 07:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: How is Olive Hill not part of the Appalachian coal country in Eastern Kentucky? Aren't there coal mines all through that area?
Where exactly is this "community" you are talking about? I know Breathitt County is part of that community and there are tons of racists rednecks and descendants of Klansmen in that county. Confederate flags all over the place.
Definitely part of the mining community. I have no idea what map he's using.
RE: White Privilege? - Beaker - 07-10-2018
(07-09-2018, 02:36 PM)Dill Wrote: Do you think terms are "just words," or themselves the problem, or can they illuminate aspects of racism that just aren't very plain? Also, fish, grasshoppers and pandas are all covered by the term "animal." But that doesn't mean there is no advantage to further distinguishing animals with backbones from those without, and/or those with warm blood from those with cold, right?
I think "institutional racism" is a very useful concept, because it decribes practices which are racially discriminitory in effect, but could be maintained by people who do not consciously think about race at all.
Surely you can see how policies like ivy league universities' legacy admissions discriminate, can't you? And calling that "institutional racism" makes it usefully distinguishable from "just racism" of the blatant Charlottesville type? And asking people to be nicer wouldn't help much in this case, since the policy is carried out independently of individual preference, by employees just doing their job. It is the institution, the policy, which has to be addressed--not some "racist-making-a-decision."
And would you say that it is utterly impossible that proportion of black drivers stopped for speeding--or stopped and frisked--is proportionally higher than whites?
I would contend that these terms provide people who already feel downtrodden that there are even more cards stacked against them. They promote more victim hood and hopelessness. If I had been told my whole life that racism is holding me down and keeping me from getting what I want, that can do two things...spur me to overcome, or cause me to say why bother, they won't let me win anyway. Now throw on top of that the relatively recent terms of institutional racism and white privilege and there's two more things I have to overcome to make it. Can you see how those make the deck seem even more stacked when in essence, they are both already part of racism? To me, I just feel they make the problem seem larger (and therefore harder to overcome) and further divide or separate the races rather than work towards bringing us together.
RE: White Privilege? - Dill - 07-10-2018
(07-10-2018, 10:48 AM)Beaker Wrote: I would contend that these terms provide people who already feel downtrodden that there are even more cards stacked against them. They promote more victim hood and hopelessness. If I had been told my whole life that racism is holding me down and keeping me from getting what I want, that can do two things...spur me to overcome, or cause me to say why bother, they won't let me win anyway. Now throw on top of that the relatively recent terms of institutional racism and white privilege and there's two more things I have to overcome to make it. Can you see how those make the deck seem even more stacked when in essence, they are both already part of racism? To me, I just feel they make the problem seem larger (and therefore harder to overcome) and further divide or separate the races rather than work towards bringing us together.
Thanks for the thoughtful answer.
If you consider the history of the US struggle for civil rights, there is little evidence that regarding racism as a personal choice of some or even most whites has inspired and driven change. On the other hand, looking at how it operates in and through institutions certainly has; think of the research behind Brown vs Board, which provided both legal target and strategy. Think of King and CORE and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, who went, not for "racism" in the abstract, but for laws, institutions, municipally sanctioned practices.
I have seen no evidence that specifying modes of racism, identifying more specifically where and how it operates, does anything but spur people to target and change it. I don't want to speak for groups usually targetted for racism in the US, but as an observer I have seen no indication that their membership feels that more terms means more racism, more obstacles. Like Racism PLUS institutional racism.
So it's not really "larger" but "more specific"--that is what is at stake in using these terms. Also "white privilege" is not a term usually addressed to racial minorities in the US as an additional difficulty to overcome. To the degree there is such privilege, it is a function or effect of racism, not something separately added. Inequality creates it by default (that's why so many whites who do not recall "choosing" their privilege are mystified and angered by the concept); equality erases it.
RE: White Privilege? - fredtoast - 07-10-2018
(07-10-2018, 10:48 AM)Beaker Wrote: I would contend that these terms provide people who already feel downtrodden that there are even more cards stacked against them. They promote more victim hood and hopelessness. If I had been told my whole life that racism is holding me down and keeping me from getting what I want, that can do two things...spur me to overcome, or cause me to say why bother, they won't let me win anyway. Now throw on top of that the relatively recent terms of institutional racism and white privilege and there's two more things I have to overcome to make it. Can you see how those make the deck seem even more stacked when in essence, they are both already part of racism? To me, I just feel they make the problem seem larger (and therefore harder to overcome) and further divide or separate the races rather than work towards bringing us together.
This is based on the false theory that black people just give up when faced with adversity.
No one ever says we should not tell poor white people their schools are underfunded because it will just make them all give up and not try. Seriously, how many times have you heard people say "We can't talk about schools needing more money because it will just make all the kids give up and stop working."
No problem has ever been corrected by "not talking about it"
RE: White Privilege? - Beaker - 07-10-2018
(07-10-2018, 10:48 AM)Beaker Wrote: I would contend that these terms provide people who already feel downtrodden that there are even more cards stacked against them. They promote more victim hood and hopelessness. If I had been told my whole life that racism is holding me down and keeping me from getting what I want, that can do two things...spur me to overcome, or cause me to say why bother, they won't let me win anyway. Now throw on top of that the relatively recent terms of institutional racism and white privilege and there's two more things I have to overcome to make it. Can you see how those make the deck seem even more stacked when in essence, they are both already part of racism? To me, I just feel they make the problem seem larger (and therefore harder to overcome) and further divide or separate the races rather than work towards bringing us together.
(07-10-2018, 06:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This is based on the false theory that black people just give up when faced with adversity.
No one ever says we should not tell poor white people their schools are underfunded because it will just make them all give up and not try. Seriously, how many times have you heard people say "We can't talk about schools needing more money because it will just make all the kids give up and stop working."
No problem has ever been corrected by "not talking about it"
I bolded the part for you where I said it can do TWO things....not just make people give up. And I also never specified the person as black or white, so if you want to use a white person who has felt downtrodden in my example then that works too....or asian, or latino, etc.
I also never said anywhere that it should not be talked about, so you are misquoting again by having that part of your reply in quotes. I have maintained all along in multiple threads that racism is not acceptable and should be fought. Not ignored.
RE: White Privilege? - Beaker - 07-10-2018
(07-10-2018, 06:34 PM)Dill Wrote: but as an observer I have seen no indication that their membership feels that more terms means more racism, more obstacles. Like Racism PLUS institutional racism.
So it's not really "larger" but "more specific"--that is what is at stake in using these terms.
I see what you are getting at there with more specific, but I still maintain it does more to further separate and divide. I think at this point we need to be striving more towards coming together and seeing each other as equal humans....without labels.
The best example I can think of from an anecdotal standpoint comes from the genocide in Rwanda with the Hutus and the Tutsis...two tribes that made up the bulk of the Rwandan population. The Tutsis were the tribe that was on the receiving end of the genocide. If you were a Tutsi, you were targeted. All forms of ID at the time indicated tribal affiliation. In other words, when people were asked to show their papers, if it said they were Tutsi, they were killed.
When I visited Rwanda, many people told me how they were ashamed of what had happened, and were sad that the world still mainly saw Rwanda through the lens of the genocide....even though they had been working hard for many years to put it behind them. I asked them what types of measures were undertaken to do so. They said the first thing that happened after the genocide was that IDs no longer indicated tribal affiliations. And People no longer referred to themselves or others as Hutus or Tutsis. The were simply Rwandans. In fact it was now frowned upon to the point of raising suspicion if you referred to yourself by tribe, or asked someone else what tribe they were from. They said that simple step had gone a long way to bridging the divide between the people.
To me, that first step they took is similar to what were need to begin healing. Stop labeling each other by race, and just call each other Americans...or even better humans.
RE: White Privilege? - fredtoast - 07-11-2018
(07-10-2018, 07:17 PM)Beaker Wrote: To me, that first step they took is similar to what were need to begin healing. Stop labeling each other by race, and just call each other Americans...or even better humans.
That is what I am saying. We need to end things like racial profiling by police, employers, real estate agents, and bankers.
But we can't heal until after the problem is fixed.
RE: White Privilege? - PhilHos - 07-11-2018
(07-06-2018, 04:20 PM)fredtoast Wrote: When you look at society as a whole white people control a disproportionate amount of wealth and power. Exceptions to the general rule do not change the general rule. Since a disproportionate amount of CEOs and upper management are white it is a privilege to be white.
Only if they hand out privileges to white people. Just because a majority of a group is a certain race does not automatically mean there's a privilege in being that race. Unless, of course, you're implying that all white people are racist.
I forget who it was that said it on here, but "correlation does not equal causation"
RE: White Privilege? - fredtoast - 07-11-2018
(07-11-2018, 01:07 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Only if they hand out privileges to white people. Just because a majority of a group is a certain race does not automatically mean there's a privilege in being that race. Unless, of course, you're implying that all white people are racist.
I forget who it was that said it on here, but "correlation does not equal causation"
I have explained this to you over and over again.
You never have to worry about being the subject of racial profiling by the police. That is a privilege. Doesn't matter if only half of the police forces use racial profiling it is still a privilege for you to not have to deal with it.
This has nothing to do with either "correlation" or "causation". So I have no idea why you even brought that up.
RE: White Privilege? - PhilHos - 07-11-2018
(07-11-2018, 01:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You never have to worry about being the subject of racial profiling by the police.
Yes, I do. If I were to go to a black majority neighborhood, you better believe the police are going to be looking at me closely.
Also, I'm sure there are plenty of times where the description of an alleged perp is a "white male" which would make me the subject of racial profiling.
(07-11-2018, 01:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: That is a privilege. Doesn't matter if only half of the police forces use racial profiling it is still a privilege for you to not have to deal with it.
Really? So if the police department in Los Angeles uses racial profiling, but my local cops don't, I'm still benefiting but my black neighbors aren't? :huh:
(07-11-2018, 01:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This has nothing to do with either "correlation" or "causation". So I have no idea why you even brought that up.
You have claimed that white privilege exists because the majority of CEOs and whatnot are white. This is a textbook example of 'causation' when all you have presented is a correlation.
RE: White Privilege? - fredtoast - 07-11-2018
(07-11-2018, 01:42 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Also, I'm sure there are plenty of times where the description of an alleged perp is a "white male" which would make me the subject of racial profiling.
Well thanks for proving that you do not even understand what "racial profiling" means.
Hint: it has nothing to do with color of a specific alleged perpetrator.
(07-11-2018, 01:42 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Really? So if the police department in Los Angeles uses racial profiling, but my local cops don't, I'm still benefiting but my black neighbors aren't? :huh:
Yes. It is privilege to be able to go to any city you want to and not have to worry about racial profiling.
(07-11-2018, 01:42 PM)PhilHos Wrote: You have claimed that white privilege exists because the majority of CEOs and whatnot are white. This is a textbook example of 'causation' when all you have presented is a correlation.
I don't point out the disproportionate control of power and wealth as the "result" of white privilege (although that could very well be the case). Instead I point out the disproportionate control of wealth and power to show that white people have the power to turn their racism into oppression. I have always admitted that black people can be racist also, but the difference is that they do not have the power or control to turn their racism into oppression.
If white people didn't control so much of the power to hire, promote, fire, give contracts, approve loans, and so on then racism would not be as big of an issue.
RE: White Privilege? - PhilHos - 07-11-2018
(07-11-2018, 02:01 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes. It is privilege to be able to go to any city you want to and not have to worry about racial profiling.
Except that I do, if I go to a city or town that is majority black.
(07-11-2018, 02:01 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't point out the disproportionate control of power and wealth as the "result" of white privilege (although that could very well be the case). Instead I point out the disproportionate control of wealth and power to show that white people have the power to turn their racism into oppression.
Theoretically, they CAN turn their racism into oppression (to which I would argue would be next to impossible in America), but that still does not prove the existence of white privilege.
(07-11-2018, 02:01 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If white people didn't control so much of the power to hire, promote, fire, give contracts, approve loans, and so on then racism would not be as big of an issue.
So, if black people or hispanics or whatever controled much of the power to hire, promote, fire, give contracts, approve loans, and so on there'd be a lot less racism? It sure sounds like you're saying whites are MORE racist here.
RE: White Privilege? - Beaker - 07-11-2018
(07-11-2018, 02:01 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If white people didn't control so much of the power to hire, promote, fire, give contracts, approve loans, and so on then racism would not be as big of an issue.
If some other racial group were swapped out for the whites and had all the power you contend above, then how do you know racism against other groups wouldn't be just as prevalent? Are you implying that whites are inherently more racist?
RE: White Privilege? - Dill - 07-11-2018
(07-10-2018, 07:17 PM)Beaker Wrote: I see what you are getting at there with more specific, but I still maintain it does more to further separate and divide. I think at this point we need to be striving more towards coming together and seeing each other as equal humans....without labels.
The best example I can think of from an anecdotal standpoint comes from the genocide in Rwanda with the Hutus and the Tutsis...two tribes that made up the bulk of the Rwandan population. The Tutsis were the tribe that was on the receiving end of the genocide. If you were a Tutsi, you were targeted. All forms of ID at the time indicated tribal affiliation. In other words, when people were asked to show their papers, if it said they were Tutsi, they were killed.
When I visited Rwanda, many people told me how they were ashamed of what had happened, and were sad that the world still mainly saw Rwanda through the lens of the genocide....even though they had been working hard for many years to put it behind them. I asked them what types of measures were undertaken to do so. They said the first thing that happened after the genocide was that IDs no longer indicated tribal affiliations. And People no longer referred to themselves or others as Hutus or Tutsis. The were simply Rwandans. In fact it was now frowned upon to the point of raising suspicion if you referred to yourself by tribe, or asked someone else what tribe they were from. They said that simple step had gone a long way to bridging the divide between the people.
To me, that first step they took is similar to what were need to begin healing. Stop labeling each other by race, and just call each other Americans...or even better humans.
You picked a good example. The Tutsi-Hutu conflict was rooted in Belgian-created identities, identity cards, and "modern" class privileges reltating to educaton adn government.
I don't have time to go into this in depth at the moment. But I have a note and a question.
The note is that, in order for Rwandan society and government to be reconsituted, there must me some justice administered. E.g., leaders of the slaughter need to be identified and punished. Impossible to do that affirming distinctions in identity, at least for the moment. ( Have you seen Rising from the Ashes or The Uncondemned, and especially My Neighbor, My Killer? They deal with diverse efforts to both bring the tribes together AND account for crimes.)
The question is--Beyond affirming one, undivided national identity, what else is being done to prevent future conflict? For example, before the genocide, Tutusi had the lion's share of government offices and control of the military. If no one knows who is Tutsi and who is Hutu, it seems like that domination could continue, regardless of what identity cards don't say. The absence of official tribal affiliation might work in favor of Tutsi control then many of whom are still very angry about what happened to their families.
(Judicial balance is/was an accute problem in the justice system, which is discussed somewhat in My Neighbor, My Killer, in which people are able reconcile with some people from their own village who killed family members. Some don't want to reconciled with grinning, unpunished killers. But where genuine remorse it shown, it is possible in some cases.)
RE: White Privilege? - Dill - 07-11-2018
(07-11-2018, 02:24 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Except that I do, if I go to a city or town that is majority black.
Would the police single you out for observation, would clerks and store detectives follow you around a store, and would banks and realtors treat you differently from the majority population? If so, then yes, you would be the subject of racial profiling--though it might work in your favor in some of these cases.
RE: White Privilege? - fredtoast - 07-11-2018
(07-11-2018, 02:24 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Except that I do, if I go to a city or town that is majority black.
Again, thanks for proving that you do not understand racial profiling.
(07-11-2018, 02:24 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Theoretically, they CAN turn their racism into oppression (to which I would argue would be next to impossible in America), but that still does not prove the existence of white privilege.
There are multiple scientific studies that show blacks are discriminated against by law enforcement, real estate agents, and potential employers.
Some people don't know about these studies. I give them the benefit of the doubt. But you have seen them posted in multiple threads. You are intentionally denying reality. People like you are the problem.
RE: White Privilege? - bfine32 - 07-11-2018
(07-11-2018, 03:26 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Again, thanks for proving that you do not understand racial profiling.
There are multiple scientific studies that show blacks are discriminated against by law enforcement, real estate agents, and potential employers.
Some people don't know about these studies. I give them the benefit of the doubt. But you have seen them posted in multiple threads. You are intentionally denying reality. People like you are the problem.
What makes these studies scientific?
RE: White Privilege? - fredtoast - 07-11-2018
(07-11-2018, 02:24 PM)PhilHos Wrote: So, if black people or hispanics or whatever controled much of the power to hire, promote, fire, give contracts, approve loans, and so on there'd be a lot less racism? It sure sounds like you're saying whites are MORE racist here.
(07-11-2018, 02:30 PM)Beaker Wrote: If some other racial group were swapped out for the whites and had all the power you contend above, then how do you know racism against other groups wouldn't be just as prevalent? Are you implying that whites are inherently more racist?
All racial groups would probably act the same if they controlled a disproportionate amount of the wealth and power. But racism would not be as big of an issue if the wealth and power was more evenly divided.
So put away your victim cards. No one is picking on the poor little white people.
RE: White Privilege? - fredtoast - 07-11-2018
(07-11-2018, 03:30 PM)bfine32 Wrote: What makes these studies scientific?
Controlled variables.
RE: White Privilege? - bfine32 - 07-11-2018
(07-11-2018, 03:33 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Controlled variables.
Good term. What was the controlled variable in such experiments? You could have just answered: Science.